then they must also oppose in-vitro fertlization to maintain a consistiant moral stance? It doesn't involve killing anything, it is only making use of something that is going to be thrown out anyway.
2006-11-26 10:00:39 · 17 answers · asked by JS 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Anybody who believes in embroyonic stem cell research but doesn't want government funding for it is so full of crap its ridiculous. Why don't you want government funding for it if you believe in it? And medically what really gets done without federal funding give me a break. And for those people who say its been a bust will what the heck do you expect number 1 its not getting federal money and number 2 it hasn't been studied for that long it takes time for these things to happen. I will take the opinion of most scienists and doctors when they say that there could be huge strides made with embroyonic cell research over those idiots who listen to Rush Limbaugh and repeat after him about how embroyonic stem cell research hasn't cured anything.
2006-11-26 10:12:39 · answer #1 · answered by mrlebowski99 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Only the government funding of such research. Facts are that embryonic stem cell research is pretty iffy.. no therapeutically useful results have come from that research as yet... only vague promises of Nirvana.
Adult stem cells,on the other hand, have produced results that are actually being used in treatments.
If Embryonic stem cells show so much promise, let the private sector fund the research and keep government out of it.
2006-11-26 10:07:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Why not honestly say "church-goers" instead of implying that this is a Republican thing? President G.W. Bush, a Republican and a practicing Methodist, was the one who first authorized federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. He limited it to 22 lines of existing embronic stem cells because the practice was then unproven (it still is years later) and because it was (and still is) morally unacceptable to a very large number of members of several major faiths, including Roman Catholics and Lutherans, and Bush respected their beliefs.
The fact is that embryonic stem cell research, moral or not, is legal everywhere in the United States. There is major opposition to public funding by taxation, and where it has been voted in, such as by the recent "Proposition 2" in Missouri, it passed by a narrow margin, despite very strong and nearly 100% campaign funding by a private enterprise that would reap the financial benefits. It passed because many voters failed to familiarize themselves with the true meaning of the bill. It is virtually certain to be contested in a future referendum.
2006-11-26 10:20:00 · answer #3 · answered by senior citizen 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think conservatives are afraid woman will be solicited to have abortions for money so there will be more stem cells for research. Although I don't believe in abortion, I do believe in stem cell research. Why waste stem cells because they were obtained wrongfully. Maybe an unborn child's destruction would result in some good because the stem cells of that fetus would help a person who is suffering from an illness that maybe cured by this research.
2006-11-26 10:10:48 · answer #4 · answered by pmz 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
There's no Conservative opposition to stem phone research, simply federal funding of it. Bush thought governmental involvement in a morally ambiguous discipline might be a damaging slippery slope.
2016-08-09 23:38:03 · answer #5 · answered by ? 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Generally, it is because most of the research has been done on aborted fetuses. I think that if their short lives could mean a cure for someone, than why not honor them in that way? However, most researchers are finding no benefit from embryonic stem cells. I wonder why liberals haven't mentioned this. They have found some limited success from adult stem cells, though.
2006-11-26 10:05:57 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Because conservatives are against taking of human life at any stage of development. They don't want embryos created solely for the purpose of destroying them, either.
There are stems cells wasted every day. Why not harvest the cord blood when babies are born?
2006-11-26 10:05:41 · answer #7 · answered by Sherral 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
there is not any Conservative opposition to stem cellular learn, purely federal investment of it. Bush concept governmental involvement in a morally ambiguous area could be a unfavourable slippery slope.
2016-10-17 14:09:12 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We don't oppose it, we just won't pay for it. Oh by the way, embryonic stem cell research has pretty much been a bust. Check out the progress being make with the non embryonic stem cell research.
2006-11-26 10:05:54 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
Yeah, and watch those same conservatives jump on the bandwagon when they are stricken with a debilitating disease that could be cured with this research. Bet you anything, they'd be all for governmental backing for it then!
2006-11-26 17:22:55 · answer #10 · answered by Schona 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