Wednesday, July 19, 2006

Bush Vows to Veto Stem Cell Bill

The Senate voted to lift restrictions on federally funded human embryonic stem cell research yesterday, setting the table for President Bush's first veto and producing an emotional campaign issue that Democrats believe will help them this fall.

Senators voted 63 to 37 to approve a House-passed bill that would pour millions of dollars into a field of medical research that is promising -- but also controversial because it requires destroying human embryos to extract the cells. Bush announced in his first nationally televised address, on Aug. 9, 2001, that he would ban government funding for research using embryonic stem cell colonies created after that date, and he has vowed to cast his first presidential veto to block the legislation rescinding his executive order.

White House press secretary Tony Snow said Bush's veto "will be pretty swift" once he receives the bill, possibly as soon as today.


(Washington Post)

Bush decides to use his veto power for the first time to do what? To destroy perfectly good embryos rather than allowing them to be used to fight disease:

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), who has had two types of cancer, said he thinks "it is a clear-cut question to use embryos to save lives, because otherwise they will be destroyed." Fertility clinics hold about 400,000 unneeded embryos, he said, and only 128 have been "adopted" by couples who played no role in creating them. "A century from now, people will look back in amazement that we could even have this debate when the issues are so clearly cut," he said.

13 comments:

Laura said...

If Bush is against the destruction of embryos then he should also be against the creation of embryos in fertility clinics, most of which, will be destroyed anyway. And as long as he's a believer in God's will - if you're infertile, didn't God make you that way? Ban fertility clinics - it's good population control and stops the destruction of more embryos than all stem cell research combined...

Leigh-Ann said...

I've no doubt that George Bush thinks if you stick an embryo under a microscope, you actually see a tiny baby waving at you.

asher said...

What ever happened to all that research on fetal tissue that Reagan was so against? I hate to bring up sound scientific things that were tried before but what ever became of all that research.

The fact is that no medical results have ever come from human embryo stem cell research. All positive results have come from adult stem cell research. I hate to throw facts at you.

However, if Bush didn't veto this bill we'd all be laughing at what a hypocrite he was. Amazing how you can have it both ways.

dbackdad said...

Hypocrisy. Interesting. Kinda like having Mr. Snow say that you are against this bill because you are against murder. Hasn't stopped Bush in Iraq or Gitmo.

Laura said...

Dback: Yeah, I saw the video clip of Bush. He can't justify the killing of innocent life even if it's for a greater good of saving lives... kinda like, oh, I don't know, a pre-emptive strike against another country costing thousands of lives and billions of dollars - all because of the potential (and actual) death and destruction caused by Saddam... hmmmmmmm

Laura said...

Oh and Asher: I am no expert in stem cell research and I'm guessing you aren't either. I'll take your word that more results have come from adult stem cells. But logically, wouldn't that be because more research is allowed to be done on adult stem cells and that the pool of embryonic stem cells with which research can be conducted is very limited. Expansion of that pool of stem cells may yet yield as many results as adult cells, given the chance to perform the research.

asher said...

Laura,

No, that's not at all logical. You can't compare the two. An adult stem cell cannot compare to an embryonic stem cell. One is developed and one has yet to show anything. The fact remains that no results have been gained by experimenting on embryonic stem cells.

What is more problematic is: if stem cell research poses such a possibility for cures, why hasn't any private enterprise looked into it? I mean, the profits might be enormous....cures for alzheimers, spinal injuries, diabetes and Pfizer couldn't care less?

Please explain.

dbackdad said...

Asher said, "... why hasn't any private enterprise looked into it" -- To do so they would have to have two completely independent labs (one private and one government funded). Not having government funding for stem cell research means not even for test tubes. There are many other research projects that labs undertake with the benefit of government and private funding intermixing. The stem cell ban prevents any intermixing.

A concerned Jewish Agnositc. said...

Please write something about the current conflict.

asher said...

dbackdad,
well that's about the best spin I've heard all day. I mean you wouldn't want the public and private sector searching for cure would you? One of them might actually come up with something!

The idea that stem cells will actually produce anything is speculative at best and impossible at worst. Again, I see you don't bring up fetal tissue matter as the great hope of the 80s. Well these things pan out over time

dbackdad said...

Asher,
When no one will argue with you, you seem to have a fun time arguing with yourself. If you would like to discuss fetal tissue matter, then why don't you? I'm not going to bring it up for you. I'm not afraid to admit that I don't know a lot aboout it. I was a teenager in the 80's. Fetal tissue matter, or Ronald Reagan, were the furthest things from my mind. Maybe Star Wars ... or baseball cards. :-)

Concerning my comment about federal funding, I'm not trying to spin anything. There are many reasons why federal funding is needed for embryonic stem cell research. Some listed here: International Society for Stem Cell Research.

You accuse us of having it both ways, " ... if Bush didn't veto this bill we'd all be laughing at what a hypocrite he was. Amazing how you can have it both ways." Who are you speaking for? I would not have criticized Bush for not vetoing this. That's ludicrous and I don't think anyone else here would. Let's keep our discussions here to what each of us believe instead of what we think the other believes.

Skcorefil said...

Other countries have federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. Korea made a big deal about making it an important initiative a couple years ago. So far, they have had advances using adult stem cells but their only embryonic break through ended up being something they had fabricated.

The US not funding what millions of Americans consider murder won't stop advances to be made elsewhere if they will be made and so far they haven't.

Half Sigma said...

It's hard to make a case how this helps Bush or Republicans politically, so this indicates that Bush actually BELIEVES the Christian stuff.

As a libertarian, Bush has betrayed me, because his economic policies haven't been any different than Clinton, and his primary agenda has been to promote Christianity.

Harriet Miers was appointed because she was a Born Again Christian. Luckily his own party rebelled and Bush had to appoint the much more qualified Alito, an intellectual conservative.