Forum Home | Login

Should Pres. Bush veto stem cell bill? What would you do?

terpfan1980

Join Date 08/2004

+13

Should Pres. Bush veto stem cell bill? What would you do?

In case you've been under a rock, or have just ignored the topic in general (hey, one of the biggest threads on the topic was from our favority Clueless Old Liberal, so I don't blame you if you did ignore it), with the passage in the House of Representatives of a bill that encourages stem cell research, President Bush has threatened to make use of his veto powers for the first time in his presidency.

Never mind that it is fairly unusual that a President would not have ever vetoed a bill during his first term (which, logically has been the case now because Republicans control both the Senate and House, and have primarily worked in conjuction with the President, rather than going off in their own direction, as they have in the case of this bill). The President is clearly threatening to veto the new stem cell bill that has come up in the House and may be passed in the Senate (though that is not a given at this point).

For a news reference on the issue, see the following article from CNN.com:

Bush threatens veto on stem cell research bill

(CNN) -- President Bush on Friday threatened to veto a bill expanding public funding for embryonic stem cell research that could make it to his desk by early next week.
"I made [it] very clear to the Congress that the use of federal money, taxpayers' money, to promote science which destroys life in order to save life, I'm against that," Bush told reporters. "Therefore if the bill does that, I will veto it."
It would mark the first veto of Bush's presidency.
Supporters of the bill dispute Bush's depiction of the research, saying it's critical to advance scientific discoveries that may help cure diseases.
The bill would broaden the limits on funding embryonic stem cell research beyond the strict rules the president outlined four years ago.
Bush limited funding for research on human embryonic stem cells to cell lines already in existence at that time.
Bush aides have said they're concerned the measure still may pass the GOP-led Congress by a veto-proof margin. They're working to convince enough Republicans to support the president.
In the House of Representatives, 290 votes are needed to override a veto.

Note that the House bill passed on a vote of 238-194 -- far less than the two-thirds support that would be needed to override a veto.

Nows the time for JoeUser's and JillUser's to speak up on the issue.

Should the President veto the legislation?

Should Congress over-ride the veto and expand the research as suggested in the House bill?

If you faced the choice that the President has made, what would you have done?

Finally, to throw a monkey wrench into the discussion, lets say you have a friend or relative that has Alzheimers, or Parkinson's Disease. Would it change your convictions at all, knowing that perhaps the research would help lead to a cure or treatment for your friend or relative, or would you stick by your convictions regardless?

politics

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

"So who is doing the interpreting, the churches or the people"

I don't go to church, so I don't think churches are interpreting anything for me. This is like the gay marriage debate. Believe it or not there are gay people opposed to gay marriage, and there are non-religious people who oppose abortion and human embryonic stem cell research.

"Should we come in behind many other nations that are not allowing relgion to heavily influence their goals?"

You are hung by your own Hitler example on that one. If you study history, you'll find that Hitler had lots of scientists and lots of "theories" at hand when people differed. Dr Mengele was basically just doing medical research based on his personal ethics.

The fact that we have to draw a line is apparent to you. You just feel that the line drawn by other nations is more acceptable. I, and many others, don't. There are some nutjobs that believe that had his work continued we would have been decades ahead on genetics. Others, myself included, think he was a monster than held back such science.

Do you want to use China or Saudia Arabia as a "They do it, why don't we?" standard? If so, who then will draw a line among nations to follow?

Successfully updated karma reason!

So you deny that other nations are not already ahead of us in this research? Have you been reading the news about the South Korean's, The British, and even the French. It's going to happen whether you like it or not. It's crazy how you take it to extremity of comparing me to Hitler for wanting stem cell research. It shows how close minded you are on the subject that you have to take someone as bad as Hitler and pair it with anyone who wants these therapies that potentially could help millions just because of your personal ideals. It's a way to make it look extreme because it is extreme to you.

You make a big distiction between an embryo and a fetus, others don't.

Yeah and the one's that don't are not good doctors.

Successfully updated karma reason!

" So you deny that other nations are not already ahead of us in this research? "

No, no more than I deny Dr. Mengele was ahead of us by leaps and bounds in dissecting and experimenting on live people.

"It's going to happen whether you like it or not."

And I never claimed to be a voter in those nations. Neither should they influence our self-governing here.

