Skip to comments.
U.S. quietly OKs fetal stem cell work - Bush allows funding despite federal limits on embryo use
Chicago Tribune ^
| July 7, 2002
| By Jeremy Manier
Posted on 07/07/2002 11:24:26 AM PDT by Keyes For President
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:50:44 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
The Bush administration has approved the first federally funded project using stem cells obtained from fetuses aborted up to eight weeks after conception, expanding the scientific promise of stem cell research and complicating the ethics debate that surrounds it.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
TOPICS: Breaking News; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bush; embryo; fetus; stemcell
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 441-451 next last
To: marajade
Since when did babies become state property?
Let me answer your question like this:
Can you kill your child after he or she is born and make that same argument to the judge?
81
posted on
07/07/2002 2:17:40 PM PDT
by
Jhoffa_
To: Jhoffa_
Don't you get it? The baby is actually not a real person of its own since the mother carries it in her body. This gives the woman the right to harvest it like a crop if she so wills because her will is sovereign. You've got to love the relativists.
82
posted on
07/07/2002 2:18:00 PM PDT
by
JMJ333
To: dcwusmc
"Would you rather keep abortion the way it is or have each State decide on the matter?"
I personally don't believe abortion is moral for myself and consider it murder... But when you have a situation where women are injuring themselves by performed illegal abortions then there is definitely something wrong with that picture as well... I don't have the answer... Having each state decide would certainly be a start... But since the US Supreme Ct has already opined then I guess that is that...
83
posted on
07/07/2002 2:18:20 PM PDT
by
marajade
To: Jhoffa_
see my post 83
84
posted on
07/07/2002 2:19:36 PM PDT
by
marajade
To: Dane
Then why did Bush's speech more than an year ago have any significance? If the President cannot cut off any funding, why was it a big deal when Bush authorized funds for stem-cell research using non-aborted tissues last March. I am still confused.
85
posted on
07/07/2002 2:19:48 PM PDT
by
Satadru
To: JMJ333
You assume too much about me... that is really sad... see my post 83
86
posted on
07/07/2002 2:20:21 PM PDT
by
marajade
To: Wordee
We are IN a WAR now. President Bush is ON our side. The TERRORISTS are on the OTHER side. ... ..
Hey, look if you like Dubya and you don't agree for whatever reason then just say it in so many words.
But by all means, get your soapbox from off the top of the WTC rubble.
It get's old, ya know?
87
posted on
07/07/2002 2:20:34 PM PDT
by
Jhoffa_
To: Wordee
I have NOT made ONE editorial COMMENT on the article which was PRINTED ON THE FRONT PAGE of the CHICAGO TRIBUNE. I have only provided a LINK to the ARTICLE for INFORMATION and DISCUSSION as is COMMON PRACTICE on FREE REPUBLIC.
I know you will understand now because I used plenty of CAPITAL LETTERS.
:-P
To: Dane
I guess I have to get over this masochistic streak that sometimes compels me to respond to your bilge... The dems may be the party of abortion on demand, but WHAT HAVE THE PUBBIES DONE TO REVERSE THE TREND? EVEN WHEN THEY DID HAVE CONTROL OF BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS? Answer: ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. They are, at BEST, political cowards. At worst? They are like you and your autoritarian ilk, same as the Dems. In either case, they are BAD FOR THE COUNTRY AND THE CONSTITUTION.
89
posted on
07/07/2002 2:21:43 PM PDT
by
dcwusmc
To: marajade
But when you have a situation where women are injuring themselves by performed illegal abortions then there is definitely something wrong with that picture as well...
Yeah, they are killing their children.
Ghouls.
I don't have the answer...
Obviously..
90
posted on
07/07/2002 2:22:44 PM PDT
by
Jhoffa_
To: Satadru; Askel5
Then why did Bush's speech more than an year ago have any significance? If the President cannot cut off any funding, why was it a big deal when Bush authorized funds for stem-cell research using non-aborted tissues last March. I am still confused. Because the media wanted to create a wedge with one issue people like you and Askel. I will trust Bush over the media every second of the day.
91
posted on
07/07/2002 2:24:36 PM PDT
by
Dane
To: Jhoffa_
And what is your answer?
92
posted on
07/07/2002 2:25:10 PM PDT
by
marajade
To: Jhoffa_; Wordee
I HOPE that WORDEE had TONGUE firmly IN cheek and that HE or SHE was KIDDING. And I HOPE that MY use OF CAPS does the SAME trick AS WORDEE's OK?
93
posted on
07/07/2002 2:26:22 PM PDT
by
dcwusmc
To: marajade
I didn't assume anything. I responded to that feminazi line about it being your body. Here is the reality of the situation: They are creating human beings at the NIH for the express purpose of killing them and then experimenting on them for medical benefits to those already born. They are using my tax dollars to do it.
A) It is never permissable to benfit from evil. And that is exactly what those who use the treatments from these experiments are doing.
B) I find it morally reprehensible that 1 penny of my money would go toward said evil.
Concrete truths exists. Recognize them and fight for what is right. And ESCR isn't right.
94
posted on
07/07/2002 2:28:18 PM PDT
by
JMJ333
To: dcwusmc
WHAT HAVE THE PUBBIES DONE TO REVERSE THE TREND? EVEN WHEN THEY DID HAVE CONTROL OF BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS? Answer: ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Uh they had clinton veto every partial birth abortion ban that was sent up to his desk while clinton was getting lewinskied in the oval office.
Bush was in office for 5 months when jeffords jumped and handed the reins of power of the Senate to dashole.
Your intentional ignorance is showing again.
95
posted on
07/07/2002 2:28:48 PM PDT
by
Dane
To: JMJ333
I believe that only God can create life... Any stem cell research as to date are souless...
96
posted on
07/07/2002 2:30:08 PM PDT
by
marajade
To: marajade
I must disagree. When conception occurs you have a human being. All human beings--even ones created artifically--have souls. To say that they don't reduces them and plays into the "its only a blastocyst" crowd.
These innocent and defenseless human beings have instrinsic dingity and value!
97
posted on
07/07/2002 2:33:37 PM PDT
by
JMJ333
To: marajade
I lost my hearing in one ear in 1994. I gave the research community 10 years to figure out how to get my auditory nerve to regenerate. It was really a bet with myself... but it is surely being slowed by idiots who think stem cell research is somehow WRONG! Geez!
98
posted on
07/07/2002 2:33:44 PM PDT
by
nsmart
To: nsmart
I see, so it is okay that a human being is created and then killed and researched on so that you can benefit. That is disgusting and vile.
99
posted on
07/07/2002 2:35:50 PM PDT
by
JMJ333
To: JMJ333
"All human beings--even ones created artifically--have souls."
That hasn't been scientifically proven yet has it?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 441-451 next 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson