President Obama made the difficult but correct decision today to lift restrictions on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. He acknowledged that “many thoughtful and decent people are conflicted about or strongly oppose this research,” but that a majority of Americans “from across the political spectrum” support it. Stem cell research, he noted, could “help us understand, and possibly cure, some of our most devastating diseases and conditions.” Obama also rejected the “false choice between sound science and moral values,” saying that “I believe we have been given the capacity and will to pursue this research — and the humanity and conscience to do so responsibly.”
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
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Daniel on ACORN stole election?
- Daniel on Open thread 11/21
- satatom on Open thread 11/21
- satatom on ACORN stole election?
- Wahine_Tara on Open thread 11/21
- Wahine_Tara on Open thread 11/21
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/21
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/21
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/21
- JWink on Will GOP contenders be nice to Obama?
72 Comments
Stem cell research, he noted, could “help us understand, and possibly cure, some of our most devastating diseases and conditions.”
———-
Notice how the “embryonic” part disappeared from that true statement.
Fortunately the Bush limitation caused science to look to other ways of getting embryonic stem cells than from killing embryos adn they found them. It also helped drive research using adult stem cells, which are the only ones that have led to any cures. So we really don’t need to research cures by killing human life.
But scientist will do it still, and in doing so will devalue human life.
I was sorely disappointed that Obama did not, in the end, add the provision which would have copy protected his own DNA, so no one could clone the One.
Maybe Obama did not leave out embryonic for a reason? Obama believes in developing ALL forms of research – embryonic and adult stem cells. Why can’t we have both?
I find your argument of killing human life somewhat insincere though since most of those embryonic stem cells are left over from fertility clinics and were destined for DESTRUCTION.
Isn’t destruction of these cells the same as the killing of human life? Why is it okay to throw these embryonic stem cells out in the garbage okay with you but not using them for research?
Either you’re against killing of human life or not.
Our nation cannot afford a One, and a Two, and a One, Two, Three, Four.
Amway I am willing to bet you have had a lot of disappointment in your life, huh?
“But scientist will do it still, and in doing so will devalue human life.”
To the millions of Catholics who voted for this guy.
Suck it.
We seem to already have more than enough embryos to assure our survival, so using a few that were already slated to be disposed of to find ways to alleviate human suffering now and for future generations seems a fair trade-off.
It should be self evident that the sanctity of human life is more valuable to each and every one of us than all the knowledge that any number of lab experiments can discover.
There is a fine line betweeen research that helps mankind and that which dehumanizes the same.
Since Obama does not respect the right to life for the unborn, it is safe to say that he has no reservations about funding research that freely crosses that line.
It’s very dangerous for a man to be dealing with issues ‘above his pay grade’
Oh for Pete’s sake, this no more the unborn then the eggs ejected every month or the sperm spilled during a porn movie!
I rest my case
Yes by all means let stand on that these are the unborn and value the sanity of life…. That is until they are born then crap on them if it mean I have less money in my pocket!
Sorry but after witnessing the uproar over SCHIPS and funding health care for the children. This stance is illogical and is often held by the same people who stood against health care for LIVING children but wanting to stand in the way of medical research using less then human children.
This is not about killing a child for research no where close to the experiments of Nazis. Abortion is killing a human child on that I agree. On embryonic stem cells being a child that just is nonsense and no different then the above description I used. They are going to be destroyed, burnt and the ash blowing in the wind.
If it help or not is a matter of we will see. But to oppose it on the grounds that to use them in medical research is objectionable while they are suffering a useless end as it is. Well it flies in the face that the human race is the most intelligent of all species.
I will rest my case
It IS hard to get that big ol’ rock of hypocrisy with those folks aint it ‘dog?
Let’s dig under that rock and see what’s hiding there.
Well for starters and has been mentioned, these embryos are fertility clinic leftovers. SO to honestly be against this research, you MUST be against fertility clinics. There’s no way to argue around it. I guess if the “pro life” people were honest and had their way, there would be no fertility clinics.
Nevermind the side catch that if there are no fertility clinics, these “babies” never exist in the first place.
Opening up this research gives people HOPE. WHO could deny them that? The same sort of folk that could deny a childless couple the hope of a child I guess.
Ugly, ugly people.
Okay listen up stupids. What PRESIDENT Bush did was prohibit federal dollars from being used to fund embryonic stem cell research. He in no way banned it and in fact a lot of research was taking place using private funding. Now Obama has turned on the federal spigots and will pour tax payer dollars into it which will take the place of private funding. Now millions of americans who are opposed to E.S C. research will have their money taken and used. I guess thats the name of the game with leftists. Force people to pay for things they oppose. “Change we can believe in”.
Bluejay that was addressed a couple of days ago on one of the cable news shows, the answer that was give was a Federal law that states how many eggs can be implanted and they have to be fertilized only before the procedure. No extras and no storage to be done.
I can see your point on the throwaway embryos WriterDog, even though I think your characterization was very crass. I strongly disagree, but understand.
But suppose that a some big cure is found through embryonic cell research. What then? The demand skyrockets for our unborn. Bidding wars on our leftovers? Embryos created to be used? Embryo farms?
Better think now about the consequences.
Chrisfrommactown, how is that different then 75% of any other spending? No one agrees with every cent that is spent. The individual just does not get that much control over all the spending! That is the way tax money works.
Outlander we already have sperm banks and egg banks as it is. If such a demand were to arise and sorry for being so crass but right there was is the answer. Every month a woman eject eggs and well the rest as for men. In both case it is a waste that if need be would be the supply. A pro-lifer gave me an explanation as to why the interest in using the embryo stem cells over adult stem cells. It that the embryo cell can be used more then once while the adult is used once. I do not know if that is true or not but at least we had a real discussion.
This is such an emotional issue that there is a lot of misinformation out there that is in support on one side or the other.
Another point Outlander is that everyday someone is selling or donating their blood. At one time such things was thought of as being unholy. If such a big break though did occur the same would happen.
But suppose that a some big cure is found through embryonic cell research. What then? The demand skyrockets for our unborn. Bidding wars on our leftovers? Embryos created to be used? Embryo farms?
That presumes that the research can only find treatments that requires further embryos, and in bulk. But research doesn’t work that way. The knowledge gained may very be used to develop new drugs and other treatments that cure a host of diseases. We just don’t know.
I wonder how many of these anti-science fundies will turn down a cure that resulted from stem cell research when it comes to curing their paralysis or Parkinson’s. I’m thinking they’ll change their tune like they have on heart transplants, test tube babies and cures for STDs.
Every month a woman eject eggs and well the rest as for men. In both case it is a waste that if need be would be the supply.
———-
Oh, then just put ‘em together and presto. Farm the little buggers. Fatten them up and sell them.
Thankfully WD, I don’t think that most folks would go for that kind of proposition.
” Obama also rejected the “false choice between sound science and moral values,”
=======================================
Enter, the Mengele factor:
“The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it.”
- Joseph Mengele, Practitioner of Terror Medicine, Auschwitz
To all the Christians who voted for President Obama, I hope this is the change you were hoping for, more funding for abortions, embryonic stem cell research, choosing to put our country into more debt. These decisions are clearly against biblical principles. One question: Is God pleased?
For Regular, a BIG bowl:
Burp!
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/catholicamerica/2009/03/obama_the_baby_killer.html?hpid=topnews
— snip —
“The tutior (Latin for safer) position of the Church says that even if an embryo may not be a human person in a biological sense, it has the potential of becoming so. In Catholic theology, potential human beings share rights with actual human beings.
However, the abandonment of embryos by couples who have decided not to use these frozen stem cells has created a new situation. If they are otherwise to be destroyed, then does not the good that can be done to heal disease outweigh protecting a non-existent potential?
These are deep, delicate and daunting issues. They are not resolved by “baby killer” accusations or by cavalier dismissal of Catholic moral concern. President Obama’s policy falls within the parameters set for science by Catholic theology. And maybe it should be that way. I’d hate to see a president invoking theology as a basis for policy: that would turn the democracy into a theocracy.”
Over 20 years of taxpayer-funded and privately-funded embryonic stem cell research has produced not one cure or treatment. ESCR is not even safe for human trials, likely never will be. Adult stem cell research, producing safe and ethical new cures and treatments every year, will be robbed so that profitable patents can be issued on the manufacture of living human beings for destructive “research.”
What will the American people say when Obamanation finds out that science will claim that new cures and treatments can be achieved by robbing condemned criminals and the hopelessly insane of their organs, or by shackling them on a grisly research table as soon as their life is deemed worthless?