"It's crazy how you take it to extremity of comparing me to Hitler for wanting stem cell research."

Point out once where I compared you to Hitler. You said "With that kind of rational we could say Hitler's beliefs where just as valid as ours." and I was pointing out that such a statement could be as easily applied to your own argument of following other nation's leads.

"It shows how close minded you are on the subject that you have to take someone as bad as Hitler and pair it with anyone who wants these therapies that potentially could help millions just because of your personal ideals."

And it shows how ignorant of the issue you are that you would call these my values, when in reality they are held by millions and millions of people in this DEMOCRACY, who voted in a President some happen to differ with. Just because this is so self-apparent to some doens't mean they should override the rest of us.

"Yeah and the one's that don't are not good doctors."

Again, more of your imposed values. You see this as obvious. I see this as complex; so complex that knee jerk reactions like yours can't reign.

Erring on the side of charity or compassion is STILL erring. Erring because you followed the international pack who also erred is still erring. You think the ends validate the means. I, again, differ.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Yeah and the one's that don't are not good doctors.

No, Actually they are competant doctors. For it is the doctor that does not pretend to know everything that makes the best doctor for he is willing to learn. If you know everything, there is nothing else to learn.

I guess you know everything.

And the lamest excuse is "Everyone else does it". Yea, and if everyone else jumped off a cliff, would you? That is how we got Hitler and Stalin!

Successfully updated karma reason!

To me, this is the mentality that creates phenomena like lobotomy and thalidomide "flipper babies". How DARE we opt not to dive into research that might help people? How dare we not sacrifice our concept of where life begins to help someone who may not even be helped by the research?

We have ethics for a reason. If we sacrifice them every time we think they are holding us back there is no reason to have them in the first place. Without them we'd be breeding newborns in labs for replacement parts.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I'm not saying we should do it because other nations are, but more so because we have been technologically superior for the last century and to start losing that for the wrong reasons will erode what made this last century the American century. I mean we are losing scientists that are going over seas becasue they feel stifled over here. It has nothing to do with the fact we have to follow them, only merely my wish for the U.S. to remain on top. I always said they were opinions I gave. "when in reality they are held by millions and millions of people in this DEMOCRACY" You're in the minority, more people support stem cell research then reject it here is a link Link

If you think that a fetus is an embryo you should go back to med school.

Successfully updated karma reason!

If you think that a fetus is an embryo you should go back to med school.

When does it stop being an embryo? What miracle occurs to turn an embryo into a fetus? You are again splitting hairs you do not understand.

Successfully updated karma reason!

"It has nothing to do with the fact we have to follow them, only merely my wish for the U.S. to remain on top."

So we should do it because we are better at it and don't want to lose that rank? That never seems to be a valid reason for war. Hey, we haven't kicked butt lately, lets invade Canada.

What? War for those reasons is ethically wrong to you? Well, human embryonic research is ethically wrong to me. Who knows what horrors we would be better at if we put our minds to it...

"You're in the minority, more people support stem cell research then reject it here is a link"

Well, then, you guys need to start winning elections, huh?

"If you think that a fetus is an embryo you should go back to med school."

Just another silly, diversionary statement that didn't work the first time. I don't think a fetus is an embryo, and I have never said such. YOU are the one that keeps bringing up the distinction. You don't seem to understand that an embryo, to me, is as much a person as a fetus.

People are willing to take them and give birth to them, and they were initially fertilized to become children for infertile couples. I think your fetus/embryo distinction is pretty arbitrary.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Well, then, you guys need to start winning elections, huh?

What you guys? Who are these you guys? How do you know I don't vote Republican? What, does being a conservative mean you have to feel exactly the same way as every other conservative? Sorry I'm not cut out of a mold here. A fetus is not formed until after 40 weeks in the womb when it first starts forming organs. here is another link with that explanation. Link

Successfully updated karma reason!

You missed on that one BADLY, enigmatic...a "fetus" is BORN at about 39 weeks.

Or maybe you meant to say that and believe that anything that hasn't poked its head out of the birth canal is fair game?

Successfully updated karma reason!

I assumed it was obvious that "you guys" meant people who were in favor of human embryo research. You realize that you choose who the Republican party nominates as well, right?

Maybe you oughtta pay more attention to the primaries.

