Science is the engine of progress for a country (and humanity). It's what puts a country ahead of other countries and over the long term, it's what puts their economy ahead of other countries. To reject, hamper or restrict science is to launch a direct attack on a country's competitiveness.
If he's going to play the morality card, he should play it consistently. Science's most horrific invention is the nuclear weapon. It saves lives by taking lives, just like stem cell research (assuming you consider embryos to be lives, but let's assume that for now).
If you were going to call "morality timeout" on any area of science, it would surely be nuclear weapons research. Yet he seems to have no problems with all the talk of developing new nuclear weapons, those bunker busters and the like. It's inconsistent and hypocritical, and thus to my mind indefensible.
So which ethical line do you toe? Make funds available for research, and allow the families of these embryos the freedom to decide whether they can be used in research or not, ultimately benefitting millions of lives through the research? Or would you withhold federal funding on a fallacious religious belief, and condemn these embryos to destruction?
2006-07-14 05:16:11 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Bush should be using our tax dollars to support pioneering research that can bring mirecles to market and improve human quality of life. Not use it to blow people up!
He's going backward in civilization.
2006-07-14 07:52:13 · update #1
amazing that he can be "morally" opposed to stem cell research while totally ignoring Christ's direct interpretation of the commands of God, specifically "love thy neighbor as thy self". While I believe that there are terrorists held in Gitmo, I also believe that any Child of God is required to acknowledge them as fellow human beings and afford them the basic human rights we would want for ourselves; otherwise, what distinguishes us from them???
2006-07-14 05:26:33 · answer #1 · answered by Alan S 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Remember, Bush is the first President to ever fund stem cell research. Why is this always forgotten? Yes, the legislation did limit which strands. However, he is not prohibiting private funding of stem cells, so find a stem cell research organization and make a donation. You suggest it should be the families decision. Ok. If you're going to be consistant in your thinking then it should also be the decision of others not to fund or donate.
If we're simply going to ignore ethics or morality (as fallacious as you find it) and go with your sense of consistancy then the government should be funding human cloning, or perhaps return eugentics.
2006-07-14 05:34:52 · answer #2 · answered by JB 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Stem cells are generally (not always, but generally) collected from aborted fetuses. Now, Bush is anti-abortion. This situation would make a demand for aborted fetuses. Bush won't support something that makes a demand for abortion. It would be opposite his political platform.
Part of me says, there will be abortion in this country no matter what, so why the heck not put them to good use and part of me is disgusted by it. If we could find a way to collect stem cells from non-aborted fetuses (maybe stillborn fetuses?) I would be a lot more open to the idea. Then again, I am very afraid of the idea of playing God with genetics and we seem to be getting close to that point. If you're unsure why I don't like this idea, go to any Star Trek site and look up Khan.
2006-07-14 05:22:07 · answer #3 · answered by Kats 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush ok'd utilising the present stem cellular lines already contained in the labs. He has stated no continually to the taking of latest lines for authorities funded analyze. For those of you who do not care about the pre-born, and also you imagine stem cellular analyze is so overwhelmingly significant, bypass ahead and fund it. detect a business enterprise that does it and make investments or detect a private college with a software and donate, what about the Christopher Reeves foundation? Why do you insist that authorities money from those who believe that abortion is homicide ought to apply those money on analyze utilising fetal substances? If that occurs, purely to be straightforward, pubic universities should be in a position to apply public money to tutor the existence of God to atheists or per chance to tutor that international warming doesn't exist.
2016-12-01 06:46:17 · answer #4 · answered by leija 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Here's a very simple fact, short and sweet, since you lack any intelligence: Bush is only AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT FUNDED steam cell research. You know, those tax dollars that get taken from our paychecks to destroy embryos!!!!! He is not against PRIVATE funded stem cell research. You want to set up a little supermarket isle where you can go and pick some fresh embryos and do your research with PRIVATE MONEY? Knock yourself out sweetie, just don't ask for my tax dollars to fund that crap.
2006-07-14 05:31:13 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
President Bush supports ADULT stem cell research, but not FETAL stem cell research.
Many people think that using FETAL stem cells is taking a human life. Therefore, it is immoral to experiment with them. It's as simple as that.
As for those who don't think that a fetus is a human being, your DNA today is exactly the same as the day that you were conceived. If you're human today, then you were human then as well.
Here are some sources about experimenting on "lesser" humans. Read them and then tell me that FETAL stem cell research is moral.
2006-07-14 05:41:18 · answer #6 · answered by SPLATT 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Up to now, no human being has ever been cured of a disease using embryonic stem cells. Adult stem cells, on the other hand, have already cured thousands. There is the example of the use of bone marrow cells from the hipbone to repair scar tissue on the heart after heart attacks.
2006-07-14 05:20:37 · answer #7 · answered by R J 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you make alot of positivist assumptions about the role of science in a society that are incongruous with many of the setbacks science has also caused. The interesting thing about Bush's position, however, is that he used to be aligned _for_ stem cell research. However, after a summit with Pope John Paul II, he changed his position, and never fully explained why he changed. That event, for me, has been one of the most interesting events of his presidency.
2006-07-14 05:21:56 · answer #8 · answered by satyr9one 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whats a stem cell?
2006-07-15 00:17:17 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush is against stem cell research. He speaks directly to God...
2006-07-14 05:25:28 · answer #10 · answered by Todd Maz 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush is an idiot who obeys the Christian right. You are correct in your understanding of the importance of science.
Someday, future generations will look back and scoff at Bush's ignorance and wonder how he was elected.
2006-07-14 05:21:46 · answer #11 · answered by Truth 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