http://www.forbes.com/business/free_forbes/2006/0904/124.html?partner=aolmag
2006-08-20 13:21:43 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Bush would rather that those embryonic cells be tossed in a dumpster than allow them to be used to help mankind. Quite simply, if they're not used for research, they're dumped in an landfill. Why he does this is beyond comprehension; more proof that the man is deserpately clueless and certainly not qualified to be dog catcher in Quapaw, OK let alone the leader of the free world.
2006-08-20 13:41:59 · answer #1 · answered by Bostonian In MO 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with the crusadbiologists disagree.
Since the ban, federal funding of embryonic stem-cell work has risen to all of $40 million a year, just one-fifth of the money for other kinds of stem cells and a pittance in the $20 billion research budget of the government's National Institutes of Health. But Eli Broad and a few other billionaires--some of them from President Bush's own Republican Party--and a number of states and private foundations have stepped into the gap. They have funneled three times as much as the federal government into embryonic stem-cell research. That's the reason the biologists disagree? That's not a good enough reason. It doesn't even seem to have anything to do, with what the crusaders say.
2006-08-20 20:30:42 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Stem cells can save lives. Go for it.
As for cloning, would a cloned human have a soul?
2006-08-20 20:34:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wanna help
2006-08-20 20:27:06 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm glad. My mom has MS.
2006-08-20 20:28:42 · answer #5 · answered by glitterprincess 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hmmmmmmmm
2006-08-20 20:27:51 · answer #6 · answered by Penney S 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well i like boobs
2006-08-20 20:28:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