Stem Cell Veto

[DCJenn]

So, as I'm sure everyone can figure out, I have no problem with stem cell research. My take is that the research can benefit millions and therefore any moral question of how the stem cells might be obtained is therefore moot.

How do the masses feel about 1) the Senate apparently backtracking on their originally stated position of backing up the Pres. and 2) the potential Veto.

as an aside, the morality of research can be a whole 'nother debate, me thinks.

Jenn

[SuzySunshine]

I think its too bad that Bush is vetoing something that could, and will help millions.

This is the summary of the bill I found and as a strong catholic republican, this is the type of stem cell research I would support.

The embryonic stem cell bill Congress is preparing to send President Bush would lift his executive order blocking federal funding for any stem cell research using embryonic stem cell lines developed after Aug. 9, 2001. To qualify for federal funding under the bill, newer embryos could be used in studies only if they:

_Were created for the purposes of fertility treatment.

_Were donated by in vitro fertilization clinics with written, informed consent of those being being treated.

_Were"in excess of the clinical need of the individuals seeking such treatment"and would never be implanted in a woman.

_Would otherwise be discarded, as determined by those seeking treatment.

_Were not donated by patients induced to do so by financial or other incentives.

I think it's a much-needed adjustment to the stem cell research limitations. I'm all for stem cell research, especially with all of the discarded embryos. If they're going to be discarded, why not use them for something that could help millions of people?

I will rejoice if the Senate actually upholds a veto. Let's see what happens.

[Meenah]

I am all for stem cell research!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1000%!

[PrincessFiona]

It floors me that we are at 'war' in Iraq, the middle east is blowing up, minimum wage in this country is not a living wage, we have millions of uninsured...and we are talking about a veto on stem cell research.

Gawd...when will this presidency end???

kris

so do we think the senate is going to have the cojones to do the right thing and override??

[Sheherezade]

I think it died in the house. Didn't it? I heard yesterday that they needed only 4 more votes in the Senate (possible) but 50 in the house. The sponser said it would die. I think it did yesterday. Is there more news?

[SuzySunshine]

I don't think they have the votes - aren't they like 3 or 4 short? I'd like to see it but I don't see it happening.

[Meenah]

Where are the assasins when we need them???

Where are the assasins when we need them???

holy monkey Luanne! how much of that beverage have you been sipping?

[MissCrabette]

I am 100% for stem cell research.

Having said that, let me give you another perspective. The majority of the US population is in favor of this bill, yet a very large percentage of Americans are still against it. Let's not even get into why they are against it. Instead, I want to draw a parallel to the war in Iraq. It's pretty clear that most people on this site are against it and they see it among other things as a waste of resources for a cause they don't believe in. The only difference is that this administration chose to ignore the anti war voices out there and instead it acknowledged the anti stem cell research people. And I'm sure we would have been pretty pleased if our voices had been heard on the topic of the war in Iraq.

And just in case I appeared to be defending the veto, I am not. I simply wanted to turn the issue around a little bit. We'll get our turn in 3 years. In the meantime we'll have to make use of that countdown.

[Vanquisher]

Sorry Cristina, I cannot look at the other side when it comes to that imbecile!

He has no problem sending thousands of men and women to die, but already discarded embryos he wants to "protect"? Besides, everyone should agree with me!

I am with Luanne.


Oh, and speaking of assassins, (huge tangent coming), why can't it be like the movies where we send in Tom Cruise (he has to be good for something) over to North Korea on a covert op? These things always get resolved in two hours in the movies!

[SueC]

Did anybody see Sam Brownback addressing the senate on the issue? (I confess the only reason I saw any of it was because Jon Steward was poking fun). A proud day for Kansas!

[PrincessFiona]

Where are the assasins when we need them???

:>

Are you volunteering

kris

[PrincessFiona]

...why can't it be like the movies where we send in Tom Cruise (he has to be good for something) over to North Korea on a covert op? These things always get resolved in two hours in the movies!

Admittedly, heidi, I have often thought the same thing. The US has been involved in some uprisings like this (think S. America) but...why not just take care of it the *easy* way. I think it breaks some international law (see how informed I am ) though. Imagine if all of the diff. countries were running around assasinating the leaders that they thought were bad. Also, I guess there is the question then too of who would replace said leader. If we went into Iran (for example) and took out the big guy, someone just as bad would probably take his place.

It doesnt make sense that instead thousands of innocent people have to die or be displaced in 'legal' wars, does it.

kris