...which I have on a T-shirt, of course. :o)
Posted on 06/09/2004 6:27:12 PM PDT by Not gonna take it anymore
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Laura Bush, whose father died from Alzheimer's, said on Wednesday she admired Nancy Reagan's devotion to former President Ronald Reagan until his death but could not back her call for relaxation of stem cell research restrictions.
Reagan, the 40th U.S. president, died on Saturday at 93 of pneumonia after a long battle with the brain-wasting disease. His wife, Nancy, and children were at his bedside.
Mrs. Bush, whose father died in 1997, said she had great respect for the former first lady and that she was an excellent role model for families struggling to cope with the illness.
"I know how very difficult it is for the patient, obviously, but also for the caregiver. It requires unbelievable strength of character to take care of the person you love as you see them slip away like that -- 'the long goodbye' they call Alzheimer's," the first lady told the CBS "Early Show" from Sea Island, Georgia, where leaders of the Group of Eight countries are meeting.
But Mrs. Bush said she did not endorse Nancy Reagan's call, already rebuffed by the White House, to allow greater stem cell research to proceed in the hope it would provide some answers to the disease or possibly a cure.
The Bush administration has placed restrictions on embryonic stem cell research and opposes using stem cells from most embryos, a stand Mrs. Bush said she supported.
"There are stem cells to do research on and ... we have to be really careful between what we want to do for science and what we should do ethically," the first lady said. "Stem cell ... is certainly one of those issues that we need to treat very carefully."
Pressed on whether she was prepared to endorse Mrs. Reagan's impassioned call for restrictions to be lifted, she replied, "No."
More than 200 members of the U.S. Senate and House (of Representatives have also urged Bush to allow researchers to use embryonic stem cells to eventually provide brain cell transplants to Alzheimer's patients. They also hope to use embryonic stem cells to treat Parkinson's, spinal cord injuries, heart disease, diabetes and a range of other illnesses.
Reagan had a decade-long battle with Alzheimer's, which affects the brain, causing memory loss, confusion, mood changes, hallucinations, speech problems and incontinence.
...which I have on a T-shirt, of course. :o)
AR, I answered that question with the two that followed:
""What has been condemned as evil in the past when it comes to the destruction of any human life? How does society look on prior cases of any discrimination between the human rights of one human being and another?""
Society has at least nominally supported the non-maleficense principle of medical and social ethics/justice for over 2500 years. First, do no harm. If there is doubt as to personhood, give the human being the benefit of the doubt in protection from aggression by another. Increase, do not decrease the classes of humans that are considered persons, etc.
Look back at history. Contrast those societies which have a limited classification of "Person" and those with more wide spread protections for human life, liberty and property.
Which societies are healthier, more productive, and which are thought of as "good" by those societies that surround and follow them?
How ought we to live to increase the good in our society and the approval of those who follow us?
AR, your problem is with the understanding of the definition of "capacity," and, as LB has said, with the idea that it is necessary for the person to act, or function, at a given level at all or any given moment(s).
Not every member of the species must demonstrate all the qualities of all the members of the species in order to be classified as a member of the species.
Aristotle discussed the "nature" and "power" of beings over 2000 years ago. This is not new philosophy, nor is it solely Judeo-Christian or American philosophy.
Again, your problem is with definitions.
"Potential" is not "capacity."
***why don't we invest our money in research that not only respects all human life, but offers a real remedy right now to many diseases?***
Because research using adult stem cells would involve pesky things like finding volunteers, signing consent forms, medicine (costing money) to harvest the stem cells, etc.
When killing an unborn baby, researchers don't have to deal with any of that.
BTW, if harvesting my stem cells offered a real chance at finding a cure, I would happily volunteer to share.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.