Posted on 07/19/2006 11:57:06 AM PDT by frogjerk
WASHINGTON — President Bush vetoed the first bill of his five-and-a-half year administration Wednesday by rejecting a measure that would provide more federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research.
"In this new era, our challenge is to harness the power of science to ease human suffering without sanctioning the practices that violate the dignity of human life," Bush said in the East Room of the White House after vetoing the measure.
Bush announced his veto standing before 18 families with "snowflake babies," children born after frozen embryos that were not used were adopted by other couples.
"Each of these children was still adopted while still an embryo and has been blessed with a chance to grow, to grow up in a loving family. These boys and girls are not spare parts," Bush said after several interruptions of applause from supporters. "They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research."
Bush's first veto follows the Senate passage of the legislation on Tuesday with a 63-37 vote. That vote is four votes short of the two-thirds margin needed to override the veto.
In August 2001, Bush permitted existing federal research to continue, but has advocated against further government funding for that specific type of lab work. He and others argue that stem cells that come from human embryos — unlike stem cells derived from adults — can only be harvested through the loss of a human life.
Opponents of Bush's veto quickly responded to his decision.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., a surgeon who pushed for expanding federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, immediately issued a statement opposing the president’s decision to veto the measure.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Finally.
Pinheads.
I am pro-life but, but, but, but...
On this issue Frist is a hypocrite.
Bush did a simple thing that's often hard to do. He did what was right. He has my respect.
Amen to that.
To quote the great John Paul II, our goal is that man should be the master, not the product, of his own technology.
A balanced article, I'm shocked! Shocked I tell you!
They used the E word in the title, then explained the President's reason for the veto at the start of the article. Who wrote this article?
Bless W.
Now that he's broke in the veto pen, what say he use it on some big spending bills as well??
Amen to that as well!
President George W. Bush holds Trey Jones, 1, of Cypress, Texas, after speaking out against federally-funded stem-cell research during an event at the White House in Washington July 19, 2006. Bush on Wednesday used his first veto to block legislation expanding embryonic stem cell research. Jones, along with many other children onstage with the President, was conceived from frozen embryos.
Oh, but wait!
I thought they weren't really babies, that they were just cells.
//sarcasm now off
This is foolish. In vitro fertilization produces large numbers of excess embryoes, and there are simply not enough recipient mothers for them all. Instead of them ending up in a bio-refuse container, our scientists should learn what they can from them, and with federal dollars to help.
GOD bless you Mr. President!
Read this...not even private biotech firms are willing to invest in this boondoggle because it has shown zero promise. Adult stem cells on the other hand have successful treated 72 different diseases and conditions. Read on...
Stem Cell Stampede in the Senate
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=16092 ^
Posted on 07/18/2006 9:56:15 AM PDT by Grendel9
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R.-Tenn.) called the debate over stem-cell research “the first major moral and ethical challenge to biomedical research in the 21st century.” At a press conference kicking off this week’s congressional debate, he admonished everyone, "In discussing this science, we must remember not to check our ethics at the door." Even so, he endorsed H.R. 810, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act, which would allow the use of taxpayer funds to pay for unethical embryonic stem-cell research.
With all the hype and political posturing, it is sometimes difficult to remember that the deliberations should be a fact-finding mission, not a stampede of celebrity and congressional cockamamie; that the debate is, at heart, a discussion of science, not myths.
One of the most puzzling -- and cruel -- of modern-day myths is the mantra about the wonders of embryonic stem-cell treatments. Sen. Arlen Specter (R.-Pa.) predicted that research on embryonic stem cells (ESCR) would result in “a veritable fountain of youth.” [1] Because of embryonic stem-cell treatments, a research organization for the aged claimed, the future will be a “world without debilitating costly diseases.” [2]
The myths surrounding embryonic stem-cell research are puzzling because, bluntly, there are no human trials underway on embryonic stem cells; nor have any animal trials shown enough potential to warrant initiating human trials. Further, putting aside the moral concerns, research on embryonic stem cells is not illegal; it is a matter of funding -- who will pay for ESCR? Ironically, commercial enterprises are unwilling to invest in the research since the outcomes are so scientifically questionable and, consequently, unprofitable financially. The Bush administration has been unwilling to approve taxpayer funding because of the ethical concerns about the research. In other words, there is too much risk of ESCR becoming a bust on every front -- scientific, financial, moral and ethical.
