Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

House fails to override stem cell veto (Embryonic)
AP ^ | July 19, 2006

Posted on 07/19/2006 4:35:23 PM PDT by TheDon

The House failed Wednesday to override President Bush's veto of a bill to lift his restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. That means the veto stands, killing the measure.

...............

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 109th; embryos; hr810; stemcells; veto
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last
To: Perdogg

Absolutely right, my unknown friend. Far too many taxpayer dollars being spent on activities that private enterprise should fund. In the church we say, "Back to the Bible." In the Federal Government, we need to say, "Back to the Constitution" - and be originalists in both camps.


21 posted on 07/19/2006 7:16:07 PM PDT by Manfred the Wonder Dawg (Test ALL things, hold to that which is True.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: madprof98

The embryos are frozen and they are either destroyed or go bad after being frozen for too long.

The only ones that are used for stem cells are from couples who say they want their unused embryos used for research instead of being destroyed.

Couples with sick kids that have diseases that can be helped by stem cells are producing fertilized eggs for the purpose of getting stem cells to help their child. I think this is morally much worse.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2004-05-05-stem-cells_x.htm


22 posted on 07/19/2006 7:22:09 PM PDT by oozzyy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: oozzyy
I think this is morally much worse.

"Morally"? "Worse"? These are VALUE-words. They should not be used by posters who think human flesh is just so much raw meat.

23 posted on 07/19/2006 7:27:24 PM PDT by madprof98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: oozzyy
A closer analogy would be using the parts of people after they die.

Like what the Chinese do with the organs of executed prisoners?

24 posted on 07/19/2006 7:28:58 PM PDT by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Lunatic Fringe


25 posted on 07/19/2006 7:29:27 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

Great news. This issue is not understood by most. Most people think Bush banned the procedure but he did not. Only futher Federal Funding which the amount he allowed is the first President to do so. It is legal for private entities to do the research. There is plenty of private money to fund this as it should be.


26 posted on 07/19/2006 8:18:56 PM PDT by therut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oozzyy

Do you know that European countries do not allow so many embryos to be created and stored? We should revise our in vitro practices to comply with these best practices so that we don't have this disaster waiting to happen.


27 posted on 07/19/2006 8:23:30 PM PDT by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: therut

And plenty of state money, thank goodness. At least some of the states see the value in research.


28 posted on 07/19/2006 8:25:56 PM PDT by BritExPatInFla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: oozzyy
The bill would have only allowed research on embryos that were going to be destroyed anyway.

It would have spent taxpayer dollars on research which is not only ethically dubious at best, but likely scientifically worthless as well. I would like for some proponent of ESCR to tell me, if all the ESCR experiments worked out as well as could be hoped, what specifically would be the result? What treatments would be possible, and where would any materials required come from?

If ESCR researchers were honest, they'd either be explaining why embryonic cells are better than adult cells, or else admit that they're not. But I don't think they can do the former and they obviously don't want to do the latter.

29 posted on 07/19/2006 11:38:14 PM PDT by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: BritExPatInFla
And plenty of state money, thank goodness. At least some of the states see the value in research.

What are the ESCR advocates hoping to achieve? Are they seeking to develop ESCR cures for diseases that adult stem cells won't be able to cure? What diseases would those be? Is there any evidence that embryonic cells can do anything useful (other than their natural procreative function) that adult stem cells can't do?

Researching embryonic stem cells today, given the extent to which adult stem cells have demonstrated themselves superior, would be like researching new techniques for increasing the density of magnetic core memory. Once upon a time, such research would have made sense, but no longer.

30 posted on 07/19/2006 11:44:43 PM PDT by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

Congratulations to the Republiacsn, and any Democrats if they were any, that voted against this.


I second that. There were 14 Democrats who deserve congratulations on this. There is nothing more important to me than the issue of life and stamping out abortion!!!


31 posted on 07/20/2006 12:46:56 AM PDT by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: oozzyy
Adoptions New Frontier, Snowflake babies

Snowflake babies are new option for infertile couples

'Snowflake' babies give infertile couples another option

There is no reason to destroy these embryos. There are living, breathing human beings who have been adopted from these embryos, the embryos that people want to destroy for research. How much further along this path do we have to go before we reach Nazi human experiment proportions??

Adult stem cells are ALREADY helping the cause of curing diseases, embryonic stem cell research is fantasy land.
32 posted on 07/20/2006 1:10:07 AM PDT by MissouriConservative (People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid - Kierkegaard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Fifty-one Republicans voted for an override, while 14 Democrats voted against it. Three Republicans flipped from the anti-funding to the pro-funding side. Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania and Dave Reichert of Washington voted against the bill last year, but voted to override Bush's veto. Brian Bilbray, who told pro-lifers that he supported the president's policy during his campaign just a few weeks ago, voted for the override too.


33 posted on 07/20/2006 5:47:35 AM PDT by NC28203
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: supercat

Wow, my bad, doing research with something that would be discarded, after time anyway, seemed like a good idea. Maybe we can get to the point where we can 'uninvent' things that make religious groups, and the politicians whoring to them in an election year, uncomfortable.


34 posted on 07/20/2006 9:00:37 AM PDT by BritExPatInFla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

Comment #35 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson