Posted on 07/28/2004 12:15:25 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
WASHINGTON – Ron Reagan, son of the late Republican president, last night at the Democratic National Convention called on Americans to "cast a vote for embryonic stem-cell research" when they go to the polls in November.
But his older brother, Mike Reagan, says Ron doesn't know what he's talking about and is simply being used by the Democrats.
"I would love for Ron to get involved in the Alzheimers' Foundation or the Parkinson's Disease Foundation," said Michael Reagan on his nationally syndicated talk radio show. " I would love for that to happen. Ron Reagan, my brother – I love him. I would just hope he becomes more knowledgeable on the issue and honors our father."
Ron Reagan delivered what he called a "non-political" speech at the Democratic convention in Boston last night. But it was widely perceived as an endorsement speech for John Kerry and the Democrats.
"He is basically saying vote for Kerry and there will be stem-cell research," said Mike Reagan. "What I am saying is that there is already stem-cell research taking place. The media would have you believe – and my brother would have you believe – that stem-cell research is not going on. But it is."
Ron Reagan told the 20,000 people assembled at the convention that stem-cell research may lead to the "greatest medical breakthrough in our or in any lifetime."
In 2001, President Bush limited the use of federal funds for embryonic stem cell research, citing moral and ethical concerns about performing experiments with fertilized human embryos. Proponents of such research insist those restrictions interfere with efforts to develop new treatments for a variety of diseases, including Alzheimer's, which slowly killed the former president.
However, adult stem-cell treatments have actually shown far more potential in treating dread diseases. Preliminary research involving embryonic stem-cell research has been associated with the development of tumors.
"Now, there are those who would stand in the way of this remarkable future," Ron Reagan said, speaking of potential discoveries, "who would deny the federal funding so crucial to basic research. A few of these folks, needless to say, are just grinding a political axe and they should be ashamed of themselves."
Ron Reagan told the delegates that the choice in November is more than selecting one ticket over another.
"We can choose between the future and the past," he said, "between reason and ignorance, between true compassion and mere ideology."
Ron Reagan prefaced his remarks by saying: "A few of you may be surprised to see someone with my last name showing up to speak at a Democratic convention. Let me assure you, I am not here to make a political speech, and the topic at hand should not – must not – have anything to do with partisanship."
He called embryonic stem-cell research the "greatest medical breakthrough in our or in any lifetime."
The issue of stem-cell research took center stage for the Reagan family because of Nancy Reagan's public support. The former first lady, along with other members of the family, has been very vocal in expressing the belief that the scientific community should be allowed to explore this controversial avenue in the search for a cure for Alzheimer's and other diseases.
While Ron Reagan, his mother, Nancy, and his sister, Patti, have weighed in in favor of embryonic stem-cell research, one member of the family opposes it.
As Michael Reagan put it recently: "The media continue to report that the Reagan family is in favor of stem cell research, when the truth is that two members of the family have been long time foes of this process of manufacturing human beings – my dad, Ronald Reagan during his lifetime, and me."
"The media should keep in mind that we are also members of the Reagan family, and my father, as I do, opposed the creation of human embryos for the sole purpose of using their stem cells as possible medical cures," said Michael Reagan.
Michael Reagan said embryonic stem-cell research could not have saved his father from the ordeal of Alzheimer's disease.
"This is junk science at its worst," he said.
......and her spokesman son is an atheist ! enough said.
Thank you for posting this. This is it !
I'll second that. There is no other reason to hide the truth about stem-cell research.
OK...Now I know who I'm debating with. That's cool, but obviously the discussion ends here.
Where was Ron Reagan and the stem-cell gang at when Reagan first announced he had Alzheimer's back in 1994? Oh never mind - Slick was President then the issue was nonexistant just like the homeless problem magically disappeared when Clinton took office.
Does Jr. have AIDS? ...sure looks like it?
No one lives forever, OK? Why can't people with terminal illnesses and diseases just accept what they got and make peace and pass on with dignity?
Even Nancy has secretly opposed some of Reagan's conservative ideas. It's just sad that Ron doesn't appreciate the greatness of his father and how lucky he really is.
Are you kidding? Children under age 10 are stricken with diabetes that will eventually kill them. Other children are stricken with MS or MD that will cripple or kill them.
Others in the prime of their life are stricken with ALS that will kill them in the most cruel way. The list of diseases goes on and on and each might be cured via stem cell research.
BTW-When you are sick do you go see a doctor? And when the doctor prescribes a treatment do you ask if how the research to develop said treatment was done?
What are embryonic humans? Is it OK to cruelly kill them to help others?
If you're not well-schooled, why call me a liar? Doesn't lead to very interesting discussions...
Regardless...Educate yourself and you'll find out you're dead wrong.
And the line for blonds forms over there. Your organs will be useful for someone who can form rational arguments. A real human being.
There is nothing in the Bible that promotes slavery. If there was you would cite it. You made the claim. It is incumbent upon you to back it up. You can't.
Ugh...
Fine. You win. I'm just a dirty liar.
I get off on lying to perfect strangers instead of having interesting discussions. Yeah, that's the ticket.
If fundamentalist Christians are right--that the Bible is the literal word of God, then God evidently approved of slavery. The following rules of behavior are laid down by Moses in Leviticus:
Leviticus 25:44-46 (NIV) "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."
Leviticus 25:44-46 (KJV): "Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour."
Exodus 21:20-21 (NIV): "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property"
Exodus 21:20-21 (KVJ) "And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money."
Now...Just to avoid some fights...
Do I think all "True" Christians follow the above stated scriptures? No...Of course not. Do I think some do? No...Of course not. Do I think some vehemently racist Christians (Not "True" Christians) do? Yes. But more importantly...Do I think that back before widespread education on the subject, that some "True" Christians did? Yes, unfortunately.
Opened your yap a bit too soon, didn't you?
Now...If you're ever interested in calm, rational discussion, let me know. Until then, I'm not interested in taking anymore of your unwarranted abuse.
Care to show me where I called you names?
Stem cell research is not even an issue. Its the source of the stem cells that is an issue. There are several sources of stem cells that were originally taken from embryos that have been grown for research. There is research on adult stem cells.
The so-called-need for harvesting babies for even more stem cells is simply a political need to justify abortions. It gives everybody a warm fuzzy to see Christopher Reeves smile while he learns to move the pinky finger on his left hand. Too bad the thirty or forty babies that were harvested from their mother aren't quite so photogenic after they've had their limbs removed so ol' Chris can have a photo-op.
Your stem cells will be useful for someone who possesses sentience.
Apparently the rigors of debate are too much for you.
I'm not well schooled in the Bible but I think you're lying through your teeth.
Now...Like I said...Let me know when you're interested in interesting discussions, rather than pointless accusations and name calling.
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.