Bush says it's immoral to use taxpayer money to destroy human life - But isn't that what he does best?

Question

He was talking about funding stem cell research.

But isn't he spending $200 million/yr of our tax dollars to destroy human life in Iraq? Doesn't that count?

MIsta Ricksa: ARe you saying that the 3500 US soldiers killed in Iraq are guilty of something? Are you saying that no innocent Iraqi civilians (you know the ones we are trying to save by bringing them democracy) are innocent?

Thank you, I meant $200 BILLION/yr, not million.

Answer 1

You are correct!
Did Bush take the hypocritic oath?

Answer 2

The Bush adminisration is extremly hypocritical, and every decision they make is driven by sel-interest and not for the betterment of the people. The perfect example being the Iraq war- this war is no-longer about 9/11 or freeing the people of Iraq from oppression (caused by Sadam), no. Their driving force behind the continued occupation is for the country's most valued natural resource. Cause whoever controls oil basically has power over the world economically and the tax-payers money is helping him achieve this.

Answer 3

If that was the case he would have nuked Iraq and be done with it.

Loss of life in war time is different the harvesting stem cell for research.

He has not made the research illegal, just not using tax payer money to fund it. Instead of fighting the government, spend you money funding the research.

Murdering of the unborn is different then those whose lives are lost fighting in a war.

Answer 4

I think there is a big difference between war killings and planned killings, such as abortion, partial birth abortion and human stem cell research. There will always be wars, countries trying to protect their citizens only to find that those citizens are not appreciative of it. Tell that to the families of soldiers who have laid down there lives for you and me.
You see, as a medical professional myself, I am interested in cures and such, but I have also limits that I set for myself as to how far one should go when it comes to playing God. Once one thing is legalized, it will be followed by another and another. Who then can stop when they turn to perform experiments on humans or end human life simply because one is too old, too sick or disabled? There have been human experiments in this country done before and people were outraged once they heard of them. As they should be.

Answer 5

You know, I'm pro-life and against ESCR. I don't like the idea of bigger, more powerful humans using smaller, less powerful humans (or prehumans) for spare parts, basically. But I completely agree with you. That man could not waste more of our money destroying more human life! The big life issue for this administration is the lives of our troops and Iraqi, Afghani, and Pakistani civilians, and they are failing *miserably*. He needs to grow a conscience instead of sucking up to the Religious Right.

Answer 6

hahaha,

i was waiting for these discussions to come... and first off dude, you facts are waaaaaaay off..

200 million.... pffff... what was it this year, 120 billion.... l know these big numbers are confusing so let me put it into simple terms:

the budget is $120 .... you wrote $0.20... huge difference....

and that´s about how far off you are on this topic as well..

Answer 7

NO, the U.S. is in Iraq to stop the loss of human life. If we were over there to destroy human life, we would be done by now.

Answer 8

I believe the Iraqi people have been responsible for the majority of the deaths in Iraq.
The US doesn't use IEDs or car bombs- nope that would be those poor terrorists you seem to be soo fond of.
Maybe you should adopt one, I'm sure they'd never turn on you.

Answer 9

Well, it's the abortionist who think THAT way. What Bush meant to say is that it is immoral to use taxpayer money to destroy INNOCENT human life. The people of Iraq ARE innocent. We're not killing them. It is not we who are setting the bombs in Baghdad markets and killing 60-75 innocent people per day.

Answer 10

He doesn't want to waste money on a program that can be used to prolong life while he is so busy destroying life wouldn't that really look like a double standard or redundant even. He's more interested in population control.