What are your thoughts on Bush vetoing the stem cell bill?

Question

Today, for the second straight times, the president vetoed the stem cell research bill. The detail of the information could be located at: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/287553/bush_to_veto_stem_cell_bill_for_the.html

Answer 1

I think he made the right decision. For all the wrong reasons. I happen to work at a national lab for the DOE. I also did my graduate work (chemical engineering) using money from a DOE earmark. Consequently I think I can safely say that working with government money, and the consequent beauracracy and oversight, is perhaps one of the simplest ways to PREVENT scientific breakthroughs. Science happens with government grants in spite of their money, not because of it. With something this politically charged the proposal system alone would crush all of the truly innovative ideas. This research needs to be done. But it needs to be done in independent laboratories, safe from government influence. When it's done on their dime it's not like they just give you money and then walk away. Oh no. I'm happy to see that Bush vetoed a bill that would have slowed down progress in an important area. I just wish he had a better reason.

Answer 2

I think that all he did was to refuse funding. Did he make it illegal or simply refuse to grant funding?

If fetal stem cell research is that important to those of you, why not suggest that other foundations and organizations fund the stem cell research. No one is being denied the research, it just won't be paid for with taxpayer dollars.

Here is the info from the article in the link.

In a report filed by an Associated Press Staff reporter, a White House spokesman Tony Fratto said, " The president supports and encourages stem cell research, including using embryonic lines, as long as it does not involve creating, harming or destroying embryos," he further said, "That is an ethical line that should not be crossed."

In the same report, Bush is expected to issue an executive order mandating the Health and Human Services Department to encourage research into stem cells that, like human embryonic stem cells, also bear the possibility of renewing into different types of cells that might be used to cure disease.

The president in his veto threat, accused the Democrats of reprocessing an old bill that he already vetoed and argued that the bill would mean American taxpayer could be forced for the first time to support a measure that deliberately destroy human embryos.

Answer 3

ADULT stem cells have been the reason for 74 cures. Embryonic stem cells have yet to work and be the cure for a single disease. The bill is for Federal funding of embryonic stem cells. This doens't mean researchers do not have the ability to experiment on stem cells they just don't get tax payer money to experiment on these cells. I don't want my tax dollars going toward killing embryos. Even if my tax dollars weren't going toward this I feel it is wrong. Even if it had nothing to do with any type of living tissue I think the private sector and the market should pay for the research because they receive the profit. I don't know why the govenment should subsidize reaseach performed by the big pharmapsudical companies when they will make an enormous profit on their discoveries.

Answer 4

He's an ***. He doesn't understand stem research anymore than most of the people who have answered your question.

Stem cell research is going on and has been for over 10 years.....here and in major research hospitals all over the world. His temper tantrum changes nothing. He is going to veto anything sent to him from Congress because he thinks he is the King of America and is angry because the new Congress won't give him what he wants.

Private funding, state funding, corporate funding in our country is handling the research. It would probably move faster if the government would help with the funding - like it does with many other types....but it will get along quite nicely with the funding it has. Overseas, the governments support the research because great strides are being made in curing terrible diseases like MS, Lou Gerig and others. The possibilities are endless.

For those who don't support it, how do you think stem cells are obtained? Do you think they abort a fetus and snatch it????

Millions of fertilized eggs are harvested as part of the infertility program that women go through when trying to have a child. Of the millions collected, a very tiny amout is actually used...the remaining eggs are frozen until the donors decide to have them destroyed...usually after a live birth. Many people donate them to the research.

It is foolish to decide to destroy them rather then use them for something positive. Anyone who truly believes that a fertilized egg is a person is just nuts....... That describes the idiot exactly.

Answer 5

I think that stem cell research could yield some very beneficial results. However, I also urge caution when using this technology. Not for religious reasons but we just know that people abuse technology and this particular technology has vast potential for misuse.

For example when heroin was invented by Phiser (a major pharmeceutical company) in the 30's it was hailed as a miracle drug (in the positive sense). Nobody knew that it would explode into the huge social problem that it has.

Steroids have some legitimate medical uses but we all know that they get abused horribly too. Do people remember thalidamide?

As far as how do we proceed with this? I don't really know. All I know is that we need to mine the good side of the technology while maintaining strict controls against abuse. How do we do this? Again, I don't really know but I do think that like all technology it is a double edged sword and we need to be cautious not to cut ourselves too badly.

Answer 6

The president is a Christian and he is mixing religion with his politics. Not right. He should not have vetoed the stem cell bill. But then again the guy isn't too bright.

Answer 7

the reason of Bush's veto is that the approach maximum in lots of cases used to reap embryonic stem cells involves the destruction of a human embryo. as much as now, no President as enable tax payer money to fund any technique that destroys human embryos. because of the fact the fact of whilst life starts continues to be unclear, that's suitable to err on the edge of warning and look after what ought to probable be a human life. further lines of stem cells are obtainable: from umbilical cords, embryonic fluid, and so on. that is not any longer neccessary to interrupt a fetus to get the cells. (basically extra cost-effective) Bush's veto does no longer forestall the harvesting of stem cells from dissimilar sources. It does no longer limit stem cellular study. It does no longer outlaw medical breakthroughs or new discoveries. All those will proceed unrestricted and legal. It basically assure that those human beings who have faith life starts at thought are no longer compelled to have our tax money used to pay the cost of committing what to us is a sin - the destruction of a human life.

Answer 8

If embreyonic stem cell research is so promising, why aren't the Pharmaceutical companies doing it? It is not, or never has been illegal for them to do so. The debate has always been over government funding. If it's so promising, why do they need tax dollars to go to researching new drugs and treatments that the drug companies and health care industies are going to reap in the profits if it pans out? I thought the democrats were against corporate welfare.

Answer 9

It's interesting, in that NO cures have been found from Embryonic research, only T cells and cord cells from adults. From what I've read Embryonic cells have too many chances to turn cancerous, vs the other types. Also, if Embryonic cells are best to use, let's follow the money; why are there no private labs working on these "miracle cures".

Answer, it doesn't work

Answer 10

what he did is veto use of government funds for stem cell research. R & D can still be done by companies that want to do it. Right now most don't because there isn't enough uses to make it cost effective for them