In First Veto, Bush Blocks Stem Cell Bill (1 Viewer)

[hipsterdufus]

It's a historic day. Bush has made his first veto, against Federal Funding for stem cell research. The rapture right must be jumping up and down with glee, but this is a sad day for America.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush readied the first veto of his presidency Wednesday to stop legislation easing limits on federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research.

Bush planned to sign a veto message Wednesday afternoon without any ceremony or photographers to record the historic moment. ''He doesn't feel it's appropriate,'' White House spokesman Tony Snow said.

But the president was to speak about the issue later in the White House East Room, surrounded by 18 families who ''adopted'' frozen embryos that were not used by other couples, and then used those leftover embryos to have children. ''The message there is that an embryo can create a human being,'' Snow said.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/...&en=64c804bc15cc6a9f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

 

[Captain America]

Well, he may have blocked federal funding but the private sector can now go full force on it without all those restrictions it had to abide by before can't they?

I suppose that's better than nothing. :shrug:

 

[scottyz]

Well, he may have blocked federal funding but the private sector can now go full force on it without all those restrictions it had to abide by before can't they?

I suppose that's better than nothing. :shrug:

IL and CA are going to fund stem cell research on their own. I bet more states follow.

 

[Goobieman]

It's a historic day. Bush has made his first veto, against Federal Funding for stem cell research. The rapture right must be jumping up and down with glee, but this is a sad day for America.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/...&en=64c804bc15cc6a9f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Talk to Ifuh.

Maybe you can get the veto overturned on the grounds that it violates the establishment clause.

:roll:

 

[Little-Acorn]

Well, he may have blocked federal funding but the private sector can now go full force on it without all those restrictions it had to abide by before can't they?

What restrictions?

.

 

[Binary_Digit]

What restrictions?

.

"Restrictions on federally funded embryonic stem cell research" seems to be the media buzz phrase. It's carefully worded to mean something it's not. Bush didn't restrict any research, he only restricted funding.

 

[jfuh]

"Restrictions on federally funded embryonic stem cell research" seems to be the media buzz phrase. It's carefully worded to mean something it's not. Bush didn't restrict any research, he only restricted funding.

And where has the majority of funding for academia come from? Yep, federally
What happens when private industry funds research? It's patented and sealed as cooperate secrets. Stem cell research is important academic knowledge that should be published for any researcher.
So the medial portrayal of restrictions is indeed accurate as only private researchers won't be restricted.

 

[Rightwing86]

im possibly for adult stem cell stuff. but I am in no way for embryonic stem cells. way to many problems with those. check this out

1. Reason i kinda am sketchy on the stem cell stuff http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/research/story/0,,1673484,00.html
2. Reason i do not support Embryonic stem cells
http://www.lifeissues.org/cloningstemcell/bradsarticle.html

i mean a tumor grew hair,bone,skin tissue inside this guys brain WTF!

 

[Goobieman]

And where has the majority of funding for academia come from? Yep, federally.

BS. Prove it.

What happens when private industry funds research? It's patented and sealed as cooperate secrets.

Sounds OK to me -- you invest the $ into the reseach, you reap the benefits of its result.
That is, you get paid for the work you do. You have a problem with that?

Stem cell research is important academic knowledge that should be published for any researcher.

Then why dont YOU fund the research and then open it to public domain.
Dont presume to force your morality on others.

 

[hipsterdufus]

So we have approximately 400,000 blastocysts of 100 cells, no bigger than a . with no nerves that could be used to stop diseases. Many of these 400,000 will be destroyed in the course of degeneration. Scientists would need about 100 to create the new stem lines needed. This is ridiculous.

Ask yourself a question.

A house is on fire: you have time to save one thing, which do you choose?

1. A newborn baby?
2. 100 frozen blastocysts?

 

[Goobieman]

So we have approximately 400,000 blastocysts of 100 cells, no bigger than a . with no nerves that could be used to stop diseases. Many of these 400,000 will be destroyed in the course of degeneration. Scientists would need about 100 to create the new stem lines needed. This is ridiculous.

