so bush vetoed stem cell research, how much more harm is he going to do to our country?

Answer 1

Funny how someone who can let Americans die in 9/11 and Katrina; and can bomb civilians in Iraq (with flesh-melting white phosphorus no less), has a problem with using stems cells that would have been discarded rather than saving lives. There seems to be a pattern here--Bush supports a culture of death and suffering.

Answer 2

Plenty. And anybody who wanted that bill vetoed obviously doesn't know the first thing about stem cell research or its benefits. The research would only involve stem cells that would otherwise be discarded. DISCARDED! would you rather throw away a stem cell, or use it to find cures for diseases. Honestly, sometimes I think half of America is missing a brain.

I hate ignorance.

2 years. We have to put up with 2 more years of this? Not good.

Answer 3

People applauding the President's veto regard this action as a principled stand against abortion.

They are, of course, wrong.

The research to be supported by the bill would have allowed Federal funding to be employed in research programs using fertilized eggs frozen at in vitro fertilization clinics. Those eggs - not much beyond the oocyte level - are not even embryos yet. These are "surplus" eggs to be destroyed because their donors no longer have need of them. Perhaps the anti-abortionists should outlaw in vitro fertilization if it results in fertilizing excess eggs, too - by their definitions, destroying the unused eggs is murder, too.

Bush's veto is pandering to a VERY small population of religious or ethical zealots.

In the US, this issue has been shown to divide even the anti-abortion crowd. Nationwide many people who previously endorsed Bush have turned against him for this veto.

What the veto proves is that Bush is inflexible, inattentive, and shallow. He misunderstands the politics of this matter and clearly believes that despite public opinion he will eventually gain from his action.

The only way to stop Bush from working yet further harm on the nation and the world is to surround him with a legislature that will block his worst actions and force legislative solutions to problems he refuses to acknowledge. Thus, vote Democratic in November.

Of course, Bush is leading such a totally incompetent Administration that even so he will work harm on the country by sheer ineptitude. But one more example such as Katrina, and it's likely he and his entire top floor of Cabinet members will be impeached en masse.

Answer 4

As usual the details are left out. The president vetoed easing the limits on embryonic stem cell research. Doctors will agree that they can do the research from NON embryonic stem cells and that there has been no proof that embryonic stem cells will further benefit research in any capacity. Please read the details and if you don't understand, look it up. I applaud the President on this issue. You should too.

Answer 5

Bush might as well have done away with blood donations in this country as well. Blood is made up of human cells, as well as donated almost expired fetal embryo's which are going to be destroyed anyway. Why not allow research to potentially offer life instead of throwing them away in a land fill which is where they will end up now anyway.

People donate organs every day to save lives. Why can't a woman offer a fertile embryo to save lives? She can decide to abort it and that's legal. That is an equal argument to any of this. Once a month a usable egg is expelled if a woman does not become pregnant. I guess she should be arrested for that according to Bushes Theory.

Answer 6

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.

Answer 7

He hasnt done any harm to this country. I am glad he vetoed stem cell research.

Answer 8

George Bush vetoed federal investment for embryonic stem cellular examine on account that's erroneous. Being in politics demands understanding the version between precise and incorrect, and because 2/3 of congress for sure does not have this perception, Mr. Bush had to step forward. sick admit, he's performed issues i do no longer approve of in the previous, yet each flesh presser has. even nonetheless,l Mr. Bush is rather on a challenge for God, it is why he does not provide a damn approximately his approval score. (He does not could hardship approximately yet another election anyhow)

Answer 9

I find it so incredible that people have become so self-righteous that they see nothing wrong with stem cell research. Since when did wrong become right and right become wrong? Why does being a Christian have anything to do with how babies unborn bodies are used for science experiments. Doesn't anybody else see how backwards the world is becoming?
"Don't judge anyone for their beliefs, but if you have any morals I'll judge you as 'religious' and that is OK." It's crazy! Upside down and backwards!

Answer 10

Wow Leogirl you obviously have no idea about the details. Currently we can do research on SOMATIC stem cells. These are different from EMBRYONIC stem cells. You can get somatic stem cells from anyone but they don't have the same potential because they're already differentiated. Embryonic stem cells have much much more poteintial because they are what all cells arise from.

Don't spout off about details you obviously know nothing about.