"A fetus is not formed until after 40 weeks in the womb when it first starts forming organs. here is another link with that explanation."

Again with the cheap diversion. I'm not disputing what or when a fetus is. I'm saying that an embryo is just as human as a fetus. People who adopt these embryos don't implant a fetus, they implant an embryo.

Successfully updated karma reason!

"You missed on that one BADLY, enigmatic...a "fetus" is BORN at about 39 weeks."

Damn, sorry I'm still in school. I'm only pre-med after all.

"Or maybe you meant to say that and believe that anything that hasn't poked its head out of the birth canal is fair game?"

How about narrowing it down to anything that has human brain waves. That is my problem though, that I'm a little more disconnected that the average Joe. I allow scientific and empirical research to control my reasoning for the most part, relying less on the emotional underpinnings of extremely pious individuals and I am thinking that embryonic research is worth it if it means helping people that live their whole lives dealing with the shortcomings that they were given at birth or that accidents caused. I mean what about them, why are people born with defects, aren't they innocent at the point of birth so why are they made to suffer? I don't want to hear it's God's will either they haven't had a chance to do good or evil at that point. How come we can't have interest in saving people with a terminal congenital defect? Aren't they valuable and feel more pain than any embryo ever could, and if we could save them from something terminal is that not protecting life? I'm assuming since everyone here is for the sanctity of life that no one believes in capital punishment as well.

"Again with the cheap diversion. I'm not disputing what or when a fetus is."

Why is it cheap because I state a fact that is relevant to the topic? Something that I was talking to Dr. Guy about (which I have my doubts on just what kind of Dr. Mr. Guy is)
Again you're too self-conscious, Dr. Guy was the one that vehemently believes that an embryo is the same thing as a fetus. I was talking to him but that was my fault for not being specific. Is a butterfly the same thing as a caterpillar even though it goes through "meta-morphosis" which is defined as "change". I think when you (Bakerstreet) said you guys you assumed I was a liberal which is common because again if you are a self proclaimed conservative now adays if you differ from the maintream ideals of conservatives you're a commie. In this case I am siding with liberals and conservatives that believe in stem cell research. I will admit as much as this is an argument with emotions propelling the words we say, I am enjoying this debate. Usually I'm only on here an hour but today I've stuck around. Where is terpfan isn't this his article? How come he isn't saying anything? Don't be afraid Bakerstreet may look mean but he doesn't bite. (now you can say it was cheap).

Successfully updated karma reason!

"Why is it cheap because I state a fact that is relevant to the topic?"

You keep saying defining a fetus as if that is somehow important to the discussion. We aren't talking about experimenting on a fetus, so I don't understand why you keep trying to tell me what a fetus is over and over. Sorry if it looks diversionary to me since a fetus and what defines it isn't in question.

You should try to understand what Dr. Guy is saying instead of using rhetorical tactics to twist things. He is saying in terms of life and the respect thereof, there's no difference between an embryo and a fetus.

"I think when you (Bakerstreet) said you guys you assumed I was a liberal which is common because again if you are a self proclaimed conservative now adays if you differ from the maintream ideals of conservatives you're a commie."

Please, for the love of God, show me where I called you a liberal. You also said I compared you to Hitler, which I didn't. I salute your guile, but these tactics don't make your point for you.

I know that there are Republicans who are for human embryo research, and there are no doubt Democrats who oppose it as well. I merely meant that when you and those of your ideals elect someone to office, maybe you should pick someone who SHARES those ideals.

Successfully updated karma reason!

JillUser

Join Date 11/2003

+17

"Nows the time for JoeUser's and JillUser's to speak up on the issue."

Well, since you called me out personally

Yes, he should veto it.

Successfully updated karma reason!

"Because three times now you a have accused me of talking about a fetus:"

Oh, oops sorry, I meant for it to be read by Dr. Guy as I stated in my last post. It's just hard to tell you two apart, you almost seem like the same person. Anyways, I did state it was my fault for not being specific.

Successfully updated karma reason!

well, I overstated by saying me when i meant we. Sorry. I corrected it but you posted before I could clarify. I don't even think Dr. Guy is disputing with you what a fetus is, he's disputing the idea that there's a difference in terms of ethics between a fetus an embryo.

Successfully updated karma reason!

"Please, for the love of God, show me where I called you a liberal."

I never said you did call me a liberal, I said "I think when you said "you guys" you meant to call me a liberal". That doesn't say you said it but that you meant it which are not synonyms oh God this is silly. Ok I apologize.

"He is saying in terms of life and the respect thereof, there's no difference between an embryo and a fetus. "

Well, his name is Dr. Guy, I thought it was crazy that he (being a Dr.) couldn't tell apart an embryo and a fetus. Again I think too much in just pure scientific terms.

"Looks diversionary to me since a fetus and what defines it isn't in question."

Sorry javascript errors, I can't "quote" properly. Anyways, to me it is in question. To tell you the truth I think that is where I would draw the line. I actually don't like abortions to be honest and I'm against them (because fetuses are being destroyed, I know I know it's crazy of me), but I believe my ideals shouldn't be imposed on other so I think a woman should have a right to choose. How about a compromise? Those of us that one day would like stem cell therapies to improve our lives opt to be taxed a penny for every dollar we use, and those that don't, will not pay anything but cannot use stem cell research you know to cure alzheimer's or cancer or whatever they find. How about that ?? Sound good?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Here's a question. What if we could genetically modify human embryos or physically modify them so that they wouldn't have "conciousness", or feel pain? WHat if we could basically grow "vegetable" humans in a lab for organ harvesting?

Would it be okay that they didn't feel pain? They wouldn't be "human", would they? Are the ethical standard of pain and conciousness enough?

"Those of us that one day would like stem cell therapies to improve our lives opt to be taxed a penny for every dollar we use, and those that don't, will not pay anything but cannot use stem cell research you know to cure alzheimer's or cancer or whatever they find. How about that ?? Sound good?

Would people who oppose capital punishment agree if they didn't have to pay for it with their taxes? Would anti-war folks agree if their tax money didn't go toward the war in Iraq? Doesn't make much sense.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Am I the only one who finds it incredibly creepy that we're seriously considering breeding our own kind for medical experiments?

Successfully updated karma reason!

"Here's a question. What if we could genetically modify human embryos or physically modify them so that they wouldn't have "conciousness", or feel pain? WHat if we could basically grow "vegetable" humans in a lab for organ harvesting?"

Let's stick with anything that can't survive outside of the womb for any longer than a week, or moreso the cellular level. Anything that doesn't have it's own organs. We wouldn't be harvesting fetuses for their organs just transforming cells into them, which is better in my opinion. To me that's a prettier picture than watching the increasing numbers of alzheimer's which is predicted to increase rapidly or more specifically the rate of change will increase. Ever seen footage of a man's head light on fire because the eletric chair fried him. We're already barbaric in certain aspects what Saints are we trying to emulate? The biggest thing for me is that I know that other countries are going to be ahead of the U.S. in research and will see amazing benefits. Then if it starts making money it will move to the U.S. because as we know it money is the number one factor with anything in this country just like the drugs we buy are overpriced for no reason. I say why avoid the inevitable it's only going to hurt us in the long run.

"Would people who oppose capital punishment agree if they didn't have to pay for it with their taxes?"

You know who knows, would they? No one's ever asked which makes me wonder it in the first place. Let's start an initiative.

P.S. I think my avatar is cooler than yours Bakerstreet

Successfully updated karma reason!

Normal gestation is only 39 weeks! 40 weeks? You are whacked!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Oh, oops sorry, I meant for it to be read by Dr. Guy as I stated in my last post. It's just hard to tell you two apart, you almost seem like the same person. Anyways, I did state it was my fault for not being specific.

he is younger, and I am more Handsome.

Successfully updated karma reason!

That gets an insightful.

Successfully updated karma reason!

"Normal gestation is only 39 weeks! 40 weeks? You are whacked!"

Yeah, I already felt bad about that once, geez, kick a man when he's down why don't you...

Successfully updated karma reason!

Well, his name is Dr. Guy, I thought it was crazy that he (being a Dr.) couldn't tell apart an embryo and a fetus. Again I think too much in just pure scientific terms.

Not all Doctors are the medical kind. PHD anyone?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.

There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting and posting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!

View all recent posts

Mark all posts as read Delete cookies created by the forum Return to Top

Stardock Forums v Server Load Time: Page Render Time: