Posted on 08/14/2004 6:59:15 AM PDT by TomDoniphon68
Three years ago President Bush made his first national television prime time address in August 2001 to the nation on the topic of human embryonic stem cells. Who would have thought that the controversy over little balls of a hundred or so cells might make the difference between another Bush Administration and a Kerry Administration? Yet it might well.
In 2001, Bush was attempting a political balancing act -- allowing research to go forward in this area while mollifying his pro-life political supporters. So Bush limited federal funding to only human embryonic stem lines that had been derived before his August 9, 2001 speech. New polls show that Bush's balancing act failed. Naturally, the Democrats have not been shy to hammer him on this issue.
According to recent poll by the Economist, 65 percent of Americans favor dismantling "potentially viable human embryos" to obtain stem cells for research on possible cures for a host of ailments including diabetes, Parkinson's, spinal cord injuries and heart disease. Earlier this month, a University of Pennsylvania National Annenberg Election Survey asked 1,345 adults, "Do you favor or oppose Federal funding of research on diseases like Alzheimer's using stem cells taken from human embryos?" Sixty-four percent said they favored such funding, while 28 percent opposed it.
What's even more interesting is that Americans have consistently supported federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research. As far back as July 2001, a Harris poll conducted before Bush set his limits on stem cell research found that 61 percent of Americans who had seen or heard something about stem cell research favored using leftover embryos from in vitro fertilization as sources of stem cells.
The Kerry campaign has needlessly distorted the stem cell issue -- there is no "far-reaching ban on stem cell research" as this official campaign press release claims. Private companies are free to conduct whatever research they wish using stem cells, just not with federal funds. Still, the bottom line political lesson here is that Americans strongly support medical research that they believe could someday help them or their loved ones. After November, Bush and his supporters may have plenty of time to reflect on this fact. Ronald Bailey is Reason magazine's science
The American people need to be educated about this issue. There is adult stem cell research and a huge, unused source of stem cells in umbilibal cord blood and placental tissue.
No.
Next question.
No. Very few people are going to have their vote determined by the stem cell debate.
Of that small percentage, most are the most fiercely pro-life voters who will opt for Bush over Kerry.
Thats right. And theres the fact that Americas billionaires can still donate as much money they want into research.
If this is such a promising path...why isn't the private money (perfectly legal, mind you) rolling in, hmm? A cure for ANY major disease would be worth a gazillion dollors.
Could it be that it's not the panacea they'd like you to beleive? Remember fetal tissue from a decade ago? That was also the cure all that went nowhere.
NO
Bogus push polling at it's worse. The only President who has funded stem cell research of any kind is President Bush.
No he won't.
There's no law against this. If it were so promising, there would be oodles of private funding going to this. IMO it's just a bunch of phonies who want big federal bucks to fund their research.
On 9/11 i met a woman who was saying that the Michigan militia brought the WTC down.
BTW welcome to FR. Be carreful and you may get to stay a while.
As far as I'm concerned, while health issues are important, the stem cell issue is minor, it hasn't even been researched enough to be discussed.
John Kerry, a treasonous, yellow-belly who wants to be CIC during the current time of war & the terrorist threats, is the issue. Stem cells are WAAYYYY down on the list.
No, because it is a non-issue. Stem-cell research goes on as we speak. It is being conducted in private labs with private money here and all over the place in Europe. The NIH isn't doing much but some would argue that that should help rather than hurt a scientific project.
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.