Thursday, July 20, 2006

Stem-Cell Research

President Bush exercised his first veto by rejecting legislation to expand federally supported embryonic stem cell research. He was among just seven presidents who had never vetoed a piece of legislation — all of the others served before 1881.

In an attempt to override the veto, the House voted 235 to 193, 51 votes short of the two-thirds majority required.

He said the vetoed bill "would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others. It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect." He went to say each child on the stage he was delivering his speech from, "began his or her life as a frozen embryo that was created for in vitro fertilization but remained unused after the fertility treatments were complete. . . . These boys and girls are not spare parts."

President Bush said taxpayers should not support research on surplus embryos at fertility clinics, even if they offer possible medical breakthroughs and are slated for disposal.

This is a law against the federal government spending tax dollars on stem-cell research. It is not a law against private companies or organizations doing this research. This is where most American's fail to grasp the story -- they are caught up in the spin.
"Those families who wake up every morning to face another day with a deadly disease or a disability will not forget this decision by the president to stand in the way of sound science and medical research," said Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-IL.)

Some conservatives also criticized the veto. "I am pro-life, but I disagree with the president's decision," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN), a heart surgeon who is weighing a 2008 presidential run. "Given the potential of this research and the limitations of the existing [human embryonic stem cell] lines eligible for federally funded research, I think additional lines should be made available."
The federal government is not required, nor should it be required to solve all of our problems.

4 comments:

Reach Upward said...

As the general age of our population increases as a result of declining birthrates, look for the majority (i.e. the older folks) to increasingly take advantage of the minority (i.e. the younger folks or the unborn) in a pitch to improve their own lives.

We are doing it with Social Security and Medicare. What is to stop us from using the unborn for spare parts?

As generations compete with each other for resources, countries like the Netherlands make it increasingly palatable to dispose of those that consume a disproportionately higher percentage of resources (i.e. the infirm, the elderly, and the disabled) via euthanasia. Some want our country to follow suit, and some states are doing so.

Welcome to the brave, new world.

Anonymous said...

Here are some links that I believe will be interested

Anonymous said...

Here are some links that I believe will be interested

Anonymous said...

Looks nice! Awesome content. Good job guys.
»