[AFPhys]

I'm going to have to mull this over very carefully.

I clearly recall the debate early in my life about whether heart transplants were "ethical". He makes some good points in this speech.

Also, his noting that only 22, not 78 cell lines are now available is a clear and good argument.

I'm still not finished reviewing this speech and thinking it over, so I'm not going to comment further.

[muawiyah]

So, Frist comes up against his first "moral challenge" and flubs it.

Time for a new Majority Leader.

[little jeremiah]

later read/pingout.

[sonsofliberty2000]

I will withhold judgement only because this is one topic I know absolutely nothing about. I need to read up on it. Any Freepers got some Stem Cell For Dummies links?

---

[Dr.Hilarious]

I don't see the problem with using embryos created in the process of fertility treatments which are due to be destroyed anyway. If the argument is that this encourages abortion, this has zero to do with that. This material is going to be created--artificial insemination and other such fertility treatments are here to stay and are not going anywhere, period. So why NOT use them?

Abortion is a completely separate argument and should be kept that way. If the embryos used came from abortions I'm 100% against it. It's like the difference between donated organs and stolen ones, to me.

[lepton]

But I also strongly believe -- as do countless other scientists, clinicians, and doctors -- that embryonic stem cells uniquely hold specific promise for some therapies and potential cures that adult stem cells cannot provide.

Here is a hitherto unsupported foundation for his argument. To date, we have found that we can take adult stem cells and do the things we want to with them. We have not found actual limits. In the case of embryonic stem cells, so far we can't even make them take the first steps. Quite aside from the ethical issues - which are quite important - embryonic stem cell research in more than a very basic fundemental level appears to simply be dumping money down a hole.

[lepton]

Also, his noting that only 22, not 78 cell lines are now available is a clear and good argument.

Not so important when we can't even keep them alive and developing. We shold master this basic set of steps before throwing large scale money into it.

[TheDon]

Right now, to derive embryonic stem cells, an embryo -- which many, including myself, consider nascent human life -- must be destroyed.

FrankFrist has joined the dark side, he is a ghoul.

[Pukin Dog]

He makes no good points and he contradicts himself. What he has done, is show himself to be without core values. I am still convinced that he did this because Bush let him, but I believe that only because Bush discovered that Frist has no spine long before the rest of us did.

There is no way to say that an embryo is human life, while agreeing to federally fund its destruction, while calling yourself "pro-life".

I think Bush just pushed him from the train, and we will soon get an announcement from Frist that he will NOT run for President in 2008. He can read polls, and probably already knows he has no chance.

[Txsleuth]

I saw him give the speech this morning, I have read it now twice, and I have heard reaction from radio talk show hosts, other Congresscritters..and some freepers here on FR.

The one question that seems to pop up the most is: It this research on ESC is so promising, why isn't the private sector, that would make billions prolly, going after this...which makes the taxpayers, a lot of whom DO NOT agree with this on moral grounds?

The way I read his speech, he is rationalizing using Federal funds only because HE says that the only way we can SURE that this is done ethically (according to HIS rules), would be to have NIH oversight...which wouldn't be the case in priavately funded research....

My problem with THAT is, who said that the NIH is the ones to make ethical decisions? Maybe they will follow a strict guideline, but maybe not....there is corruption everywhere, and what if on moral, religious or whatever grounds, Americans DO NOT want their tax dollars going to "killing" unborn babies..?

I just don't think that this is where the Fed. Govt. should get involved...

[Lone Red Ranger]

If nothing else moving to allow private sector research opens the door to research and cures...Not that the government has to pay for it...But, that's another debate. I think overall, Frist makes good points.

What this actualy got me to thinking was, "Is Bill Frist running for President?" It looks like a coalition building move - taking key 'abortion-related' arguments away from the left.

[Now_is_The_Time]

Wasn't he elected to stop this kind of Culture of Death crap?

[FlatLandBeer]

How long before Frist is called a RINO?

[Fitzcarraldo]

IMO there is a problem using embryonic stem cells for treatment because of the tissue rejection issue. Much progress had been made using stems cells harvested from the patient's own body.

[XR7]

Stem cell lines.
All very scientific.
Everything will be all legal, of course.
Heard Howard Stern on the radio the other day. That paragon
of virtue was complaining about how President Bush is "forcing"
people to leave the US to get proper health care, referring to a news
story about some quadraplegic who is going to the Netherlands to
get stem cells implanted - as if that is going to cure him.

The bottom line is, to have a steady supply of stem cells (which the
activists say will cure just about anything that ails humanity) you
gotta breed human embryos, and kill them, to satisfy the stem cell
lobbyists. Of course, umbilical cord stem cells are just as good -
but they don't want to be limited to that.

After all, if we limit stem cells to only umbilical cord cells, then we
are saying that Roe v. Wade might be wrong, and that a human
embryo is a human being. And, if we kill the baby human being,
well, you could call that murder. Can't have that.

SO let's make it respectable and pretend it is. After all, killing a few
"potential" humans to save some old geezer's life (or even a child,
for the children, you know) is worth it, isn't it? After all, the most
respected doctors, scholars, and legal ethicists have assured us that
everything is completely legal, of course, and will be done
under the strictest medically supervised, sanitary conditions.
-- Your papers please?

[verity]

It is amusing to note that some condemn this on moral grounds while others only condemn federal funding.

[EternalVigilance]

Bookmarked.

[SierraWasp]

I haven't read anything yet, but something in my gut tells me that something is way off with this fricken Frist!!! He and Trent Lott both have been infected with that D.C. Disease that keeps me ill at ease. I would think it kept the President awake at night, too!!!

The dear Doctor is given us his brand new "aroma therapy," that consists of an aresol room deoderant tryin to cover the smell of the entire barnyard called the Crapitol!!!

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

A heart transplant is not even slightly comparable. That is an argument of distraction, not of honest comparison. It just makes him more suspect.

Regarding the number of lines, it's still an argument of futility. If sucessful, this so-called "ethical" approach would undoubtedly lead to the unethical approach of creating life to destroy life in order to "save" life (cure one disease and the patient will just die another way). So even that argument is unethical. It just buys time. I'm ashamed of Frist.

He has been revealed to be all about money.

[oceanview]

Nancy Reagan is going to be on MSNBC with her son today (I do not know what time).

that's the real sad part about this - the sheeple, especially alot of sheeple seniors, believe that cures for alzheimers and cancer and parkinson are "right there", they there are going to be miracle cures coming from this in just a few years. they are delusional, they have been sold a bill of goods on this, and unfortunately there has been no effective rebuttal - hence we see this political cave-in.

[SuperSonic]

Here's the take on it from the cartoonist from Non-Sequitur: