Cell BUSH bill
I, firmly believe that we are fortunate to be born in these times. An era, of space exploration, of nano technology, of discovering the human genome, an era dedicated to the search for the HIV vaccinne, of stem cell research.
President Bush, today, used his veto powers to deny federal funding for stem cell research.
President Bush in his speech went on to say the following:
"It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect. So I vetoed it."
"These boys and girls are not spare parts," he said of the children in the audience. "They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research. They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells."
"If this bill were to become law, American taxpayers would, for the first time in our history, be compelled to fund the deliberate destruction of human embryos, and I'm not going to allow it."
credits: associated press, cnn
The american tax payer has been paying for policies of this government that majority of the population does not agree with. On one end, we have the Gates foundation donating over 250 million $ towards an HIV vaccine, Scientists at Harvard medical school showing promise that stem cell culture/research would be a proven technology in the next 10 years, and, we are debating if we should use all our resources to proceed further?
MORALITY? It is ironical that politicians choose to use words they aren't very familar with in the first place. We have made our troops bake in the heat in more than one nation in the past, sent them to wars they were not meant to fight, citizens have lost their kith and kin? Where were our morals then?
I agree, the bill vetoed doesn't stop private and state funding for such research. I find it preposterous that the leaders of a nation that prides itself on advancement in medicial research, would find it hard to support research, especially, when a majority of its population supports it. Aren't we a DEMOCRACY??
Everyday, rats, frogs, crabs, crickets, monkeys, drosophilla are wiped off, tested and wasted in the name of medical research. ETHICS, is what we speak of. If we believe, it was the supreme power (GOD) who created us all, is it ethical to kill animals/plants, destroy the environment in the name of research?
President Bush, today, used his veto powers to deny federal funding for stem cell research.
President Bush in his speech went on to say the following:
"It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect. So I vetoed it."
"These boys and girls are not spare parts," he said of the children in the audience. "They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research. They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells."
"If this bill were to become law, American taxpayers would, for the first time in our history, be compelled to fund the deliberate destruction of human embryos, and I'm not going to allow it."
credits: associated press, cnn
The american tax payer has been paying for policies of this government that majority of the population does not agree with. On one end, we have the Gates foundation donating over 250 million $ towards an HIV vaccine, Scientists at Harvard medical school showing promise that stem cell culture/research would be a proven technology in the next 10 years, and, we are debating if we should use all our resources to proceed further?
MORALITY? It is ironical that politicians choose to use words they aren't very familar with in the first place. We have made our troops bake in the heat in more than one nation in the past, sent them to wars they were not meant to fight, citizens have lost their kith and kin? Where were our morals then?
I agree, the bill vetoed doesn't stop private and state funding for such research. I find it preposterous that the leaders of a nation that prides itself on advancement in medicial research, would find it hard to support research, especially, when a majority of its population supports it. Aren't we a DEMOCRACY??
Everyday, rats, frogs, crabs, crickets, monkeys, drosophilla are wiped off, tested and wasted in the name of medical research. ETHICS, is what we speak of. If we believe, it was the supreme power (GOD) who created us all, is it ethical to kill animals/plants, destroy the environment in the name of research?
posted by Ashwin at 2:22 AM
6 Comments:
I totally agree with you.
Even if a majority want to pursue a course of action then it does not mean that it is correct. while the government may falter on many other fronts and seem indifferent to human plight i believe that the human race does not have the right to terminate life. the president is also against abortion so he is consistent in his view.
Well...he is i suppose "ok" with the adult stem cell research, his government doesnot ban private or state funding for such projects?
As the president, you choose that embroynic stem cell research is to be banned based on ethical, moral and non-scientific reasons.
how do you then justify pockets in the same economy going ahead with this?
If you have decided that as a nation, tax payers money shouldn't be utilized for this purpose, then doesn't it make sense to ban any form of support to such scientific research.
Somewhere down that road is a political motive governing these laws, not science!
I don't think it's a political motive as much as it is a religious one. Unfortunately, they're often dangerously tangled.
He surrounded himself with little kids talking about how we shouldn't use children as spare parts. If it was the "Using Children As Spare Parts" intiative, he might have a point. But it's not. We're talking about cells. He's wanting to take it in a direction that just doesn't make sense.
Plus, he says he respects life? He doesn't have a problem with marching across the boundary into people's personal lives, attempting to hijack their access to & quality of healthcare- but he has no problem marching right across the boundary of a country to destroy it, killing thousands of people- actual people- in the process? A couple of years ago, Donald Rumsfeld stated the U.S. would stop counting civilian deaths because they are not 'relevant' to the mission in Iraq. Pictures of coffins coming home to the US have been banned from broadcasting. And Bush dares to utter the word 'respect'? Please! He should stick to making as ass out of himself at conferences he doesn't know are being recorded. That's the only thing he's done in a long time that made any number of Americans smile.
All the people I've known studying & participating in science- myself included- are very aware of being ethical & ethics are often discussed. I'm all for science. If we can advance to cure horrible diseases such as Parkinson's, let's do it!! There are many people suffering, and we should do all we can to help them. That would be such an exciting breakthrough...
I wish to clarify that my post was not so much against Mr.President, as much as the politics of being a president.
It is extremely hard to take a stand on issues such as these and understandably so. As President Bush rightly points out, once we choose to move ahead, there is no looking back. It is wise to take a cautious step.
All I wish from any goverment is to be honest to its people. Look at the facts and decide what is the best for society and humanity.
Over the thousands of years that civilizations have existed, there were many policies and decisions that have challenged authority, but today well integrated in society.
We may never be able to completly justify the loss of these embryos.
Pardon me when i say this, but the sacrifice (if you wish to call it so) of 100's of cells for the lives of a million odd people in the years to come seems worth it!
I understand what you're saying, but from what I understand he didn't say it was a revolutionary move for humanity that deserves caution (I agree with that). He basically said cells are people. I think he's more religiously than logically motivated here. Justifying politics with a religion is a risky move, because you can say *anything* in the name of a religion.
But yeah, we should work on improving the quality of life for humanity in many ways while remaining cautious.
~Amy
Post a Comment
<< Home