Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback’s high-profile opposition to embryonic stem-cell research isn’t going unchallenged by Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (in photo), who last week stepped up to defend this promising field. In a letter to the U.S. Senate signed by eight other governors, Sebelius called President Bush “out of touch” on the issue and urged senators to pass a bill authorizing federal funding (the Senate did so, but Bush has vowed a veto). “Every day, thousands of families in our states struggle as a loved one suffers from juvenile diabetes, spinal cord injuries or other conditions that might be cured if restrictions are lifted,” Sebelius said in the letter. “For over five years, these families have been forced to wait as the Bush policy has obstructed this vital research.”
Posted by Randy Scholfield
-
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in. -
Contact us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Chas on Fairness Doctrine baloney
- Chas on Fairness Doctrine baloney
- Jed on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Public was correct to be concerned about Kline
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Fairness Doctrine baloney
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Fairness Doctrine baloney
- Wahine_Tara on Open thread 11/22
42 Comments
Kathleen Sebelius is either an idiot or a liar!
Yes, reasonable people can disagree on such policy issues, but our ditsy Governor does not have the facts on her side:
There is NO ban on private stem cell research of ANY kind.
ALL stem cell “cures” so far have been with adult stem cells.
All promising research, so far, has been with adult stem cells.
The Federal ban is ONLY on Federal funds going towards Embryonic Stem Cells. That research can still be funded privately.
The vast majority of ALL stem cell research is privately funded.
No private money is going towards Embryonic Stem Cells because it does not produce results, so far.
Kathleen Sebelius is simply looking for a way to justify Nazi like experimentation with human life.
Kathleen Sebelius wants to remove the stigma from her friends like late term abortionist George Tiller.
A “cure” that depends on aborted babies will instantly change public opinion on the whole abortion issue, Sebelius and Tiller hope.
Also, federal funding of Embryonic Stem Cell research will tend to “justify” the Megele’s and Tiller’s of the world.
I fully realize that abortion, in some forms, will probably be legal for a long time.
This debate is not about finding cures for dred diseases. That is, so far, a false promise.
This debate is about normalizing and mainstreaming the abortion industry.
Actually, if the governor is for sponsoring tax funded ESC research, why not start here in her own back yard? Let her propose spending STATE tax dollars!
“does not produce results, so far”
That is why it is called RESEARCH; especially BASIC research.
How much result do we have with controlled fusion so far? Perhaps we should abandon that too?
“reasonable people can disagree on such policy issues” But, disagree with you and it’s Mengele name-calling time.
You are amazing, Paul. The majority of the populations, by far, including Republican support embryonic stem cell research.
By the way, Paul, what should they do with the thousands of unused blastocysts?
Continue to throw them in the trash?
The best definition I have heard so far about when life begins is when a fertilized egg is implanted in the womb. For petri dish fertilized eggs and the resulting blastocysts, there is no implantation, thus no life. Therefore, there should be no moral ramifications of ESC research.
I seem to recall the term “quickening” used by Thomas Aquinas to describe the point of “ensoulment” which; I think, was implantation or perhaps even later.
Too High A Price For Scientific Knowledge
By Cheryl Sullenger
Published in the San Diego Union-Tribune (January 27, 2000)
Ever notice how life sometimes imitates Star Trek? Upon reading a recent newspaper article about embryonic stem cell research, I was reminded of a Star TrekVoyager episode entitled “Nothing Human.” In this episode, set in the 25th century, Voyager crew member B’Elanna Torres is attacked by an intelligent, but very alien species who affixes himself to her vital organs in order to survive, endangering Torres’life. The doctor soon discovers that if the creature is removed from Torres, it will die.To save the lives of his two patients, the doctor calls upon the aid of a holographicscientist, a duplicate of a doctor whose expertise in xenobiology is unsurpassed in theAlpha Quadrant. This scientist, it is soon discovered, gained his medical knowledge,through often brutal and lethal experiments on a subjugated race of people whosuffered greatly due to his experimentation. His knowledge, gained from the deaths ofcountless innocent people, would certainly help save the lives of Torres and the alienbeing. However, Torres is appalled by the prospect of benefiting from suchexperimentation and rejects any treatment derived from research on unwilling humansubjects, even if it costs her her life. Torres and the creature are eventually saved, butthe Voyager doctor is left with a moral dilemma. Is it ethical to use research gained atthe price of so much intentionally inflicted suffering and loss of life? In the end thescientist’s program is deleted along with any knowledge it contained. The price of thatknowledge, counted in the lives of his dead and maimed research subjects, was just toohigh.