Its ridiculous that the Federal Government wont pay for the work?
Why?

 

[Stinger]

And where has the majority of funding for academia come from? Yep, federally
What happens when private industry funds research? It's patented and sealed as cooperate secrets. Stem cell research is important academic knowledge that should be published for any researcher.
So the medial portrayal of restrictions is indeed accurate as only private researchers won't be restricted.

If you believe so strongly then start a non-profit to get the money and fund the research. Nothing is stopping you or anyone else from funding this.

 

[jfuh]

If you believe so strongly then start a non-profit to get the money and fund the research. Nothing is stopping you or anyone else from funding this.

Is this recommendation from your years of expereince in aquiring research grants?

 

[Goobieman]

Is this recommendation from your years of expereince in aquiring research grants?

No.
Its a suggestion that you stop whining and put your money where your mouth is.

You think it is important -- then YOU work to fund it.

Don't presume to impose what you think is important onto others.

 

[jfuh]

No.
Its a suggestion that you stop whining and put your money where your mouth is.

You think it is important -- then YOU work to fund it.

Don't presume to impose what you think is important onto others.

how is stating the fact that stem cell research is limited imposing my views on others?
Please be specific

 

[Stinger]

Is this recommendation from your years of expereince in aquiring research grants?

No it's my reccomendation that you work to support it if you believe so strongly in it. You can contributed directly, you can invest in the companies that are doing the research, you go do fund raising.

 

[jfuh]

No it's my reccomendation that you work to support it if you believe so strongly in it. You can contributed directly, you can invest in the companies that are doing the research, you go do fund raising.

1stly your argument was that this veto does in no way to restrict stem cell research. I've shown exactly how it does.
2ndly I'm stating that this knowledge should be open and published to everyone not to private companies.
3rdly investing in companies would not open such information to the public but only the thier market sharing.
As usual you can only spin the issue when you get called on your bullshit.

 

[Stinger]

A house is on fire: you have time to save one thing, which do you choose?

1. A newborn baby?
2. 100 frozen blastocysts?

The baby since it has the better chance of future survival. What is your point?

How about

1. Your baby child?
2. A strangers baby child?

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Public sector investments in technology and research are crucial for the United States to remain competitive. For crying out loud, Reagan hastened the end of the Cold War by making sure that we were investing more in science and technology than the Soviets did. If we don't make public sector investments in stem cell research, we will simply see a brain drain of our best and brightest to nations that do make such investments.

The private sector does make a great deal of investments in technology and scientific research, but in many cases, the initial research is funded by the public sector. Something has to prime the pump to to speak. The fact that the extraordinarily anti-science religious right has such sway over our public scientific policies is very unfortunate for our country.

 

[Stinger]

No it's my reccomendation that you work to support it if you believe so strongly in it. You can contributed directly, you can invest in the companies that are doing the research, you go do fund raising.

1stly your argument was ................

No it wasn't.

2ndly I'm stating that this knowledge should be open and published to everyone not to private companies.

You are free to do it as a non-profit or just not patent what you find.

3rdly investing in companies would not open such information to the public but only the thier market sharing.

No necessarily, but so what? The profit motive is responsible for most of our advancements anyway.

As usual you can only spin the issue when you get called on your bullshit.

Having to stoop to profanities does not strengthen your arguements.

Why do you think governement funding is the end all? If there is such a great opportunity here money will freely flow into it. Do you happen to know how much private industry invest in this already versus what would come from the government?

 

[Stinger]

Public sector investments in technology and research are crucial for the United States to remain competitive.

We are the most competitive preciesly because of our private sector investment NOT public sector.

For crying out loud, Reagan hastened the end of the Cold War by making sure that we were investing more in science and technology than the Soviets did.

Of course you would have stopped most of that had you had your way.

If we don't make public sector investments in stem cell research, we will simply see a brain drain of our best and brightest to nations that do make such investments.

Facts not in evidence.

