http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/18/congress.stemcells.ap/index.html
First time for Bush to veto legislation passed by his republican majority?
First time for Bush to veto legislation passed by his republican majority?
Stem cell researc to go forward in the US, Bush promises to veto..
- Thread starter McManus
- Start date
Erik Mesoy
Core Tester / Intern
First veto? Ahem, signing statements?
If the bill had gotten four more votes, it would not have been vetoable, I believe.
What I fricken HATE about this issue is that there are a host of people who equate stem cell research with abortion, and thus discourage/impede it. Only a small portion of the research involves killing an embryo, and could easily be worked around. In fact, I know of almost no projects that involve killing an embryo - most of the embryo deaths I see are entirely accidental.
But, people refuse to be educated on the matter, and still want to stop it. Meanwhile, this year alone, an estimated 290,000 Canadians over 65 have Alzheimer's disease. And we're not given enough tools to work on it (Canada's laws are even more draconian). That's enough people to fill a decent-sized town, and they're all slowly losing their ability to operate.
What I fricken HATE about this issue is that there are a host of people who equate stem cell research with abortion, and thus discourage/impede it. Only a small portion of the research involves killing an embryo, and could easily be worked around. In fact, I know of almost no projects that involve killing an embryo - most of the embryo deaths I see are entirely accidental.
But, people refuse to be educated on the matter, and still want to stop it. Meanwhile, this year alone, an estimated 290,000 Canadians over 65 have Alzheimer's disease. And we're not given enough tools to work on it (Canada's laws are even more draconian). That's enough people to fill a decent-sized town, and they're all slowly losing their ability to operate.
Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
Ironic: wait to veto your first bill until you have the lowest approval rating in your entire presidency.
4 more votes needed. We'll find them, and Bush can pound sand.
The GOP has been opposing science for ages now. Science either wins, or other nations get the science. Too bad for America if it's the second outcome, is all I have to say.
4 more votes needed. We'll find them, and Bush can pound sand.
The GOP has been opposing science for ages now. Science either wins, or other nations get the science. Too bad for America if it's the second outcome, is all I have to say.
silver 2039
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Messages
- 16,208
Scientfic progress cannot be stopped...this research could benefit many people.
bathsheba666
Fast 'n Bulbous
The one person in the western world most in need of nerve cell regeneration, and he vetoes it 
Che Guava
The Juicy Revolutionary
bathsheba666 said:The one person in the western world most in need of nerve cell regeneration, and he vetoes it
Funny.....I really don't see why people get so bent out of shape over this issue. Makes me think of an era in medicine when physicians weren't allowed to perform autopsies because it was considered mistreatment of the dead. If we're going to figure out more about ourselves and how we live, we're going to have to make measured sacrifices. I think the potential benefits here far outweigh the costs..
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Would I be incorrect in assuming that Bush is opposing this on religious grounds?
Maybe. Or else on pure ignorance of the matter.
I appreciate the moral/ethical issue here. But at the same time, he really needs to understand that this isn't nearly as destructive as human life as he claims. A few embryos will be destroyed; I accept that this is a bad thing. But the benefits in terms of life saved vastly outweigh the costs. Besides, although I think abortion is wrong, I don't equate this with abortion.
classical_hero
In whom I trust
We seem to be forgetting a supply of stem cells that have no ethical problems and are right now curing people of disease. They are Adult stem cells and they are working far better than embryonic stem cells.
Classical Hero: you seem to be against ESC research. Could you tell us specifically what it is that bothers you about this research, or is it a knee-jerk assumption that abortion and ESC are intricately tied?
There's a common assumption that they're similar, when embryo death is a minor position in the entire topic.
There's a common assumption that they're similar, when embryo death is a minor position in the entire topic.
classical_hero
In whom I trust
I am more pro ASC, because we have not even fully learnt the power of these stem cells. Why bother going into a risky area without first going into an area that so far has provided great fulfillment compared to just great promise that ESC has? Have alook at all the diseases that ASC can cure. Right now there are 72 comfirmed scientific studies on various diseases. http://www.stemcellresearch.org/facts/treatments.htm
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Pontiuth Pilate said:
The latest Gallup poll has him at 40% approval, which isnt the lowest its ever been. So maybe its not as ironic as you think.
Plus, why does science need government backing to win? Cant it win on its own?
MobBoss said:
Science doesn't need "government backing" to win, but this is about government banning, not backing.
To be fair: Bush is expected to veto funding for stem cell research, he's not expected to pass legislation attempting to ban it. Though, with nearly $3 trillion in pork, you wonder why this one doesn't make it through.
What risky area? Do you know enough about the topic to think of it as 'risky'?
What risky area? Do you know enough about the topic to think of it as 'risky'?
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
IglooDude said:
Actually the story starts out as "WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Senate voted Tuesday after two days of emotional debate to expand federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, sending the measure to President Bush for a promised veto, the first of his presidency."
What part of "expanding federal funding" is not backing? And if its being expanded...doesn't that mean its not banned to begin with?
Lets be honest please.
Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
Aha, are we talking about science or the application of scientific technology here?
Robert Goddard discovered the principles of space flight in his backyard but it took the United States several decades and the outlay of billions of dollars to put a man on the moon. Forty years later private enterprise has yet to equal that feat. Another example - Edward Jenner discovered the smallpox vaccine in 1796 but it was an international program of cooperating governments that actually eradicated smallpox in 1980.
In biotechnology there is even a hurdle before the application of a technology, namely that to discover anything in the first place you need to bring to the table a lot of complicated machinery (not to mention manhours) which is not easy to finance out of pocket.
Long story short, it is not realistic to neglect science (or deliberately oppose science, as Bush is doing) and expect to remain the #1 scientific nation in the world.
Similar threads
