W Stopping Stem Cell Research is like Stopping Dr. Salk's Vaccine

salk and many other research scientists conquered polio in the 1950's. fuck head would deny him the opportunity if it had involved stem cell research, which it may have if salk were here today.

bush himself doesn't give a fuck about helping sick people, he just wants to throw raw meat to his insane base who believe god put him there.

research. I'd like a cure myself for onr or two of my chronic diseases, but not from killing anyone, even an embryo. If killing embryos is justified, why not infants > children > adults -- and, of course, the disabled.

I just can't support any killing. But of course Bush is wrong on this because he DOES support lots of other killing. He's not morally consistent. But people want to have a beer with him. :grr:

it's a hot button issue alright. using monkeys and rabbits in research is another hot button isssue. we will knock heads over this for years to come.

but, when a living vertebrate is needed, better other verts than our own species.

P.S. I knew, of course, that you didn't want to kill the disabled. ;-) Did you see my post in the Disability Issues forum re: the Bushistas plans to cut SSDI??? Haven't seen it discussed in other forums, have you?

he's so compassionate. i just don't understand why the disabled and the less fortunate of us not named bush have to be denied benefits and research funds and health care. what's compassionate about all that?

bush should check out the 'People with NO Abilities Act'

If you just leave them frozen till they're no longer viable or go ahead and destroy them, is this not either malignant neglect or killing?

Also, if you refuse to look into a possible cure to these diseases via stem cells, are you not allowing someone to die?

at the expense of lives. After all, we have the technology now to do organ transplants but we would be morally opposed to someone suggesting that we use some healthy human beings as "parts stores" and remove all their usable organs to save other lives. I don't think any DUer would support doing that to a condemned prisoner so why is it supported for embryos? They are alive and they are human, they're simply very young.

It's my opinion that excess embryos should never be created and that those in frozen storage should, if viable, be implanted and allowed to live. Otherwise, they should be allowed to die naturally, not sacrificed as medical "research material." Yes, it's a "waste." So is burying people -- think of all the extra meat we could harvest from the dead!

Still, I don't support cannibalism, even though it doesn't have to involve killing. Embryonic stem cell research does have to involve killing, unless they take stem cells from spontaneously aborted embryos. I imagine there are multiple problems with that approach, however.

Stem cells can be obtained from the umbilical cords of newborn infants and we haven't exhausted the possibilities of research with adult stem cells, either. I don't believe in embryonic stem cells as a magical panacea, as often touted by advocates.

http://cis.nci.nih.gov/fact/7_41.htm

Does this still count as killing babies? This is the exact reason we need to do the research.
What about this....
you take a fertilized egg from an invetro fertilization clinic that they are going to throw away ( in the millions yearly ) ,
you give it an electric shock to wipe all DNA from the cell,
you then clone that blank stem cell so that no inherent DNA is passed, the cell can then be "programmed" with DNA from the person it's going to treat.

The Koreans figured out how to clone stem cells this week.

I wish the American people would get up to speed on what exactly
stem cell research is all about. I have a 13 year old autistic son
who understands it better than most. He also understands that neurological diseases like his will someday be wiped out because of the ability to "fix the broken brain cells in my head".

willing donor to a person who needs it, or any other transplants from willing donors, either living or just deceased.

My moral and ethical objections are to killing humans at any stage of their lives, for any reason.

See my reply above re: excess frozen embryos.

they take your bone marrow, use the cells in it to treat your cancer. no babies, no donors.

in power. It's still hard for me to believe that we have someone running our country who is so lacking of intelligence and compassion. I hate that phucked up bastard.

:sarcasm:

In the meantime, I continue to wonder when and why a fertilized egg became more valuable than a viable, living, breathing human being.

Stem Cell procedures have not yet proved themselves to me. I prefer approaches like neural prostheses. but I certainly support continued research into stem cell methods.

Will there be enough to override ?

are against this research and the dumbass poser of a Pres. must bow to their will. Other nations will go forward and Amerika will have to get this benefit from them.

embryonic stem cell research.

This is in one area I don't want to see America leading in. After all, the Nazis made great advances in using (and exterminating) humans but the rest of the world wisely realized that their research was nothing that should be replicated. Ironically, they forbade abortion. . .

There are many Americans who are deeply concerned about embryonic stem cell research and abortion and we aren't all Fundies nor Republicans nor are we stupid.

DU is supposed to be a discussion forum, not merely a rubberstamping convention. (A thread following this pattern: "I hate people who are opposed to stem cell research!" "Me, too. "So do I. "They're all stupid." "I think so, too" = a rubberstamping convention.)

Along with birth control of all forms.