President Bush stated that he has serious moral concerns about embrionic stem cell research. He stated that we should respect the dignity of human life. Yet, there was no hesitation on his part in pulverizing several thousand innocent Iraqis. Through a proxy war in Lebanon, a few other thousands of innocent people died.
How can we reconcile his thoughts and actions?
2006-12-14 17:04:35 · 12 answers · asked by Dr. Sabetudo 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
If you can't understand the difference than there is not much of a point in trying to explain it to you. This is because your typical of the closed minded leftists cross section you represent. You have no moral foundation on which to stand so you do what ever is to your personal advantage at a given time and abhor that which is to your personal disadvantage. Since you practically can not be the Vitim of an abortion (the child=fetus Latin for children or offspring) and yet you may (although this doubtful) benefit in someway or other by this type of research you see it as logical and thus anyone that takes a moral stand against you view as a fool.
Concerning the war in Iraq, your not an Iraq and likely will never be in their despotic condition so there is no advantage to you weather or not they obtain freedom. On the other hand for all practical purposes you may be required to sacrifice a portion of your freedom (1-5 years) or perhaps your life in the cause of their freedom rendering you without advantage. So you oppose the war (well also because you have such hatred and intolerance in you heart towards Bush.) and hate those that do not agree with you because you think them fools because ultimately you are without any virtue of your own and thus try to make the invidious virtuous and the virtuous invidious. In fact you are for willfuly killing babys and he is a freedom fighter willfuly killing evil doers, bearing not the sword in vain, but the inocent that fall by mistake are by mistake but all your victims are premeditated. As for your selfrightious holier than thou crap you might want to you remove that beam out of you own eye first.
2006-12-14 17:38:20 · answer #1 · answered by sean e 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
His has had 3 vetoes, 2 of which pertained to stem cell research. Ironically, he was the first president to funnel federal dollars to do some stem cell research. I think that was a move to see if there was any inital benfits to the research among sceintific minds in this field. So far, research does not support the claims made by supporters. Umbilical blood at the moment shows more potential for curing ailments.
2016-05-24 18:30:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well first,nothing has come from Embryonic stem cell research,and I mean nothing.except to keep a reason to keep roe vs. wade,
second,progress has come from adult stem cell research,(see the word"ADULT" not baby killing
third,if the Iraqi's were innocent,then your just as ignorant,try a different approach for me,ask a soldier better yet poll a hundred soldiers and ask them that question,I mean after all your here and they are there,ask the soldiers there
fourth,they insist(lebanon,syria,iran)to kill Americans,as they feed the Al Quieda's with money arms and support,also the Hesbollah,both who would kill you where you stand if they could,after all you are an infidel
2006-12-14 17:38:56 · answer #3 · answered by stygianwolfe 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
His position is moronic. Forget, for a moment, all the thousands of innocents his policies have killed. Look simply at the stem cell debate. Under current law it is okay to DISCARD extra frozen embryos. Bush has done nothing to change that law. But he says it would be immoral to use them for research. So throwing them away is fine, but finding cures that would help humanity is morally wrong....He says he prefers the "Adoption Option", where the excess embryos are adopted and implanted in other couples. There's one small problem....When they implant embryos, they usually implant multiples, to improve the odds of success. So, 2 or 3 extra embryos end up dying anyway so that one can survive....His whole position is ignorant and moronic.
2006-12-14 17:28:51 · answer #4 · answered by truth be told 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
One has to do with the security of our nation the other doesn't. How much money in 2006 was given to stem cell research? Your problem is embryonic! Even Bill Clinton would not allow government money to be used on embryonic stem cell research. Look it up!
2006-12-14 17:23:50 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
The problem is we don't have to judge himor anyone else. After DEATH, each of us will await The Judgment. In the END we will face THE FINAL JUDGMENT. He will be judged just as you and I will be. Read and study your BIBLE during the Holiday Season. This is a wonderful time to begin that Bible Study with friends and neighbors. Have a great holiday.
Eds
2006-12-15 01:32:48 · answer #6 · answered by Eds 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your question is an attempt to equate two unrelated issues -- apples and oranges. What country do you live in? What is your religious background? Your name suggests that you are Islamic and in favor of more Al Qaeda or other terrorist attacks on innocent people. You, according to me, favor killing innocent people and President Bush, according to you, favors killing innocent people. So, how does your politics differ from President Bush's politics?
Regarding stem cell research, President Bush opposes Federal funding for it. He does not oppose privately-funded research.
Now get back to doing something useful and quit asking biased questions.
2006-12-14 17:22:58 · answer #7 · answered by PanamaJack 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because we wouldn't be doing stem cell research on Iraqis. We would be doing it on Americans. Bush has to worry about America. That's what he gets paid for.
And if you want to make war less brutal I suggest you join the military and try to do something about it. But I have to tell you...when the first bullets come flying over your head and people are trying to kill you... your not going to give one damn whit about politics.
2006-12-14 17:11:30 · answer #8 · answered by soul_plus_heart_equals_man 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
HYPOCRITE HYPOCRITE HYPOCRITE! As if you didn't already know that... there is no justification for the damage that he has caused during his presidency. His attempts at legislating his morality and his purported Christian faith is extremely irritating. All he's accomplished is make himself happy. I'd argue that he's really the most cynical of them all. He'd rather send hundreds of thousands of troops to Iraq and waste billions of dollars on this asinine war than admit that he made a HUGE effing mistake! All for his pride and his precious oil... we should send HIM to the frontlines to die for his own cause and self-righteous attitude.
2006-12-14 17:09:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Don't get me started on Bush's disregard for human life. The inaction over global warming may have consequences in the billions of human lives!
2006-12-14 17:06:47 · answer #10 · answered by firefly 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