Now back to the year 2000 and embryonic stem cell research. Today, scientistsat a California laboratory acquire human fertilized eggs discarded from In Vitrofertilization procedures. They allow the cells to divide until the embryo is perhapsseveral dozens of cells large. These embryonic cells have the remarkable ability togrow into any number of tissue types without the usual cellular aging that takes place inadult stem cells, which cannot be use as successfully. The embryonic cells are thenstripped from the membrane that would soon become a placenta and are forced to growinto whatever tissue the scientists require. This technology has recently been hailed asa brilliant breakthrough that can benefit all of humanity. Animal organs, including eyes,have already been produced in this way. Soon, whole human organs may be grown forpossible transplant, saving thousands of lives. But what of the cost? Each fertilizedegg is a complete human being at the earliest stage in his life. If successfully implantedinto a womb, a child would grow and thrive to full maturity. In reality, a person has todie each time new cells are harvested from a growing embryo.
The cost of thisresearch is innocent human life.Researchers defend their actions by saying that the human embryos used in theirexperiments were discarded embryos that no longer served a purpose. There is dangerin this line of reasoning. Scientists, with one sentence, have created a whole class ofthrowaway people based upon their personal lack of respect for the value of eachhuman life. The quest for knowledge has blinded them to the fact that they are nodifferent from the scientist in that Star Trek episode, to whom knowledge was everythingand the lives of his subjects were nothing.
“Why, then, did Aquinas hold that the process of human conception must occur gradually and incrementally? Why did he hold that first vegetative life was produced, then sensitive life, and so on? Why not immediate hominization? The answer lies in his belief that there is a great distance between the beginning point of the generative process, that is, the material out of which the human being is produced (menstrual blood), and the end point, the coming to be of a human being. Traversing this distance requires a gradual process. In one of his fuller treatments of the issue, he writes:
And we must observe a difference between the process of generation in men and animals and in air or water. The generation of air is simple, since therein only two substantial forms appear, one that is displaced and one that is induced, and all this takes place together in one instant, so that the form of water remains during the whole period preceding the induction of the form of air. On the other hand, in the generation of an animal various substantial forms appear: first the semen, then blood and so on until we find the form of an animal or of a man. [19] ”
So, ensoulment does not take place at conception but at some later time.
http://www2.franciscan.edu/plee/aquinas_on_human_ensoulment.htm
(Oops, I posted an incomplete article. Here are the last paragraphs. Sorry!)
When each individual life is not valued, all life is devalued. We live in aschizophrenic society that chooses shampoo based on the fact that no animals wereused in the testing of the product, but will in turn defend the potentially massive loss ofhuman life caused by embryonic stem cell research and its application. Where will thisdevaluation stop? We have already seen the destruction of over 34 million lives throughabortion because the unborn have been devalued. We are seeing the sick and elderlyquietly euthanized in hospitals and nursing facilities, because their lives are deemed tono longer warrant such basic care as food and hydration. This callus disregard forhuman life is creating a cold, uncaring, and unconcerned society characterized by childabuse, mass murder, suicide and violence in the schools and work-places of America.Further degradation to the value of life cannot be tolerated. Another way must be foundto solve the medical and societal problems that face us.The brave new world of biotechnology in this year 2000 has met science fiction.Now it is time to ask ourselves the hard questions needed to maintain ethical integrity inour own time. Is the cost too high? If the cost is the life of even one innocent personthen it must be determined, for our own sakes as well as for those who will come after,that the price is beyond our moral ability to pay.
A good deal of what we know about treating trauma came from experimentaiton by the Nazis on their subjegated peoples. At least, so I have been told. i do not have a direct reference. Anyway, Should we not use that either?
It’s a slippery slope with no guarantees that there will be even one cure produced that could not have been accomplished with adult stem cells or stem cells from amniotic fluid.
Suppose though that a cure is found using embryonic stem cells taken from embryos that were to be discarded. Where will the embryonic stem cells necessary to meet the demand come from? Will we be creating embryos for the soul purpose (yeah, I know, “sole”)of harvesting stem cells? That sounds like something from a horror film. The born feeding on the unborn.
I was given my name before I was 1 month old in my mother’s womb.
I wonder if my parents thought of me of anything other than human?
The thought pervades my mind in the argument of ethical behavior regarding what being a human being is.
Rosemarie, would you support a ban to in vitro fertilization?
That practice results in the destruction of many fertilized egg cells with each procedure.
“I wonder if my parents thought of me of anything other than human?”
Everyone else does.
Different views of “when” …
“In the Roman Catholic Church since the Middle Ages, ecclesiastical penalties for abortion have differed based on varying views of ensoulment. In the early thirteenth century, Innocent III stated that the soul enters the body of the fetus at the time of quickening when the mother first felt movement of the fetus. In 1588, Pope Sixtus V issued a Papal Bull, which subjected those that carried out abortions at any stage of gestation with excommunication and punishment by civil authorities. Gregory XIV subsequently limited the penalty of excommunication only to abortions of quickened children. In 1869, Pope Pius IX clarified the Church’s current stance in the Bull Apostolicae Sedis (ibid.), enacting the penalty of excommunication for abortions at any stage of pregnancy.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ensoulment
Ben,The “quickening” that Aquinas refers to is the moment when a woman first feels movement of the fetus. That first kick! Until 1869, abortion was considered perfectly acceptable by the church and the law before quickening.
Thnaks Jed - I realized that when I started looking it up. It was a LONG time ago when I “studied” that in college.
Rosemary, Out,Consider that the use in therapy of embryonic stem cells means that those cells are given a chance to live (in another person) rather than being discarded and killed, the current practice.There is a growing body of evidence in cellular biology to suggest that we may be less individual persons than cities and factories made up of cellular lifeforms. If that proves to be the case, then embryonic stem cell research is showing us how to save lives, not destroy them.
Republican,”I wonder if my parents thought of me of anything other than human?”Ask your mother how she felt about that issue when you were two years old.
The end does not justify the means. There is already advertisement for women to donate their eggs for embryonic research. This is not a simple procedure and there can be complications.
So now women will be paid to allow their bodies to be harvested of the eggs she carries. This is abuse of women.
I agree. If Sebelius is so high on this why hasn’t she promoted it in the state of Kansas?
Rosemarie,
Are you aware that the author of the article you site is a convicted felon who attempted to bomb an abortion clinic? She also spent time in prison for her offense. I do not know if in the commission of her crime she endangered people, but she is hardly an objective source on this subject.
Paul, you do need to get caught up on the adult/embryonic stem cell research. I am deeply sorry that lying is not beyond you on this subject.
http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics1.asp
Both adult and embryonic stem cell research is needed. Knowledgable scientists say so:
http://www.stowers-institute.org/default.asp
james,We already pay blood donors at private bloodbanks. I personally have some ethical qualms about that, but if a woman chooses to donate eggs, wouldn’t it fall into the same category? We donate bone marrow (some of us) to save lives, knowing the risks involved. Why not egg cells?
someone ask sebelius’ boyfriend in pittsburg what he thinks of the issue…
The Bush Admin. has been promoting pseudoscience, and attacking good scientific research for the last 6 years. See “The Republican War on Science” by Chris Mooney (2005).
If all else fails, the next president will restore common sense and the rule of reason to federal government support for sceintific research into solving the mysteries of all these horrible diseases.
It is not the place of the government to fund medical research. That is a job for the private sector.
It is not the place of the government to finance abstinence education, but the Bush administration does, even though it has proven not to work.
PM,Nevertheless, the government has been funding almost all basic research in medicine through university grants and grants to private research companies who depend on government for all or most of their funding. The private sector then purchases rights to discoveries from the universities and only does enough research to get FDA approval. Without this system, most of the medical breakthroughs of the last few decades would still be undiscovered.
Econ101: Well said!!!!!
