Dobson: Frist Guilty of Betrayal [AMEN!!]

News Max ^ | July 29, 2005 | Carl Limbacher

[conservativecorner]

Focus on the Family Action founder and chairman Dr. James C. Dobson issued the following statement today after learning that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., had come out strongly in favor of increased federal funding for destructive embryonic stem-cell research:

"It is an understatement to say that the pro-life community is disappointed by Sen. Frist's decision to join efforts to void President Bush's policy limiting the funding of embryonic stem- cell research. Most distressing is that, in making his announcement, Sen. Frist calls himself a defender of the sanctity of human life - even though the research he now advocates results, without exception, in the destruction of human life.

Story Continues Below

"Sen. Frist argues that under the Bush policy, there are insufficient stem-cell lines to maximize what he calls the 'promise' of embryonic stem-cell research. That statement continues the common misconception that embryonic stem cells hold the greatest potential for human healing and therapy. In reality, recently published studies demonstrate that some adult stem cells can form most, if not all, body tissues, just like embryonic cells may be able to do. Furthermore, there will never be a sufficient number of new stem-cell lines to satisfy the sometimes unquenchable thirst for federal money to fund pet projects of researchers. A morally sound line must be drawn at the beginning of this journey into stem-cell research: that no human life is sacrificed for possible or proven scientific gain - period. "The media have already begun speculating that Sen. Frist's announcement today is designed to improve his chances of winning the White House in 2008 should he choose to run. If that is the case, he has gravely miscalculated. To push for the expansion of this suspect and unethical science will be rightly seen by America's values voters as the worst kind of betrayal - choosing politics over principle.

"We urge Sen. Frist to reconsider his position in light of the values he has espoused during his career in public service."

[conservativecorner]

Some background:

WHAT!?
By TimChapman
Posted on Fri Jul 29th, 2005 at 09:00:59 AM EST

Frist is changing positions on stem cell research...trying to learn more.

UPDATE: The Majority Leader's office is indicating that the NY Times piece is indeed true and that they are not likely to schedule a vote on the stem cell research bill until September, after the August recess.

UPDATE: Interesting tidbit from the NY Times piece:


"I am pro-life," Mr. Frist says in the speech, arguing that he can reconcile his support for the science with his own Christian faith. "I believe human life begins at conception."

But at the same time, he says, "I also believe that embryonic stem cell research should be encouraged and supported."


So an embryo has not been conceived? How is that scientific?

UPDATE: Frist speaking on floor of Senate -- "Embryonic stem cells hold hold specific potential that adult stem cells do not hold."

UPDATE: "I see in all forms of stem cell research great promise to heal...embryonic stem cells have unique properties that make them especially powerful. Unlike other stem cells, embryonic stem cells are pluripotent...they are capable or replicating indefinitely...adult stem cells meet some medical needs but embryonic offer more."

UPDATE: "The limitations of 2001 will slow our potential to sure diseases...therefore the President's policy should be overturned."

UPDATE: "With appropriate reservations I will support stem cell research...this isn't just a matter of faith, it is a matter of science."

UPDATE: "I strongly support newer more alternative means of deriving pluripotent stem cells. With more federal funding these newer methods may provide huge payoffs and we may see advances in moral methods of extraction."

UPDATE: We should also support cord blood research and adult stem cell research. But because embryonic stem cells are pluripotent, they are uniquely necessary for potentially treating other diseases.

UPDATE: Harry Reid on the floor praising Frist -- "This was a moral decision made by the majority leader...it has even more meaning as a result of the medical background of the majority leader...I admire the majority leader for doing this."

Specter -- "The speech the majority leader made on the senate floor was the most important speech made this year, and perhaps in many years."

[Blzbba]

"you left out "bigot". "racist" and "anti-semite" in your diatribe.

you can do better."



Yeah, I know. It was an off-day for me.

[Blzbba]

"how many rights have you lost to fanatical right wingers so far Satan?"



Satan wishes he looked as good as me. That loser still has horns, which is so 14th century.

[Blzbba]

"Kill all the human beings you want you are still going to grow old suffer and die (as am I).

Nimrod tried what you are advocating and turned the earth into Hell.

But you will succeed, right?"


Actually, my real political views on this subject are nowhere in this thread.

But for the record, I see less of a morality problem with using blastocysts that would otherwise be thrown away (which is what this would entail) and more of a problem with the current method, which is simply disposal.

It's also easy for those of us in excellent/good health to criticize the actions of those of us who don't share their good health fortune.

But rather than address this civilly, let's just keep insulting each other and hurling Satanic invectives - that's SO much better.