In fact, the hype about the potential of embryonic stem-cell treatment is largely celebrity-driven; the scientists are notably silent in public and cautious in private.
One of the leading advocates of ESCR claims to have “no idea” when such therapies will be ready. [3] A Harvard professor admitted that “no studies have demonstrated the controlled generation of a uniform cell type” such as is necessary for ESCR to reach its potential. [4]
The myths are cruel because they hold out false hope for miraculous cures from embryonic stem-cell treatments when not a single disease has been treated successfully thus far. Further, there is a hidden danger in the ESCR: Some laboratory studies reveal a tendency for the embryonic stem cells to form dangerous tumors. A University of Pennsylvania bioethicist, Glenn McGee, called the potential of ESCR a “Pandora’s box.” [5]
In contrast, 72 different diseases and/or conditions have been successfully treated via adult stem cells, and the improvements in patient conditions have been documented by peer-reviewed scientific publications. Also, significant results have been produced in animal research using adult and cord-blood stem cells applied to spinal-cord injuries, diabetes and Parkinson’s disease.
Why then is there such a push in Congress to pass legislation to promote embryonic stem-cell research? Why has there been such hype for creating human embryos to use for “therapeutic research”?
In part, the push for research cloning is a control issue: Postmodernism demands human mastery of all outcomes -- that nothing be left to chance or to a “higher power.” Current ideology requires the “scientific” creation of stem cells regardless of the ethical consequences or human risks involved. For the activists hyping ESCR, nothing -- neither the health and well-being of the egg donors nor the care and handling of the created human embryos -- can stand in the way of so-called progress toward total human control over reproduction.
Nevertheless, the most promising future for regenerative medicine lies with research that focuses on adult and cord-blood stem cells. There, too, lies the ethical high road.
This week, Congress will vote on whether embryonic stem-cell research crosses a moral line to violate the ethical principles about life. [6] The specific bill, H.R. 810, would allow the use of taxpayer funds to pay for embryonic stem-cell research despite President Bush’s previous limitation of research to those cells obtained before August 2001. The President has announced that he will veto the bill if it passes Congress. The American public -- proving once again that it is savvier than those in the spotlights and on the screens -- has indicated its opposition (48%) to federally funded stem-cell research that destroys embryos and its support of adult stem-cell research (57%). [7]
Sen. Specter warned that those who oppose ESCR research will “look foolish, look absolutely ridiculous” in retrospect. A saner voice, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kansas), noted that it is unnecessary to “treat humans as raw material.”
Those folks chasing ESCR have nothing but empty promises and ever-illusive hopes; those focusing on adult and cord stem cells have solid scientific results and treatments that have produced measurable benefits on 72 diseases.
ESCR, for all its hype, is a mirage of myths -- the triumph of activism over science.
They are just cells...I scrape the inside of my cheek all of the time and create children...-Hugh and Series sarcasm...
Good for W. (all you folks who say I never say a kind word about Bush - take note; I applaud this veto. Along with tax cuts, Alito, Roberts, partial-birth abortion ban, Boy Scout support, it's why I voted for him; ; but that doesn't mean I have to agree with him on immigration, spending or Iraq - I don't, but he's right on the other stuff.)
>>Read this...not even private biotech firms are willing to invest in this boondoggle because it has shown zero promise. <<
It has shown LOTS of promise; they've been able to repair the severed spinal cords of lab mice with embryonic stem cells, and now they're trying to duplicate those results in humans.
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.