Bush Vetos Stem Cell Bill. Again.
The Senate passed the current legislation (63-34) in April, and the House passed it (247-176) on 7 June 7, 2007.
In April, almost two-thirds of us believed that Bush should not veto this bill. And ABC reports that 6-in-10 of us support, conceptually, the bill the President vetoed:
Sixty percent, moreover, favor loosening the current restrictions on federal funding for this research, as the legislation Bush has rejected would have done. And that again has been consistent: An identical 60 percent supported federal funding for stem cell research in an ABC/Post poll conducted when the issue first arose six years ago.
What is the source of the President's deep-seated opposition?
Last summer, the issue -- using embryonic stem cells in federally-funded research -- was cast as politics versus science. Scientists told the Houston Chronicle that politicians have created a false choice between research using adult cells and research using embryonic cells because both fields of study are young and need research.
Bush talks about the sanctity of human life -- and implies that embryos will be destroyed simply to provide cells for research. However, the heart of the debate is the fate of 5-day-old blastocysts that are left over after fertilization treatments. The family will decide to either destroy them or freeze them. Should the family be allowed to voluntarily donate these embryos to federally-funded scientists -- not unlike donating one's body to science upon death -- or should they be prohibited from doing so?
What do you think?
See US Liberals Guide Deborah White: Pros and Cons of Embryonic Stem Cell Research and the Veto Process.
Comments
This president is THE most uninformed idiot on the planet! If he cares so much for life, why he is bombing Iraq to hell. Can you say HYPOCRITE!!
Life is precious and people are forgetting that. If allowed to do stem cell, I believe things would get out of control and precious life would be forgotten.
jayneen, I couldn’t have said it better myself.What an idiot we have for a leader of our country.Please someone, remind me, how did this happpen???Since when has King Bush ever been FOR THE PEOPLE??
I agree with Jayneen! Heaven help us!
again…bushwacked by this bush league president. he’s full of bushwah.
Madeline, “precious life” is being forgotten given how many lives could be saved and people relieved of suffering and many other things by this veto. Stem cells generate in many places and become just like the cells around it, thus curing many, many diseases… type 1 diabetes, Parkinson’s, eye diseases/blindness, heart disease, etc. The list goes on and on! Now how is that “forgetting” precious life? Seems to me it would give many people back a life who are currently suffering… unnecessarily!
BUSH is the biggest jackass that has ever been in the WhiteHouse, bar none.
There’s no evidence that stem cell research saves lives or relieves suffering. This is just a ploy by the left to create a wedge between the parties.
BTW-Stem cell research still goes on, only now it goes on without using my tax dollar. No harm done.
c
Bush is a Neanderthal.
Sure, there isn’t evidence that stem cell research can relieve anything yet. But that is exactly why research needs to be done. I would rather my tax dollars go toward finding a cure for some of these debilitating diseases than to the war in iraq.
Stem cell and Iraq have nothing to do with each other Karissa. Your tax dollar will continue to go towards the war in Iraq like it or not.
But, for those who want to participate financially in stem cell research, there are plenty of biotech companies doing research now. There’s no law against stem cell research and the only thing impacted by Bush’s veto is our tax dollars not being wasted on research that is much better invested in the private sector.
Politicians from both sides routinely pass bills like this to drive a wedge between the parties and attempt to place the other side in a bad light. The fact is, Bush has sound reasons for not signing this bill even though most of us do not agree with his reasonings. The left is now using this veto as a tool to paint Bush as an out of touch idiot who just doesn’t get it(he may be an idiot for other reasons).
I think he gets this one and he understands that this bill was unnecessary and mean spirited.
C
Your final argument mixes pragmatism (there are other $ for basic research) and ideology (the bill is mean-spirited). I’m not sure how anyone can say that donating 5-day-old blastocysts left over from fertilization treatments — instead of the proverbial “flush them down the drain” — is mean-spirited. It’s mean-spirited in the same way as organ donation, IMO.
A Science survey shows “that about half of patients with embryos left over from fertility treatments would donate those embryos for research rather than see them discarded or donated to another infertile couple.”
