Stem cell policy shift brings a sinking feeling (John Kass)

Chicago Tribune ^ | 3-14-09 | John Kass

[STARWISE]

When President Barack Obama signed his executive order to allow human embryos to be mined for their stem cells in order to help older, more powerful humans, there was much excited applause.

The applause came from so many, their eyes bright, lit as if from within. It came from those who believe in scientific progress as the answer to the problems of the modern world, believing as fervently as any monk on the slopes of Mt. Athos believes in the Resurrection of Christ.

In signing the order last week, the president said that the Bush administration, which strictly limited such research, had offered a false choice between science and morality.

He said his new order "is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda—and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology."

There it was. Ideology, a pejorative applied to faith, offered up during Lent by our president.

[STARWISE]

*snip*

"There was no legal conflict between this bill and the right to legal abortion, but Barack Obama was still uneasy with the idea.

He and 11 other senators would vote “present” in a strategy worked out with Planned Parenthood lobbyists (“present” votes in the Illinois senate essentially count as “no” votes).

The bill would pass the Senate easily with a bipartisan majority, only to die in a House committee.

Here is what Obama said on the Senate floor that day in opposition to the bill:

~~~

"There was some suggestion that we might be able to craft something that might meet constitutional muster with respect to caring for fetuses or children who were delivered in this fashion.

Unfortunately, this bill goes a little bit further, and so … this is probably not going to survive constitutional scrutiny.

Number one, whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or other elements in the Constitution, what we’re really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a — a child, a nine-month-old — child that was delivered to term.

That determination, then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it — it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute."

[STARWISE]

~~PING!

[Vn_survivor_67-68]

I’m spinning now.....is the story of the Omnibus signing and its contents depicted in this thread true or not?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2205805/posts

[Don Corleone]

Democrats believe in the MASS MURDER of both the young and the old. ie. Obambi’s nationalized health care which will deny services to the old because of ‘cost effectiveness'and fosters infanticide at the other end of the life spectrum. Never again must we let creatures like this into political power.

[Velveeta]

Gotta love John Kass. :-)

[gondramB]

>>The applause came from so many, their eyes bright, lit as if from within. It came from those who believe in scientific progress as the answer to the problems of the modern world, believing as fervently as any monk on the slopes of Mt. Athos believes in the Resurrection of Christ. I<<

Interesting strategy - it equates supporting science with opposing religion. The real objective should be to use science in ethical ways to improve humanity’s lot.

[STARWISE]

and

[STARWISE]

He’s very slick and slimey .. I frankly can’t figure out what he’s doing. He’s sure allowing human cloning for research purposes.

###

From your link:

“In the remarks he made Monday when announcing the executive order, President Obama said he wanted to close the door to “the use” of cloning for human reproduction but not for other purposes.

“And we will ensure that our government never opens the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction. It is dangerous, profoundly wrong and has no place in our society, or any society,” said Obama.

A bill sponsored in the last Congress by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D.-Calif.) and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R- Utah) would specifically permit federal funding of research using human embryos that are created by cloning and kept alive for no more than 14 days so that their stem cells can be extracted. Federal funding of this type of research is prohibited by Dickey-Wicker.

Researchers are interested in cloning human embryos for prospective stem cell therapies because it might help overcome the problem posed by a patient’s immune system, which rejects stem cells derived from another person but might accept stem cells if they are taken from an embryo cloned from the patient himself.”

[ziravan]

Embryonic stem cell research will end, whether the Obama Administration wishes it too, or not. Why? It’s not good science.

Here’s the thing. The special deal with embryos is that their cells are easily pluripotent - able to change into whatever cell is needed. That comes with some powerful drawbacks. First, those cells are also immature and much more often that not, grow wildly out of control when manipulated. The result is a form of cancer. In addition, there are serious host/rejection issues if actually used in another human.

A few years ago, scientist developed a way to use viral load transfer to make adult stem cells pluripotent. It’s not perfect and has problems of its own. Then, THIS MONTH, at the same time Obama is making his embryo stem cell ruling, scientists have figured out a much cleaner and easier way to make adult stem cells pluripotent.

Pluripotent adult stem cells mean that treatments can be based on your own cells - no rejection, and it means those treatments are far less likely to cause cancer.

Embryonic stem cell research is simply passe science. There are dozens of stem cell treatments coming on-line and none of them are based on embryonic stem cells; all of them are related to adult stem cells.

Currently, the only real reason to USE embryos is that so much funding, for political reasons, require the use of embryos, that using them is necessary to get project funding. In this way, it is the Democrats holding back true science. In true Democrat fashion, they loudly and wildly accuse of that which they do - use science for political advantage, in this case to promote a culture of death to cheapen the value of pre-born life.

Obama’s decision is a travesty. Don’t get me wrong. It’s just that science will soon bypass this immorality because it simply doesn’t work. The problems with making embryos into effective treatments far outweigh the increasingly attainable work of making adult stem cells pluripotent.

Who knew that the world wouldn’t and couldn’t be designed in such a way to allow such immoralities to become effective treatments, after all?

I did.

I support stem cell treatments because the have the potential to be potent cures. I don’t support embryonic stem cell research because they don’t have that potential - and they’re immoral.

[Salvation]

Obama to Fund Research with 100% Failure Rate !

[Salvation]

Embryonic stem cell transplants have caused cancer.

Adult stem cells from aminiotic or umbilical cord fluid and other human souces have caused cures.

No trouble making a decision there????

[ziravan]

No trouble making a decision there????

Unless, of course, it would cost you politically. Not having the issue of embryonic stem cell research to cheapen the value of pre-born life is a travesty - for abortionists and their political ilk.

Hence the spectacle of Obama loudly announcing how forward thinking his Administration is to advance a failed avenue of stem cell research.

Of course, it’s not the first, nor last, time team Obama will speak out of both sides of its mouth at once. At least he has a teleprompter to keep his story straight.

[STARWISE]

The wonders of God’s miraculous creation, and His
almighty power and perfection are awesome.

And folks still refuse to accept that when a pregnancy
is artificially ended, a series of processes occur that
often lead to potential health problems down the road for
the former mother due to the abrupt hormonal changes.

Nope, that’s not allowed to be discussed in the raging
pursuit of eliminating an inconvenient child.

[DieHard the Hunter]

As usual, John Kass has got it right and he has articulated the issue properly and well.