BTW, my handle is the shortened name of an old (bad) punk rock album and has nothing to do with some horned-head deity. Sorry to disappoint you there.

[wardaddy]

LOL....I love good wit...or would that be humour?

[AFPhys]

Have you read Frist's speech? I've read it fully three times now. There is no way he's blindsided the President - Bush certainly knew where Frist stood on this issue in '01, and there's not much different now.

I've said in many threads that I would support a ban on IVF.

That is not politically likely, at all, in any nation.

Given that reality, what ought be done?

[Mr. Jazzy]

Senator Frist has been a less than stellar Majority leader, what with the series of filibusters that were not truly filibusters and the lack of "put up or shut up" that the Republicans needed to enforce a conservative mandate, THAT THEY HAD!!!


The dear Senator Frist needs to further stem cell research so they can grow him a SPINE!

[Blzbba]

" I repeat, it is you Mr Pantload who wants the government to take my money to support your beliefs,"


Well, as another poster has already said, the gov't is already doing this (taking money from you, John Q. Taxpayer, and using it for things you don't support). I'm no fan of ethanol (Bob Dole) subsidies, funding the Rock&Roll Hall of Fame, etc. I'm not even sure I'm FOR this measure...but I am for stem-cell research using cells that would otherwise be discarded. There's a distinction between wanting the research and wanting to gov't to fund it but I'm sure that distinction is lost on you, the Lord of Overreaction.

[pollywog]

you bet it was a dumb move for Frist!!!!

[Blzbba]

"LOL....I love good wit...or would that be humour?"



Then you HAVE to love Sen Flip Flopper Frist, who was Mr. Pro-Life-For-Schiavo...and now flip-flops to the more-liberal side of the equation. Forget either of our opinions for a second - what kind of politician would make such a switch?

I'll spot you the letters: C...L...I...N...T...O...?

[loveliberty2]

In reviewing various posts here, and in light of the discussions on other threads concerning both Frist's position and the Roberts nomination, we might benefit from re-reading a few of Thomas Jefferson's comments. In the statements below, he speaks of the meaning and implications of "religious freedom," as it pertains both to the individual's rights, as well as to the illegality of any practices which would harm others.

"The declaration that religious faith shall be unpunished does not give immunity to criminal acts dictated by religious error." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1788. ME 7:98

"If a sect arises whose tenets would subvert morals, good sense has fair play and reasons and laughs it out of doors without suffering the State to be troubled with it." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XVII, 1782. ME 2:224

"If anything pass in a religious meeting seditiously and contrary to the public peace, let it be punished in the same manner and no otherwise than as if it had happened in a fair or market." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776. Papers 1:548

"It is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interfere [in the propagation of religious teachings] when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:302, Papers 2:546

"Whatsoever is lawful in the Commonwealth or permitted to the subject in the ordinary way cannot be forbidden to him for religious uses; and whatsoever is prejudicial to the Commonwealth in their ordinary uses and, therefore, prohibited by the laws, ought not to be permitted to churches in their sacred rites. For instance, it is unlawful in the ordinary course of things or in a private house to murder a child; it should not be permitted any sect then to sacrifice children. It is ordinarily lawful (or temporarily lawful) to kill calves or lambs; they may, therefore, be religiously sacrificed. But if the good of the State required a temporary suspension of killing lambs, as during a siege, sacrifices of them may then be rightfully suspended also. This is the true extent of toleration." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776. Papers 1:547

Regarding the appointment of Roberts, the Left (Democratic Senators and their mouthpieces), which loves to quote Jefferson's phrase on "separation" when it fits their own agenda, should have the following strong admonition put before them every day.

"The proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute for Religious Freedom, 1779. ME 2:301, Papers 2:546

The Founders could not have made it clearer, through their prolific writings, a few of which have been noted herein, what they meant and did not mean by "religious freedom."

One cannot claim that the First Amendment's protection of religious freedom and free exercise would entitle any sect to do those things which are considered unlawful for all citizens. On the other hand, Jefferson makes it clear in the last quoted warning that no citizen can be deprived of public office because he either professes or renounces this or that religious opinion.

[conservativecorner]

What part of "just last month" don't you understand? This had everything to do with politics and nothing to do with policy. Frist has made a huge mistake.

Frist to Break with Bush on Stem Cell Research

NewsMax.com Wires

Friday, July 29, 2005

Breaking with President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Friday he now supports legislation to remove some of the administration's limitations on embryonic stem cell research.

Frist, an abortion opponent who just last month said he did not support expanding federal financing of research on embryos, said his decision was consistent with both his experience as a physician and his anti-abortion stance. "Now is the time to expand the president's policy because it's promising research, but it must be done in a way that is ethically considerate, that respects the dignity of human life," said Frist, who also is a heart and lung transplant surgeon.

he Tennessee Republican, who has been said to be eyeing a run for the GOP presidential nomination in 2008, said only stem cells from embryos that "would otherwise be discarded," not implanted in a woman or frozen indefinitely, should be considered for research.

Bush has threatened to veto legislation for expanded financial support for stem cell research. A bill to finance more stem cell research has passed the House, but has been stalled in the Senate. Frist's support could push it closer to passage and set up a confrontation with Bush.

Interviewed on ABC's "Good Morning America," Frist said his decision was based on policy, not politics.

Almost two-thirds of Americans say they support embryonic stem cell research and a majority of people say they would like to see fewer restrictions on taxpayer funding for those studies, according to recent polls.

"From those cells we have the potential for looking at those diseases that everybody knows about, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and others," Frist said.

The senator planned to further outline his policy in a speech on the Senate floor later Friday, explaining why he believes embryonic stem cell research should be encouraged, even though he is "strong pro-life" and considers the embryo to be "life in its earliest stage of development."

To many abortion opponents, the two views seem to conflict. Frist says they do not.

"I give huge moral significance to the human embryo, it is nascent human life, what that means is as we advance science, we treat that embryo with dignity, with respect," Frist said.

He credited Bush with opening the doors for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, and said when this policy was announced in 2001, policy-makers thought 78 stem cell lines would be available. Since then, the number has dropped to 22.

"Those 22 cell lines are not of the quality for human application or human therapy, and that's why today I believe we need to modify that policy," Frist said.

When Bush announced his position on stem cell research, he said the government should pay only for research of stem cell colonies, or lines, that had already been created at that time, so that the "life or death" decision had already been made.

Frist said additional stem cells should be used, so long as there was a careful process of informed consent in which the parents had decided that the embryos should be discarded, not adopted or frozen.

[AFPhys]

" Frist, an abortion opponent who just last month said he did not support expanding federal financing of research on embryos, ... "

I've hunted for the source of this statement. I have been unable to locate Frist's statement. I'm pretty sure it is not on his web site. Do you have the source?

I am really angry with the FRAUDcasters now, and don't trust anything they say - even on a relatively minor point like this.

[conservativecorner]

This was from the Corner Blog at National Review:

FRIST'S CALCULATIONS [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

From the NYTimes:

Mr. Frist, a heart-lung transplant surgeon who said last month that he did not back expanding financing "at this juncture," announced his decision this morning in a lengthy Senate speech.

If he spent the month polling, I'd fire the pollster.

[Pippin]

Why is Sen. Frist caving so suddenly?

Thius is really dissappointing.

[Antoninus]

I agree. Frist is just another wussy Senate pantywaist who can not be counted on.

[Campion]

Which is NOT the right to use the gov't to enforce YOUR morality onto others

That's a non-argument. The government is absolutely guaranteed to enforce someone's morality on someone else. That's what laws do.

The only questions left are whose morality gets enforced, and why. And those are the questions you aren't addressing.

[AFPhys]

He certainly didn't spend that time with a pollster.

My question is where he actually made those comments, and precisely what he said.

All I've been able to find is this AP story that everyone is using as a source, apparently, and in none of those stories, or in this NYSlimes story, have I seen where he made that comment, or a full quotation of what he said.

Look at this example for why I'm so skeptical of these jokers:

I started looking at a LATimes story [11:04 AM PDT, July 29, 2005 Frist Breaks With Bush on Stem-Cell Research] and they had this ERRONEOUS statement attributed to Frist,
While he highlighted shortcomings in the pending bill, he said he supports it because research on embryonic stem cells is "the only type that has resulted in proven treatments for human patients."

He actually said,
"Now, to date, adult stem cell research is the only type of stem cell research that has resulted in proven treatments for human patients."

Media Bias? FRAUDcasting? Honest error? Incompetent reporter?

You decide... All I know is that when I find things like that in a "news story", it reinforces why I need to go to the source instead.

I want to make certain these FRAUDcasters aren't just trying to pull one over on us again.

[conservativecorner]

Gotcha and I agree 100% BUMP.

[Blzbba]

"The only questions left are whose morality gets enforced, and why. And those are the questions you aren't addressing."



Good point. I support stem-cell research but not necessarily gov't taxpayers funding it (or abortion, for that matter). If I could personally elect (or not elect) to have parts of my tax return go towards Stem Cell Rsrch, that'd be helpful (Kind of like the "Do you want $X to go to the Federal Election Campaign funding?" checkbox).

But I am in favor of using would-be-discarded blastocysts for stem-cell research, rather than letting them get thrown out uselessly.