|
|
Post by Cheneysmyhero on Nov 9, 2004 11:31:42 GMT -5
Somebody please tell me why you conservatives are so against embryonic stem cell research. Do you really think the embryos come from abortions? While some of them might, the bulk would come from fertility clinics that have stockpiles of unused embryos that will either remain frozen or be destroyed. Why not put these to good use?
|
|
|
|
Post by Vagrant on Nov 9, 2004 11:33:56 GMT -5
I'm afraid that I am uneducated in the whole stem-cell research debate. Could someone please help me out.
|
|
|
|
Post by DoubleX on Nov 9, 2004 16:24:59 GMT -5
I'm pro stem-cell research (for what I know about it), but only to a certain extent. For example, people would be able to donate their cells for research (just like you would donate your body to science when you die). This would also be good for another reason, if you are in dire need of a heart transplant, why not regrow your own heart? That's what I get out of stem cell research.
I may be wrong on how it works. So, other then that, I'm with Vargrant.
|
|
|
|
Post by ImNotBenny on Nov 9, 2004 22:57:23 GMT -5
There are literally dozens of infertile couples who would love a peatree dish with some strangers' fertilized embryo, so there would be no need for senseless murder for the sake of some dirty cripples that nobody really cares about anyway...
|
|
|
|
Post by Cheneysmyhero on Nov 9, 2004 23:00:43 GMT -5
I'm pro stem-cell research (for what I know about it), but only to a certain extent. For example, people would be able to donate their cells for research (just like you would donate your body to science when you die). This would also be good for another reason, if you are in dire need of a heart transplant, why not regrow your own heart? That's what I get out of stem cell research. I may be wrong on how it works. So, other then that, I'm with Vargrant. I believe you are thinking of adult stem cells. I am talking about embryonic stem cells. There seems to be a lot of misinformation on the right. It seems you all believe these embryos are all aborted. While I must admit, some probably would be, most would come from fertility clinics. I am all for having the "parents" of these embryos sign off a waiver or whatever to allow these to be used, but if they aren't used for research they won't be used at all. |
|
|
|
Post by Cheneysmyhero on Nov 9, 2004 23:06:40 GMT -5
There are literally dozens of infertile couples who would love a peatree dish with some strangers' fertilized embryo, so there would be no need for senseless murder for the sake of some dirty cripples that nobody really cares about anyway... Perhaps we should leave this decision to the couples that create the embryo. I believe it is illegal to use one couples embryo to fertilize a different woman (saw a great episode of Law & Order on this) without a waiver being signed. Perhaps give them the option of helping another couple realize their dream of having children and helping somebody walk again would be the way to go. Anyway, point is this. Couple can't get pregnant so they go to the clinic. Usually, the problem is the male doesn't have very strong swimmers. Doctor gets the few swimmer the dude has and harvest some ovaries from the woman and makes about 6-8 embryos. One is implanted into the woman and if the first one takes the rest stay in a freezer. GWB seems convinced that using these left over embryos for research (theory is an embryonic stem cell can be used to generate any other cell in the human body, i.e. help burn victims by creating new skin cells, or grow organs like plants) is similar to abortion. I think otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by Vagrant on Nov 10, 2004 8:21:18 GMT -5
Well, I can certainly understand the right's objection to these tests. Unless I missed your point, you're talking about growing human beings to be used as test subjects, which is fairly disturbing.
On the other hand I can see the benefits of such research. It seems to be a complicated issue that I'll have to mull over a bit.
|
|
|
|
Post by MO on Nov 10, 2004 11:01:32 GMT -5
I don't believe in IVF in the first place, so the "thry're going to go to waste" argument doesn't hold any water for me. Two wrongs don't make a right.
There seems to be a great deal of confusion behind the whole issue of embryonic stem cell research. I have heard numerous people refer to the "ban" on stem cell research.
President Bush is catching all this heat from the pro-fetal stem cell folks but he is the first president to fund it. He has allowed research on the seventy stem cell lines that were already dead, and it's getting federal funding. Any new lines would require new killing. However, there is no "ban" on fetal stem cell research and it is being done in private research. President Bush realizes that is wrong for the federal government to fund killing more embryos with our tax dollars when so many are opposed to it. I would bet big that if any new discoveries come from any of this it will be from private enterprise, anyway. The pharmaceutical companies hire the best and the brightest and the flunkies live on government grants.
More private money is going into umbilical cord research than embryonic. That is a great indication that umbilical cord shows more promise, anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malebolgia on Nov 10, 2004 14:50:17 GMT -5
I don't believe in IVF in the first place, so the "thry're going to go to waste" argument doesn't hold any water for me. Two wrongs don't make a right. There seems to be a great deal of confusion behind the whole issue of embryonic stem cell research. I have heard numerous people refer to the "ban" on stem cell research. President Bush is catching all this heat from the pro-fetal stem cell folks but he is the first president to fund it. He has allowed research on the seventy stem cell lines that were already dead, and it's getting federal funding. Any new lines would require new killing. However, there is no "ban" on fetal stem cell research and it is being done in private research. President Bush realizes that is wrong for the federal government to fund killing more embryos with our tax dollars when so many are opposed to it. I would bet big that if any new discoveries come from any of this it will be from private enterprise, anyway. The pharmaceutical companies hire the best and the brightest and the flunkies live on government grants. More private money is going into umbilical cord research than embryonic. That is a great indication that umbilical cord shows more promise, anyway. You pretend to know the subject and both sides pretty well, but in reality your views are distorted. There are not 70 lines of stem cells. There were. There are only 19 that are actually available. Of those lines, they are all contaminated with mouse feeder cells, making use in humans uncertain. The reason "pharmaceutical companies hire the best and the brightest and the flunkies live on government grants" is because the government does not have the funding to hire these "best and the brightest" and the pharmaceutical companies do. Now as to whether government scientist are "flunkies", I would imagine that is a grave mis-statement by an assumptuous individual. The real kicker: Trent Lott supports increasing funding in embryonic stem cell research; yet, commander in chief doesn't (wonder how/if their views on racism differ?). Finally, unlike absolutely any post to date I've seen on this forum, I will actually supply a source for the information presented. www.camradvocacy.org/fastaction/SenateLettertoBush.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by MO on Nov 10, 2004 15:27:55 GMT -5
 What a pompous ass you are. I don't care how many the scientists claim they can't use. The science is unethical and unnecessary, because it kills people to save other people and it shows less promise than other stem cell sources.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cheneysmyhero on Nov 10, 2004 16:40:34 GMT -5
What a pompous ass you are. I don't care how many the scientists claim they can't use. The science is unethical and unnecessary, because it kills people to save other people and it shows less promise than other stem cell sources. What humans is it killing? An embryo sitting in a fertility doesn't really qualify as a human does it? It has the potential for life, but the potential is never going to be realized. |
|
|
|
Post by Cheneysmyhero on Nov 10, 2004 16:46:18 GMT -5
I don't believe in IVF in the first place, so the "thry're going to go to waste" argument doesn't hold any water for me. Two wrongs don't make a right. There seems to be a great deal of confusion behind the whole issue of embryonic stem cell research. I have heard numerous people refer to the "ban" on stem cell research. President Bush is catching all this heat from the pro-fetal stem cell folks but he is the first president to fund it. He has allowed research on the seventy stem cell lines that were already dead, and it's getting federal funding. Any new lines would require new killing. However, there is no "ban" on fetal stem cell research and it is being done in private research. President Bush realizes that is wrong for the federal government to fund killing more embryos with our tax dollars when so many are opposed to it. I would bet big that if any new discoveries come from any of this it will be from private enterprise, anyway. The pharmaceutical companies hire the best and the brightest and the flunkies live on government grants. More private money is going into umbilical cord research than embryonic. That is a great indication that umbilical cord shows more promise, anyway. First off, what problem can you possibly have against IVF? Two people want to procreate and need a little help and that is somehow bad? Secondly, I never said there was a "ban" per say. I just asked why the right is so dead set against it. Sure Bush has funded it, but what he has approved isn't even enough to get the program off the ground. Where private money is going is hardly an indication of what has more promise. It simply shows which is further along. Perhaps if the government would get off it's arse and approve some REAL funding for embryonic research, private money would follow. |
|
|
|
Post by TNRighty on Nov 10, 2004 17:09:49 GMT -5
As I understand it, Bush has not declared embryonic stem cell research illegal. He has only said that government will not fund it. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
If I'm correct in my understanding that embryonic stem cell research is not illegal, then I stand by our president in saying that it should not be funded by taxpayer dollars. I'll address the ethics of it later, but as for government financial support, embryonic stem cell research should be treated economically the same as any other market endeavor. If you think you can research and create a product or service people will buy, put your money where your mouth is like Henry Ford and Bill Gates did. Sell your idea to investors and make yourself rich. Government has no role here.
As for the ethics of it, I have serious problems with it. I feel that this would be marketed as a viable option for an expectant mother considering abortion. "Donate your kid to science. Think of all the good you could do. You're not killing your child, you're saving lives." It makes abortion a much easier choice.
As for the "petry dish" scenario, we're talking about researchers paying for sperm and egg donations. It would be marketed to the poorest Americans as a way to make a buck.
I just think a life created is a life that deserves the chance to live.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cheneysmyhero on Nov 10, 2004 17:55:28 GMT -5
I never said Bush made it illegal. I do believe there is a provision in the constitution to allow for us to promote science. This is clearly a science that needs promoting.
A sperm and an egg do not make a life. They make the potential for life. You might as well use that potential for something. Whether it is to create a new life, or save an old one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malebolgia on Nov 10, 2004 18:02:43 GMT -5
What a pompous ass you are. I don't care how many the scientists claim they can't use. The science is unethical and unnecessary, because it kills people to save other people and it shows less promise than other stem cell sources. "Pompous ass" hmm... some people get real teste when their lack of actual research is confronted(much like their idol Cokehead Bush). I thought you hard-hitters would start with facts and then slowly move towards harassy. I guess that was just the liberal side of me giving someone a chance. Oh well. Strike one. |
|
What a pompous ass you are. I don't care how many the scientists claim they can't use. The science is unethical and unnecessary, because it kills people to save other people and it shows less promise than other stem cell sources.