http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050525/ap_on_go_co/congress_stem_cells
Too bad our religious kook president will veto this nonetheless.
or the fundies are losing their grip and the more moderate repubs are sick of being bullied around. between the filibuster deal and this bill, they aren’t too happy.
If your point is that it is insane to have a difference of opinion on the appropriateness of using federal funds to pay for embryonic stem cell research, why don’t you offer an intelligent argument?
It is too bad that some humans believe that other humans should be used for research and then killed. I thought that humanity was making progress, what will slavery being eliminated in most of the world over the last 200 years and most of the world professing that something like the holocaust will never happen again. But, events like this vote make you see that humanity really hasn’t changed and that far too many of us are willing to use and discard human life.
It’s akin to the Nazis using human guinea pigs for research during the 1930’s and 40s. Most of those guinea pigs were killed in the process and had no option in participating or not…
You do realize that Stem Cell research is not banned don’t you? States still have the right to fund research if they choose. As it should be. Embryonic stem cell research has never, ever been banned. Ever. Many states, including California, are already funding it and doing it. The only thing that was banned was the federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. That’s all. But to the left, when something isn’t allowed to be federally funded, that means it’s being banned. The language of the left. Anyone who believes the federal government should be funding embryonic stem cell research, or any other kind of research for that matter, is invited to produce their copy of the U.S. Constitution and show us all where it says the government shall pay for it.
You do realize that Stem Cell research is not banned don’t you? States still have the right to fund research if they choose. As it should be. Embryonic stem cell research has never, ever been banned. Ever. Many states, including California, are already funding it and doing it. The only thing that was banned was the federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. That’s all. But to the left, when something isn’t allowed to be federally funded, that means it’s being banned. The language of the left. Anyone who believes the federal government should be funding embryonic stem cell research, or any other kind of research for that matter, is invited to produce their copy of the U.S. Constitution and show us all where it says the government shall pay for it.
Without Federal funding, this forum would likely not exist. The Internet was built upon research done using Federal money (originally DARPAnet, I believe). Federal money allows a lot of research to proceed that might not happen without it. There is considerable concern that the current decline in Federal money for research will have devastating impact on this country’s economy in the future, as we fall behind internationally in technology.
Although it is not in the Constitution, it is good public policy to fund such research. Don’t know if there is a direct cause and effect, but AT&T has, over the past many years, drastically reduced the amount of pure research they do. And look at them now…
Here is how I look at it: Stem cells are the byproduct of invitro fertilzation that allow people to have children who can’t. And what your left with is a choice. Pitch the surplus of fertilized eggs and cells into the garbage (in vitro necessarily creates a surplus), or, with some time and research, do something productive with them and cure some diseases and save some lives. So which do you prefer? Your real issue should be with invitro, not stem cell research. But so long as we’re going to do in vitro, the government should not throw roadblocks in front of scientific efforts to use the byproducts to do something meaningful for humanity – something I think that our “culture of life” culture would appreciate. I know that the federal government is not technically banning the process. It has no choice but to allow states and private institutions to conduct this research if they want. And while I am pleased to see that California and deep-pocketed schools like Harvard and Stanford are taking the initiative, the fact remains that the federal government is effectlively limiting this line of research by not making it a federal initiative, by not lining up the signifcant amounts of money that’s required to make meaningful advances. I guess we will have to leave it up to Old Europe to get it done.
It is fair to have an intelligent debate about the propriety of federal funding this research. Frankly, I don’t see a big deal. Government money is being thrown at stem cell research, especially in CA. they are closing hospitals and emergency rooms because they are broke, but taxpayers are on the hook for $3,000,000,000 in research that I wager will never produce a damn thing.
Private companies are investing tens of millions in embryonic stem cell research as well. Someone please explain why the federal government can do this better. I just don’t get it.
Embryonic stem cell research is conducted on embryos that could otherwise be implanted and develop into voters. The ethical implications of this approach are problematic at best, especially since adult stem cells and umbillical stem cells seem more promising.
Private companies are investing tens of millions in embryonic stem cell research as well. Someone please explain why the federal government can do this better. I just don’t get it.
Because the federal government isn’t looking to run a near-term profit on the expenditure.
Then I would have to ask an example of the government doing it better than private companies. The government just can not get over itself with ineptness. Look at the TSA. What a joke.
That is a fair opinion, and quite different from your initial inflammatory post that indicated not spending federal money was insane.
That alternative point is that those embryos that are being harvested for stem cells could alternatively be implanted and become citizens. Hopefully you will concede that is a legitimate ethical issue about which reasonable people could disagree.
Another point is that allowing this research could obviously enable people with favored genetics to produce the embryos specifically for the research, and to do so for cash. Describing the research as being performed only on material destined for the trash can is simplistic. This research is another step toward a Brave New World scenario. A little intelligent debate is in order.
Of course the federal government could ban this research altogether were it so inclined. It has never been so inclined.
What investment do you think will be more likely to produce results? Three billion by CA, or one hundred million or so from a drug company consortium?
I know where I would place my bets.
Then I would have to ask an example of the government doing it better than private companies. The government just can not get over itself with ineptness. Look at the TSA. What a joke.
The government won’t be doing the work, only providing the funding, just like with DARPA (and a whole bunch of other stuff, I’ll bet). I, too, don’t want the guv’mint doing the work itself. On the other hand, you gotta admit that airport security wasn’t too hot in private hands prior to the TSA…
“That alternative point is that those embryos that are being harvested for stem cells could alternatively be implanted and become citizens.”
I’m curious about this part. If these embryos are mostly the byproduct of in vitro fertilization, and assuming the parents have been succesfully fertilized and don’t need the extra cells, and further assuming that they will be disposed of as medical waste, then who do you want to implant them into? You can’t just tell people they have to be implanted with these cells in order to save lives. You can’t force the donors to implant them. It’s not responsible to pay homeless or poor people to be implanted. So where do you propose we implant them? I guess it seems like a nice idea to say we should just implant them and let them grow into more voters, but finding a uterus for each one isn’t quite as easy as that.
You are correct about the pre TSA in private hands. Must be the nature of the work where they can’t find competent folks.
The govt is looking at privitization in all kinds of areas. Look at messing in Iraq. It is being provided (largely) by some private catering companies. If the govt pays a private organization to do something, then they don’t have to pay for insurance, benefits, medical and dental, etc, etc. There’s all kinds of things that the private sector can do better and cheeper than the govt.
I don’t suggest that there is a crisis of embryos in need of implantation. We don’t need to go out with a uterus bounty for wayward embryos. I am merely stating that using humans or potential humans as raw material for scientific experiments is a legitimate ethical issue.
Do you agree that a reasonable person might have an issue with embryo A being implanted and turning into a taxpayer while embro B next to it is sent off to the lab for experiments? Would you concede that some might have a problem with their tax dollars paying for that work?
Do you really want a society in which such matters are not even a topic for political debate?
Count me out.
**Do you agree that a reasonable person might have an issue with embryo A being implanted and turning into a taxpayer while embro B next to it is sent off to the lab for experiments? **
It seems to be a matter of how you pose the dilema. Based on your question, I agree that people would have an issue with it. But I think the question is - would people have an issue with embryo B being used for research that is designed to have a positive affect on human life, when the same people do not have an issue with embryo B being thrown in the trash and eventually incinerated? Embryo A is really not part of the dilema, it is more of an issue with what happens to embryo B - burn it or use it to improve the quality of human life.
I will take that bet. What’s the wager going to be?