The first embryonic stem cell was discovered in 1998.
#
lindainks55
Posted March 9, 2009 at 5:03 pm | Permalink
The first embryonic stem cell was discovered in 1998.
======================================
From Wikie:
Isolation and in vitro culture
Stem cells were discovered from analysis of a type of cancer called a teratocarcinoma. In 1964, researchers noted that a single cell in teratocarcinomas could be isolated and remain undifferentiated in culture. These types of stem cells became known as embryonic carcinoma cells (EC cells).[2] Researchers learned that primordial embryonic germ cells (EG cells) could be cultured and stimulated to produce many different cell types.
Embryonic stem cells (ES cells) were first derived from mouse embryos in 1981 by Martin Evans and Matthew Kaufman and independently by Gail R. Martin. Gail R. Martin is credited with coining the term ‘Embryonic Stem Cell’.[3][4] A breakthrough in human embryonic stem cell research came in November 1998 when a group led by James Thomson at the University of Wisconsin-Madison first developed a technique to isolate and grow the cells when derived from human blastocysts.
Appears that lindainks is in error, but she is not alone in the error department.
You may depend on Wiki for your scientific information if you choose.
Stem cells have been studied since the 1940s. They were, however, not human embryonic stem cells until after their discovery in 1998.
#
lindainks55
Posted March 9, 2009 at 5:10 pm | Permalink
You may depend on Wiki for your scientific information if you choose.
============================
It’s historical information about science. It’s not scientific information.
Obviously, you are in error, but fail to admit it.
Stem cells have been studied since the 1940s. They were, however, not studying human embryonic stem cells until after their discovery in 1998.
lindainks55
Posted March 9, 2009 at 5:13 pm | Permalink
Stem cells have been studied since the 1940s. They were, however, not studying human embryonic stem cells until after their discovery in 1998.
=========================
Wrong.
They discovered a method to isolate Human embryonic stem cells.
Isolating and discovering are entirely two different methodologies.
As I said, Regular, you may choose to get all the information you want from Wiki on any and all subjects. And, if you want to argue using that info, you’ll need to find someone other than me to do it with.
#
lindainks55
Posted March 9, 2009 at 5:17 pm | Permalink
As I said, Regular, you may choose to get all the information you want from Wiki on any and all subjects. And, if you want to argue using that info, you’ll need to find someone other than me to do it with.
===============================
You’re beginning to act like Chas now, refusing to admit you are wrong. :D
Lot of things are discovered in biology/medicine, but can’t be isolated simply because the technique to do so isn’t invented yet.
If you took any type of microbiological science in college, you would know that one of the key methods of analysis is isolation.
Isolation does not equal discovery.
Regular,
Thank you for pointing out my mistakes. I make them often, so you will be kept quite busy.
Parkay posted, “Over 20 years of taxpayer-funded and privately-funded embryonic stem cell research has produced not one cure or treatment.”
I quickly responded with, “The first embryonic stem cell was discovered in 1998.”
What I should have said was that there was no research conducted on a human embryonic stem cell until after 1998,”
It is a young science. Much progress has been made, and more will be accomplished. Exciting times!
“One question: Is God pleased?”
Hang on, I’ll ask him.
God? Do you care if we use these embryos that were going to be thrown away anyway to research cures for sick and disabled people. You know, the folks you forgot or whatever?
I’ll give you five minutes to answer. Then we need to move on.
Oh and God? If I can ask a followup, do you care if gay people get married?
Ok that’s five minutes and some change.
I see God has not weighed in here. I didn’t hear anything where I am either.
I must conclude that as to the issue of stem cell research and gay marriage, God either has no interest or no strong opinion.
moves a distance away from B.J. in lightning strikes
in case…=in
Nancy Reagan is said to be pleased that the research has continued.
Maybe prayer DOES work. Her change of mind can be explained by Michael Moore’s prayer to afflict the comfortable.
From a link I posted above,
“I’d hate to see a president invoking theology as a basis for policy: that would turn the democracy into a theocracy.”
But it does warm my heart to see that many Republicans still want to legislate morality and perhaps make our Constitution more closely resemble the Bible. They may be in the minority for longer than even I had hoped! ;-)
Let’s see if any conservatives will have the guts to go after Nancy Reagan:
“I’m very grateful that President Obama has lifted the restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research,” she wrote in a statement released shortly after Obama signed an executive order lifting the Bush-era restrictions. “These new rules will now make it possible for scientists to move forward. I urge researchers to make use of the opportunities that are available to them, and to do all they can to fulfill the promise that stem cell research offers.”
Nancy Reagan has been an outspoken advocate of stem-cell research – and scientists hope that the research could someday lead to cure to Alzheimer’s disease, which afflicted her husband, Ronald Reagan.
Reagan continued, “Countless people, suffering from many different diseases, stand to benefit from the answers stem cell research can provide. We owe it to ourselves and to our children to do everything in our power to find cures for these diseases – and soon. As I’ve said before, time is short, and life is precious.”
#
lindainks55
Posted March 9, 2009 at 6:05 pm | Permalink
But it does warm my heart to see that many Republicans still want to legislate morality and perhaps make our Constitution more closely resemble the Bible. They may be in the minority for longer than even I had hoped! ;-)
=================================
O’Bama is forming the new Reichskirche just as Hitler did in 1933. It will have the goals of a ‘New Jerusalem’ and secular values above all else.
President, or should I say Minister O’Bama will lead the flock, willing or unwilling to reject the false choice between sound science and moral values.
Freedom of religion dies today and will be replaced by the first church of O’Bama.
“Regular” —
Careful or I’ll sic the Godwin’s Law enforcement officers on you.
Dear Bluejay,
He absolutely cares about marriage. In fact, The Word of God speaks authoritatively to every issue of life and clearly teaches the joining of one man and one woman.
Joining of one man and one woman? Wow, I guess Jesus must have missed the memo on that…
“jt0222″ proclaims –
“The Word of God speaks authoritatively to every issue of life.”
Like how Red Lobster restaurants are abominations?
Like how barbecued spare ribs are abominations?
How polyester/cotton blend shirts are abominations?
Thanks, but I have other issues I’m needing to find answers for in “The Word of God.”
Like that eternal question: “Paper or plastic?” at the grocery store. Paper kills trees, but it’s biodegradable and comes from a renewable resource. Plastic bags are easier to carry but are killing dolphins in the middle of the Pacific and won’t deteriorate for 10,000 years and they’re made from Arab oil.
What’s the Bible verse, “jt0222?”
And can the Gospels help me fill out my NCAA Tournament bracket?
Winning the PowerBall drawing Wednesday would be helpful. Certainly “The Word of God” has a Bible Code that can wrap up that issue for me.
Then you can direct me to the ensuing issue: Should I get the Ferrari or the Lamborghini?
You must be new here 22.
The “word of God” is writing in a very old book written by men, nothing more.
New Survey: Those With No Religion Fastest-Growing Tradition
A major new survey of religion in America reports three huge trends: that “nones”—people claiming no religion—constitute the only “religious” tradition that’s growing in all 50 states, that nearly 40 percent of mainline Protestants now also identify themselves as evangelical or born again, and that the nation’s massive Roman Catholic population has shifted from the Northeast to the Southwest. According to one survey’s investigators, “California now has a higher proportion of Catholics than New England.”
Enormous political implications here. Released today, the American Religious Identification Survey—conducted by the Program on Public Values at Trinity College—pays special attention to the growing ranks of American “nones.”
“Many people thought our 2001 finding was an anomaly,” [Ariela] Keysar said. We now know it wasn’t. The ‘Nones’ are the only group to have grown in every state of the Union.”
The percentage of Christians in America, which declined in the 1990s from 86.2 percent to 76.7 percent, has now edged down to 76 percent.
more at:
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/god-and-country/2009/03/09/new-survey-those-with-no-religion-fastest-growing-tradition.html
lindainks55
Posted March 9, 2009 at 7:40 pm | Permalink
New Survey: Those With No Religion Fastest-Growing Tradition
==============================
Yeah, that’s something one can be really proud of accomplishing.
“Our Father who art in nada, Hallowed be thy nada…”
See?
This is why I’m always reminding the fundies they might want to dial it back on persecution and marginalization of people they disagree with. Some day, maybe sooner than later, the persecution and mistreatment may be coming at them.
Nah, “BlueJay” –
We don’t need to resort to persecution and mistreatment. They probably deserve it but we don’t have to go that low.
Besides. Ridicule is so much more appropriate and so much more fun.
Why is it that those who profess to be Christian almost never act like Christians? I just don’t get it at all…
“Mary_Caruso” –
It’s because they don’t get it either.
“O’Bama is forming the new Reichskirche just as Hitler did in 1933. It will have the goals of a ‘New Jerusalem’ and secular values above all else.
“President, or should I say Minister O’Bama will lead the flock, willing or unwilling to reject the false choice between sound science and moral values.
“Freedom of religion dies today and will be replaced by the first church of O’Bama.”
Re: Regular
DNFTT propogating Godwinian delusions for its amusement.
Obama made the correct decision. Arguably, early embryonic stem cell research fueled the advances with adult stem cells, and much can be learned. It is absurd to equate personhood with an undifferentiated embryo that could be “one baby”, or if divided “two babies”, and if further divided “four babies” etc. There are ethical concerns about stem cell research, but to call them “babies” is absurd. A blastocyst is more similar to other blastocysts, of human species or otherwise. It is genetically human, if implanted it may become a human, but it is not a person.
For that matter, parkay’s insinuation of a slippery slope on this issue actually does a disservice to the slippery slope issue other critics of abortion bring up (see David Rundle’s recent editorial in this paper). But then, parkay (aka the cockroach dressing Troy boy?) does a disservice to his supposed cause every time he posts.
The percentage of Christians in America, which declined in the 1990s from 86.2 percent to 76.7 percent, has now edged down to 76 percent.
=================================================
With preachers like Chas, is it any wonder?
Hard to get good help these days.
“One question: Is God pleased?”
Jesus healed the sick, right? So what’s to say that God didn’t give the knowledge to people (scientists, doctors, etc.) to do the same? After all, Jesus was under a deadline and couldn’t hang around to help out any longer.
Why do you insist on classifying God? Why do you insist on you (collective “you”) being the only one(s) who know(s) God’s mind?
“Predestined” shares –
“…Jesus was under a deadline and couldn’t hang around to help out any longer.”
Hell, he didn’t hang around for the weekend.
I have yet to see a con honestly post that they want an end to fertility clinics.
I’ve read this book and I know how it ends (for those tivo’ing this look away):
“But Foxy-woxy had made two bites at Cocky-locky, and when the first snap only hurt Cocky-locky, but didn’t kill him, he called out to Henny-penny. So she turned tail and ran back home, so she never told the king the sky was a-falling.”
Seems as though there’s no shortage of Henny-pennies these days.
Monk,
“Then you can direct me to the ensuing issue: Should I get the Ferrari or the Lamborghini?”
God said get neither; go for the Prius!
Oh my dear people. Such bitterness and distain for the Creator of our universe and mankind. Please, feel free to mock Him because the Bible teaches the Lord was also treated this way when He was here on earth. He has given each one of you the choice to believe in Him or lean on your own wisdom and understanding. If you choose the latter, the day will come when you will believe, “Every knee shall bow and acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord”.
jt, why do you assume that your beliefs about a Creator are the correct ones? If you’d grown up in Indonesia, Persia, or the Middle East, you’d be quoting the Koran. If you’d grown up in India, you’d be quoting one of Hinduisms many scriptures. Etc., etc. You assume that the will of God is self evident (it may be to you, but not everyone starts with your assumptions about the nature of “The Creator” as a reference point), without taking into consideration that your beliefs are almost certainly a consequence of your geography.
And as for your assumption that those of us who disagree with you “disdain (hu)mankind”, nothing is further from the truth. And most people who support embryonic stem cell research do it in the sincere belief that it will help to allieviate suffering, regardless of their own religious beliefs.
Why is one major source of stem cells not even being spoke of. Umbilical cord stem cells. They are more effective than adult stem cells and should not cause conflicts with people and their beliefs. Well the only people that I can see having a problem with this are the companies convincing rich people to hoard their child’s stem cells as an insurance polices for their family. I attempted to donate the umbilical blood of my children but there is no setup (at least in rural areas) to do this. This is sad that we are so busy screaming about embryonic stem cells being wrong to use(which they are) that we are not demanding the use of the obvious alternative.
Sarah44,
Umbilical cord stem cells are ‘blood stem cells.’ They are effective in treatments for blood disorders.
We should be celebrating that, and eagerly looking to the advances that are yet to come!
Uh, jt0222,
We aren’t mocking god; we’re mocking you. You are not god. Please note the difference.