Bush vetoes embryonic stem-cell bill

[beeniesmom]

Beeniesmom, I do disagree it is the start of a baby. Would you feel the same if it were kitten or pup "embros"? Not trying to start a fight just wondering . I know some folks here say no to aborting pets but yes to humans . I can't ever figure that thinking out. Some one what to try to explain it to me.

I would feel the same if it were an animal.

I once actually started a thread on the subject: whether to abort or not but I can't find it now.

The funny thing is that I don't think this is a political issue... Or maybe it is a political issue.... less money for research means more money for the war.

It's just a matter of personal opinion. I understand that The President is a God fearing person and doesn't want to expand this kind of research. Maybe he is afraid as other people because it is a new kind of research.

Why is it legal to use birth control if, for catholics, it is immoral to do so?
PS: this is coming from a God fearing Roman Catholic.

[Corinna]

I can't speak to the use of birth control for catholics since I am not one. But that stops a pregnancy from happening,not stopping one that has started. I am glad to hear you are consistant in your beleaf in pets and humans. I still am wondering about those who find a difference.
Moosmom , while it is well known here you don't like President Bush be glad you live in a country where you can express that opinion.
I agree with the use of cord blood for the stem cells and the use of the purposely aborted embryos (don't agree with abortion) I don't agree with creating them just for sience as I also don't agree with many of the invetro programs. I have seen so many children that need homes to be adopted in.
What we need is inprovement in our adoption programs.
While i will benifit from the research I don't want to from the purposeful killing of another human or animal. The computer technology has become so good we really don't need a lot of actual cells until needed to prove the models made in the labs. Then the sources listed above could be used.
This also would save our tax dollars on duplicate sources doing the same research wasting time and money. (whole nother topic which I could yak on about for days)
I do hope this topic stays where we can have a civil disscusstion , they has been some new break throughs I haven't seen , I sure , as I have been busy and not kept up as I want to on this subject.

[Pawsitive Thinking]

Having lost my Dad to Parkinsons last year any research to eradicate this vile, vicious, evil disease has to be good

[sparks19]

An Embryo is just a mass of cells. Honestly, we are all just masses of cells. So there is some skin and bones and a few organs. That makes our life more important? You know those Embryo's turn into the future of this country (when allowed to go full term).

If you were pregnant and it was an Embryo at this point and science said OK we need that Embryo because we need to run some more experiments, would you just say OK?

Also, I think we can do without religion bashing. I am a Christian and I find it hurtful that someone thinks my beliefs are just based on someone trying to push me around just because it isn't YOUR belief.

[Maresche]

If you were pregnant and it was an Embryo at this point and science said OK we need that Embryo because we need to run some more experiments, would you just say OK?

I wasn't going to say anything but this comment takes the bill completely out of context and represents a complete misunderstanding of this issue in my opinion.

The scientists want to use cells from embryos already aborted OR extra embryos from IV procedures. These are unwanted embryos as it is, so why not use them to bring some good to the world. They are not going to be brought to term anyway.

No one has said anything about forcing/paying women to have abortions in the name of science. Such an idea is absolutely ridiculous in my opinion and I highly doubt it would be tolerated in America. But that is not the topic of this bill.

[sparks19]

I wasn't going to say anything but this comment takes the bill completely out of context and represents a complete misunderstanding of this issue in my opinion.

The scientists want to use cells from embryos already aborted OR extra embryos from IV procedures. These are unwanted embryos as it is, so why not use them to bring some good to the world. They are not going to be brought to term anyway.

No one has said anything about forcing/paying women to have abortions in the name of science. Such an idea is absolutely ridiculous in my opinion and I highly doubt it would be tolerated in America. But that is not the topic of this bill.

I agree. My point was not that they are just asking random women to give it up. But many people say well it's just a mass of cells, but if that mass of cells were yours would you feel differently?

[beeniesmom]

I agree. My point was not that they are just asking random women to give it up. But many people say well it's just a mass of cells, but if that mass of cells were yours would you feel differently?

No, because if I chose to give my "mass of cells" up, it meant that I didn't want them in the first place. At least it would go towards some good.

[Maresche]

No, because if I chose to give my "mass of cells" up, it meant that I didn't want them in the first place. At least it would go towards some good.

You hit the nail on the head!

[Maresche]

I agree. My point was not that they are just asking random women to give it up. But many people say well it's just a mass of cells, but if that mass of cells were yours would you feel differently?

I still don't the point of this statement in relation to the bill at discussion.

Of course, my thoughts would differ if the embryo asked to be given up is mine. But that isn't happening here. No one is giving up wanted embryos/masses of cells. No one wants them and they are going to be disposed of in an incerinator anyway. Why not make some use of them so they don't go to waste?

[beeniesmom]

If you were pregnant and it was an Embryo at this point and science said OK we need that Embryo because we need to run some more experiments, would you just say OK?

I think that it would be only for women getting abortions. Am I wrong?

EDIT: MAresche you beat me to the question.

[Maresche]

I think that it would be only for women getting abortions. Am I wrong?

No you are NOT wrong. If the subject of the bill was forced abortions it NEVER would have made it through the House or Senate.

[Puckstop31]

You know what bugs me the most about this? THIS, is the first thing he vetos. Please...