OH MY GOD or maybe your god, or perhaps yours, or maybe someone else’s beliefs. Perhaps the founding fathers should have included the seperation of church and state…. Oh silly me. I guess they did! I vote we all ban fetal stem cell research! I vote we declare the world is flat. I vote that we bow down to whatever religion has the most power! Just like those people in Afghanistan did.Oh wait, those people were wrong in the belief that religion was the most important thing! Lets all forget about improving mankind.I know what your thinking, Life is sacred! That is the battle cry. When life is is not in your body, ie it is in a test tube, glass slide etc or even in a turkey baster, maybe that is God’s way of saying.. Hey Idiot, maybe you shouldn’t have kids!!!!! Perhaps you could benefit society better by helping with some other things. Curing stuff isn’t so bad is it? I’ll have my eggs over easy most times, occasionally scrambled, after all it is not a cute little chick, until it comes out.
Yeah for science! Stem cell research has already shown immense progression in eliminating Parkinson’s from laboratory mice so it shouldn’t be surprising the research can be carried to humans.
I’d advise people not to go to Paul for scientific advice, he still believes the Earth is 6,000 years old. And why are people quoting rants from a convicted terrorist?
It’s no surprise the reichwing nuts on this forum support the terrorists but I am rather surprised they are so open about it.
Jed,
Please provide a discussion on how only the current system of paying for medical research produces results.
That’s simple Proudman. The government funds research, the research does scientific studies to produce results.
PM,Corporations are by necessity fixated on next quarter’s bottom line. It doesn’t pay for them to start an expensive research project that may take decades to turn a profit. They’d much rather wait until marketable results are produced before they invest.Foundations do invest in basic science, but to such a limited extent and in so many fields that their contribution to any one is minimal.Government therefore becomes the only entity left with sufficient resources to fund such research, and given the benefits to society thus far in medical and other research, has a vested interest in seeing that it continues. Further, since such research is usually conducted in universities and medical schools, it has the added benefit of producing our next generation of scientists, vital to our national interest and to the businesses that utilize their discoveries. The system of research grants also allows government agencies to direct research into areas where it appears most needed.It’s a system that has provided this country with it’s technological edge and the world with a model worth imitating!That the discussion you were hoping for?
Ben,I have been gone.
I anticipated your response, in your first post to this thread.
NASA and our military used NAZI rocket scientists to great benefit. That knowledge helped the USA win the cold war and helped put Americans on the moon.
However, those former Nazis proved their “research” worked prior to the USA using that technology.
I will be deaply troubled by any dilema causes by a real “cure” from embryonic cells.
We arent there yet.
Federal funds should not chase after flops that dont work. Ebryonic Stem Cell research shows no more promise than countless other, worthy projects.
Paul - they “proved” it would work only prior to final application. Perhaps you do not remember watching rockets blow up on the launch pad; I do. Perhaps you do not remember software engineers patching together all sorts of things to get one of our moon flights back; I do.
DougI have no criminal record at all, so you are wrong on that one.
I was found in contempt of court in a CIVIL (Non Criminal) hearing but had that finding overturned by the 10 Circuit in Denver. Do YOU believe in the law, Doug?
Furthermore, Doug, I accept both Evolution and Genesis, realizing that neither prohibits the other and that neither tells the whole story, which we wont know until we meet out Maker.
Paul - a comment on the opposite side of this issue. It would seem to me that if we wanted to make a heart valve for me that using MY adult cells would be preferable. That way there should be no rejection issues.
BenEXACTLY!Anti-rejection drugs are very, very expensive and rejection is a huge issue with all “transplant” technology.
Jed,
It is an assumption that corporations are only focused on short-term results. There are other industries out there that demonstrate that assumption to be incorrect. Take the aircraft industry for example. Billions of dollars, years of development, and government approval at the end of the rainbow. It is very similar to medical advancement.
Paul - that is why I support all sorts of reaesrch.
Proudman - I think if you scratch beneath the surface you will find a lot of government dollars in aviation research. Just looking locally what is NIAR?
Ben,
Just because you find it there does not mean it’s really needed. Unfortunately, many businesses try to fund things through the government. After all it’s ‘free money’ to them. Corporate welfare is not justifiable.