First Presidential Veto

[drwombatt]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/20/wa...rtner=homepage

im not much of a politic but i ran across this trying to get some info about current events. Apparently Hip's method is goin major for stem cell research supporters.

how neat.:

[Dr. Herbani]

science...we dont need no stinking science...i'm sorry but this man is a dipshit...ohh well, europe and the rest of the civilized world will carry on the research without us...fucken embryos have to be destroyed after 5 years anyway....i wish bush would pray to jesus a little harder, get into helping the sick rather than the money changers on the temple steps

peace

[Bromius]

I believe the federal government only banned itself from funding stem cell projects, not stem cell research itself. Many states are stepping in to fill that funding void. I live in a fairly liberal minded state (socially speaking anyway... I wish they would be fiscally liberal in the classic sense and get their hands out of the peoples pockets a little bit). States such as mine will cash in while the more conservative ones can maintain their sense of self-righteousness. Suits me fine.

[Bromius]

Thinking about the post I just made, both sides are self righteous. The side I support will just have more money and live longer

[Bobcat]

Its very sad.

[jbmac]

Originally Posted by Dr. Herbani

science...we dont need no stinking science...i'm sorry but this man is a dipshit...ohh well, europe and the rest of the civilized world will carry on the research without us...fucken embryos have to be destroyed after 5 years anyway....i wish bush would pray to jesus a little harder, get into helping the sick rather than the money changers on the temple steps
peace

Yep, America is destined to be a 3rd world county due to idiots running the place. Tis funny, in calif, the Terminator borrowed 150 million the next day
to get it going in calif. Stem cells are bad, the same way that drugs are bad - because the Church and the State, and the media tell us that. Drugs and Stem cell research have a lot in common - they can help mankind but scare primitive minds.

Just like cloning - the average american, thanks to media and "news" thinks If I clone you - there will be 2 of you - they don't understand that cloning is no more dangerous than any other science - and cloning you means your clone would always be old enough to be your kid, never your age.
Imagine stem cells and cloning, to grow new livers and kidneys and hands
for those who need them.

[Bromius]

I wouldn't dismiss most of the public as having 'primitive minds'. There are plenty of irrational people out there but some people that disagree with this technology have undoubtedly thought it out and weighed the pro's and con's. It seems like most of the objections to it are on ethical grounds. Many of those arguments are religious in nature but not all of them. Either way, these people are probably more intelligent than you are giving them credit for. Their thoughts could be just as logical as someone who favors the technology; their starting assumptions are just different.

[Hippie3]

typical BS
use any excuse to bash america/americans.

and they have the nerve to call other people
primitive, stupid.
ha!
pot, kettle, black.
as you judge
so shall you
be judged.

[Dr. Herbani]

Originally Posted by Bromius

I wouldn't dismiss most of the public as having 'primitive minds'. There are plenty of irrational people out there but some people that disagree with this technology have undoubtedly thought it out and weighed the pro's and con's. It seems like most of the objections to it are on ethical grounds. Many of those arguments are religious in nature but not all of them. Either way, these people are probably more intelligent than you are giving them credit for. Their thoughts could be just as logical as someone who favors the technology; their starting assumptions are just different.

id sure be interested in reading the paper weighing the pros and cons...what cons, finding new cures for sick people from embryos that get DESTROYED anyway after 5 years...when these fuckers are standing outside the gates talking to St. Peter there going to have to do some fast talking

[Hippie3]

the issue is not research itself
but
should the federal government fund it ?
there is a difference
even if you fail to appreciate that fact...
just as some refuse to pay taxes
because the government wages a war
that they don't support
so too
there are some who don't want their tax dollars
funding the embryo research.
i see both positions as similar.

[Dr. Herbani]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

typical BS
use any excuse to bash america/americans.

and they have the nerve to call other people
primitive, stupid.
ha!
pot, kettle, black.

use any excuse...with this administration there is a abundance of reasons to bash, although its not americans, americans support stem cell research by a large margin...i seen the other day even Orin Hatch is for this, that dude is consevative as anyone...this is just bush pandering to the the wacked out far right, the 35% who still think hes doing a good job

[Dr. Herbani]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

the issue is not research itself
but
should the federal government fund it ?
there is a difference
even if you fail to appreciate that fact...

the american people think the goverment should fund it...even if you fail to appreciate that fact

[Hippie3]

not all of them
quite obviously.

besides
the american people also
believe in adam and eve,
ufos
and ghosts.

all by rather large percentages, too
and
those same american people
elected bush
twice

[Dr. Herbani]

if we get to pick and choose exactly where are tax dollars go then im for funding a study on shorting the length of miniskirts...tell then medical research is better than a new smart bomb

[Hippie3]

are you really sure that you want the federal government getting in the middle of it ?
there are always strings on federal money,
just ask the liberal colleges that are forced to allow army recruiters on campus because of their federal funding.
i personally prefer less
not more
government interference in my life,
and that includes the health care system.
i don't like getting a free drug test every time i get my blood drawn,
i don't like the government telling me what drugs i can have
and i don't want the government
telling doctors how to conduct their research.
so explain to me
plz
why you want the feds running the show ?

[roc]

fuck the feds!

[Dr. Herbani]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

are you really sure that you want the federal government getting in the middle of it ?
there are always strings on federal money,
just ask the liberal colleges that are forced to allow army recruiters on campus because of their federal funding.
i personally prefer less
not more
government interference in my life,
and that includes the health care system.
i don't like getting a free drug test every time i get my blood drawn,
i don't like the government telling me what drugs i can have
and i don't want the government
telling doctors how to conduct their research.
so explain to me
plz
why you want the feds running the show ?

whoa...i dont want the feds running the show, i want them funding the show...id leave the actual science to the scientists...as far as the drug tests go, i'm with ya on that one. fucken bush just asked congress for a 45% increase in funding to test middle & high school students, there was a article about this recently in usa today by Donna Leinwand...the 45% increase will total about 15 million...hmm, i wonder where that money could be put to better use?

[Hippie3]

in our pockets

[Bobcat]

Hip, are you just taking the oppositional side here for arguments sake or do you really think the govt shouldn't fund this research? Their funding of this research is necessary and won't involve them meddling in anyones life.

I don't understand why anyone would be against the funding of research that could save so many lives from death, disease, loss of cognition, and disfigurement. Especially since the material to be studied is to be destroyed anyway. Material far from the 'adopted embryo' babies that our moral leader surrounded himself with at the veto.

I am not making the great stand or anything.... I just don't understand it!

[Hippie3]

i'm in favor of research
but i prefer the government stay out of it.
you guys are being naive if you think
there would not be strings on federal money,
you should study up on the federal research grant system
to see the kinds of requirements and restrictions the government
imposes if you want its' money.
let the big pharmaceutical corps and hospitals and heath insurance companies pick up the tab, let wealthy people make donations,
but keep uncle sam out of it.

[Dr. Herbani]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

i'm in favor of research
but i prefer the government stay out of it.
you guys are being naive if you think
there would not be strings on federal money,
you should study up on the federal research grant system
to see the kinds of requirements and restrictions the government
imposes if you want its' money.
let the big pharmaceutical corps and hospitals and heath insurance companies pick up the tab, let wealthy people make donations,
but keep uncle sam out of it.

goverments worldwide fund aids research, and i for sure want them funding bird flu research, i dont see how this would be any different...unless ya got what we have now, fanatical right wingers pulling the purse strings...the same idiots who would teach abstinence ONLY without instructing about condoms....now that i think about it maybe your right...we should wait for a more liberal admin, so they wont repress any findings...lol...

heres some cool shit

At the same time, there are fears that if wider research is not made possible, scientists who depend on federal funding will leave for institutions abroad that offer stem cell research programs, and the US will end up lagging on the international stage.


Earlier this month, South Korean scientists announced they had made stem cells tailored to match the individual for the first time - heralded as a breakthrough in stem cell technology.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4580299.stm

[Dr. Herbani]

in that same article from the link above

Dr John Boockvar, a leading stem cell expert at Weill Cornell Medical College, said: "The biggest source of funding for academic research is the government, and we need the government to support research

[Bromius]

I think the reality of this situation is that some funding will come from various levels of goverments and that some will come from the private sector. It doesn't have to be completely one way or the other. Also, I would imagine that money from the private sector would have some strings attached as well. A project that seemed more likely to result in a profitable technology, medicine etc would have an advantage getting funding compared to one that would say help a small group of people immensely but not earn much money.

[Bobcat]

I worked grant programs, hoops for sure- but it wasn't too bad.

Hippies right about the get donations and private funding bit, though. People need to step it up.

Still, the government needs to make an investment in this. Better them than the pharmies being the sole proprietors. You'll see pfizer creating a cure for something and hawking it off to africa for every penny they have.

[Dr. Herbani]

Originally Posted by Bobcat

I worked grant programs, hoops for sure- but it wasn't too bad.

Hippies right about the get donations and private funding bit, though. People need to step it up.

Still, the government needs to make an investment in this. Better them than the pharmies being the sole proprietors. You'll see pfizer creating a cure for something and hawking it off to africa for every penny they have.

yes, its just like aids research, i know ive donated but my $20 needs to be on top of the goverments billions...we can see the end of some terrible diseases in our lifetime....Imho it is morally wrong to oppose this research

[robman1]

There's also their future goals. If aborted embryos are being used for stem cells, then the right has no way to stop abortion in the future because we will become very dependent upon those stem cells.

By stopping this small controversy now (yes this is SMALL compared to what it can become) it will stop a big controversy later.

Those embryos being thrown out in 5 years should have never been planned to be thrown out in the first place in the pro-life eye. When you believe that something should have never happened at all, it takes a lot to let it continue out doesn't it?

[Bromius]

robman> I think most of the embryos being used for stem cell development are the by-product of invitro fertilization procedures, not abortions. What puzzles me is why there isn't much being said about invitro fertilization, since this produces lots of embryos that won't have a chance to survive. This is puzzling because a lot of the same groups that are against stem-cell research and abortion are against the 'morning after' pill. This pill prevents a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. Some critics of this pill believe this is equivalent to abortion, hence my curiousity about the lack of opposition to invitro fertilization which results in pretty much the same thing. Maybe they're cool with it as long as it results in a baby? That's my best guess, but I don't know the opposing arguments as well as I could.

[Hippie3]

Imho it is morally wrong to oppose this research

change 'oppose' into 'support'
and you sound just like
the other side
i don't think it's a moral issue at all.
it's political
but if you admit that
then you can't demonize
your opponents .

[robman1]

Bromius>

The morning after pill (as you said) destroys no embryo, baby, life. It simply prevents it if possible. I don't think that the more moderate pro-life people are very much against the morning after pill, and certainly wouldn't be so against it if they new more about it.

I'm not to clear on what the invitro fertilization thing is that you are talking about. From what I'm gathering you are talking about when a couple chooses to have a "test tube" baby how they produce multiple culture that you choose from. I think this goes back to what I was saying earlier (and this is if my understanding of invitro fertilization is correct), the pro-life characters do not feel that something like that should have ever taken place. They perhaps feel that if a baby is in progress, then destroying this progress would be destroying life (and it is true at least for the chance of life).

So both sides are pretty stale mated here and it is unfair to call the veto anything but political as hippie said. Although I am sure Bush has some moral votes on it and does not agree with abortion, or using embryos, his choice to veto was purely strategic. To not veto this would cause a lot of damage to the right now and in the future.

Voters would shudder. (conservative voters lol)

[Dr. Herbani]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

change 'oppose' into 'support'
and you sound just like
the other side
i don't think it's a moral issue at all.
it's political
but if you admit that
then you can't demonize
your opponents .

although i do like demonizing the wacko far right, in this case im more interested in helping sick people...why political and not moral? come on dude admit it, you dont like these fucks either...type of people would accuse the inventors of penicillin of witchcraft, and equate condom use with abortion

[Hippie3]

i do not believe
in "types" of people-
we are all just
one type- human.

[Dr. Herbani]

Originally Posted by Hippie3

i do not believe
in "types" of people-
we are all just
one type- human.

thats beautiful man...

[arezap]

Check out a company called Viacell. They have a product called Viacord with a service that will collect cord blood stem cells from the umbilical cords of infants for parents from the delivery room and store and multiply them for use for the family. They claim over 50 diseases so far that are being , or can be, treted using stemm cells. the service. Some of their procedures are still in Phase 1 FDA testing and stil experimental. It looks promising though imo.