AFA your argument about basic research being the provence of the private sector. There’s a lot of research on this subject — I fall on the side of “there’s a place for public investment” — but I’m sure that’s no surprise to anyone here. Right now, most of the investment in this type of research is off-shore — one more area where this nation, which was once the leader in the world technologically, is falling behind.
Suggested reading: one, two, three, four. (Hmm, I should write a brief on this topic.)
Whether it’s a good idea to continue developing technologies that extend “life” (at whatever age), and thus increase the earth’s population, is a question for another day.
mean spirited=Congress knew he would veto this bill but went ahead in an effort to further their agenda of disrespecting and weakening Bush and the right. My “mean-spirited” remark had nothing to do with science or embryos btw.
“It’s mean-spirited in the same way as organ donation”
Again, you’ve taken the mean spirited comment way out of context? But, I see where you are coming from on the life issue. I don’t pretend to claim I know when life starts or if destroying embryos is wrong? I just know and understand the thought process of those that do believe that all life is sacred. There are those on the life side who believe strongly and will never move and there are those on your side who believe they are right and to hell with anyone else’s opinion or belief. They(you) refuse to accept that there can be other possibilities and that some really do believe that stem cell research is the destruciton of life. Be incredulous, be arrogant, laugh if you want, but if you respected their opinions you wouldn’t be so cavalier.
I also never made any statement that research is the province of the private sector. I simply stated that research would continue via the private sector. And if stem cell’s future is as rosey as most on the left clamor then there should be no shortage of investors.
You’d also have to prove to me that we are falling behind in world technology? That’s just another one of those left wing blog untruths you lefties like to throw around.
C
This is not about saving human life to the scientist, this is about making $$$. How many 3rd world ladies do you think are lining up just to sell their fetuses just for research. Pres. Bush, I don’t think is againist life, just againist mad or bad scientist that think they can play God! Let’s get back to other issues like how we can make our schools safer, so when the kids get back to school in fall, they will feel safe to start learning again!
hi, Joe:
When you say “make our schools safer” …. what, exactly, are the risks you think we need to address?
Kathy
Hi, C -
You wrote:
I wrote:
You replied:
I don’t understand what you mean by “out of context”
“I’m not sure how anyone can say that donating 5-day-old blastocysts left over from fertilization treatments — instead of the proverbial “flush them down the drain” — is mean-spirited”
I never said this. You’re creating a strawman or a diversion? Maybe you don’t read what you write?
c
C -
The law would allow those 5-day-old clump of cells to be used for research.
You said that the law was “mean spirited”
I’ve asked you to elaborate on what you meant by that statement — “mean spiritied” — since my connotative interpretation of the phrase has been stated. Twice.
You say I’m putting words in your mouth. That is not my intent. I’m telling you, as plainly as I can, what your “mean spirited” comment means to me.
Kathy
Here it is again: First paragraph of comment 13.
“mean spirited=Congress knew he would veto this bill but went ahead in an effort to further their agenda of disrespecting and weakening Bush and the right.”
One more time. Mean spirited because they knew he would veto the bill. It’s just posturing on Congress’ part. It’s also an attempt to make Bush look worse than he already does. Congress(Pelosi, Reid) is mean spirited, not the bill. Now do you get it? My comment had nothing to do with science, abortion, fesus’, embryos etc.
C
“I just know and understand the thought process of those that do believe that all life is sacred. ”
Here’s one of the sacred lives that Bush “saved” by not funding research:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y22Y90RCF3Y
If it’s on Youtube it must be true?
There’s still lots of money available for research and just because the bill was vetoed doesn’t stop research. It only means that there will be no goverment dollars available. Research goes on with or without this bill.
If you’re getting all your info from youtube you must be related to the author of this site?
C
Bush just doesn’t get it with stem cell research. Hundreds of blastocysts are left over each month at fertility clinics, and most are immediately discarded or frozen and then discarded at a future date. If Bush feels so strongly about “preserving human life”, why doesn’t he favor closing fertility clinics? But there is good news W, the genie is out of the bottle. America will catch up beginning January 20, 2009, when you leave office and we have an educated president again.
Wise decision not to pursue this slippery slope