The fact that the extraordinarily anti-science religious right has such sway over our public scientific policies is very unfortunate for our country.

Since I am neither religious nor anti-science your attempt to use invectives just fell on it's face.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

We are the most competitive preciesly because of our private sector investment NOT public sector.



Of course you would have stopped most of that had you had your way.


Facts not in evidence.



Since I am neither religious nor anti-science your attempt to use invectives just fell on it's face.

I don't think the President Bush was looking to appease you when he vetoed that bill, but rather it was to appease the core religious right. Moreover, if you don't think that our public sector investments in science and technology are a big reason why we are so competitive in the world of science and technology, then you know nothing about the world of science and technology. I work in Computer Science, many new technology breakthoughs first occur in Universities with public funds, then further research is funded by the private sector.

 

[Stinger]

I don't think the President Bush was looking to appease you when he vetoed that bill, but rather it was to appease the core religious right.

I don't think it was to appease anyone, that's where you arguement misses the mark totally.

Moreover, if you don't think that our public sector investments in science and technology are a big reason why we are so competitive in the world of science and technology,

Never said that did I.

then you know nothing about the world of science and technology. I work in Computer Science, many new technology breakthoughs first occur in Universities with public funds, then further research is funded by the private sector.

And many don't. But if you want to post the dollars invested by the private sector versus the public go ahead and if you want to prove that non of those breakthroughs would have occour WITHOUT the federal funding go ahead.

That is not what my arguement is based on to begin with.

 

[talloulou]

1stly your argument was that this veto does in no way to restrict stem cell research. I've shown exactly how it does.
2ndly I'm stating that this knowledge should be open and published to everyone not to private companies.
3rdly investing in companies would not open such information to the public but only the thier market sharing.
As usual you can only spin the issue when you get called on your bullshit.

The fact of the matter is the average Joe out on the street is under the impression that Bush has banned "stem cells" and if Bush would only stop being so religious in a few years we would have the cure for everything. It's ridiculous.

I'm not even sure how I would feel about embryonic stem cells in light of an "actual" informative discussion on ethics and the future of the research and regulations on how far the research should be taken in regards to cloning and lengths of time embryos would be kept alive. I'd also like to see discussion on hybrids where human and other animal dna are mixed. These discussions are not happening and instead we are fed mindless banter from both sides and a populace that spews talking points like Jfuh's as if they have no minds of their own. There are ethical questions when it comes to cloning and playing with embryos. Why can't we just admit that and have the damn discussion?

"Despite the impression left by some of its supporters, stem-cell research is not banned. In fact, not only is it legal, it is thriving in the private sector. There are at least 11 private stem-cell research centers at universities and medical centers across the country. In May, Ray Dolby, creator of Dolby Stereo systems, donated $16 million to the University of California at San Francisco to establish a new stem-cell research center. And, just last month, Harvard University announced a privately funded, multimillion-dollar program to create cloned human embryos as sources of medically promising stem cells. Harvard is already home to the nation's largest private research effort, employing more than 100 researchers and housing 17 new stem-cell lines. Harvard now processes as many research requests for its stem-cell lines as does the National Institutes of Health."

Here's my favorite part:

"Instead of a serious scientific debate about the merits and drawbacks of a promising new therapy, one side will treat us to extravagant claims from celebrity spokespeople implying that miracle cures for everything from spinal injuries to Alzheimer's disease are just around the corner."

And....

"The vast majority of medical and scientific breakthroughs in this country's history have been accomplished by the private sector.There's no reason for stem-cell research to be any different."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/07/19/EDGLRK1B401.DTL

 

[26 X World Champs]

Dont presume to force your morality on others.

How can you write this when it is YOU who want to prevent science and doctors from curing diseases because of what I consider to be middle age reasoning and "morality"?

Tell you what you can be like the Amish and refuse to accept the Alzhiemer's cure created by embryonic stem cells..OK? Hey look at it this way...you won't remember what you're missing....but sadly your family will as they deal with your dimentia....