Stem Cell Research and Bush's Neochristianity

[Heleuiski]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5197372.stm


What do people think of Bush's stem cell research veto?


The veto - the first during six years of his administration - has delighted the president's core Christian conservative supporters but risks alienating more moderate republicans.

Scientists and senior Democrats sharply criticised the president's decision.

Iowa Democratic Senator Tom Harkin described it as "a shameful display of cruelty, hypocrisy and ignorance".

[PsiKik]

If the right wing "base" and president Bush really cared about the destruction of embryos they would be clamoring for an end to the fertility clinics who are estimated to be holding 400,000 embyros that will annually be destroyed since they are not needed.

These embryos, under the strict guidelines above, could instead be used to save lives.





http://bbsnews.net/article.php/20060719235640417

[NoahFence]

I'll tell you what I think.

FOLLOW THE MONEY

Who gets rich from this policy? Who benefits from a massive roadblock on stem cell research?

Let's see...not the energy companies...nor military suppliers...who else is Bush in bed with...AHHH! Pharmaceuticals...yesss...

"But wait!" you say. "Don't rich people want to live forever? Wouldn't they want access to this stunning new technology that might make daily pills obsolete, and cure things that pills seem only capable of mitigating?"

Why, yes, yes they might, at that...however, they're also fully capable of hopping a jet to Europe or Asia, who will undoubtedly surpass us in this field in short order.

Don't know if this is truth or not, but it's consistant, and I'm having difficulty poking holes in it.

[Heleuiski]

I'm not sure it's about the pharmaceutical money, I think it's more to do with Bush keeping in with his Bible bashing funders, so he's more concerned about the money pouring in to the Republican coffers.

Yes, let's save those little embryos while troops get blown up every day in Iraq.

Value human life?

Get real!

[NoahFence]

Matter of opinion I guess, but everything I've seen suggests that Bush and his ilk could give a rat's ass about Republican coffers. It's the businesses he represents whose coffers have been filling this whole time, and those are energy, military services, and drugs. Everything he's ever done can be followed to a significant pile of $$$ for one or all of those.

[booyalab]

Iowa Democratic Senator Tom Harkin described it as "a shameful display of cruelty, hypocrisy and ignorance".
Sure you can argue that it's hypocritical, but how the fuck is that a reason for stem cell research?
As for the cruelty accusation, it's only cruel if conservatives secretly value the life of a fetus as little their opponents, which is ridiculous.
The ignorance accusation is irrelevant since the conservative standpoint is a moral one, which only requires the most fundamental understanding of the dilemma.

[earwax]

Fascinating... So using these embryos for research is immoral, but throwing them in the garbage is ok.

Religious logic never ceases to amaze me.

[cafe]

I think destroying embryos for any reason is immoral. Though I'm not up to speed on the issue, I'm assuming this is about government funding of research on embryos that will lead to their destruction. It's not illegal to preform such research or to destroy one's own embryos. Bush isn't making it illegal. A decent portion of his base does not want their tax dollars going to something they believe to be immoral and, if not murder, something much akin to it. Why he is actually living up to a promise he made to that base is anyone's guess.

[Nighthawk]

I'm with NoahFence on this one ... follow the money.

[coffeezombie]

Yes, the embryos are being discarded anyway. This has nothing to do with the Christian Right caring about the ultimate fate of the embryos. They just don't want people experimenting with them. On the other hand, all the animals in the world can be killed if it advances science for them.

[libertarianjim]

I'm far more offended that this is his first veto. Rather than, say, some of the bloated appropriations bills that Congress has churned out.

[NoahFence]

I'm far more offended that this is his first veto. Rather than, say, some of the bloated appropriations bills that Congress has churned out.
LOL...those bills Congress churned out were on paper that already had his signature :P

[Zephyrus055]

LOL...those bills Congress churned out were on paper that already had his signature :P
NoahFence, I am grateful that you have reinforced my point made earlier in other threads that America is a plutocracy.

[Claverhouse]

... my point made earlier in other threads that America is a plutocracy.

Do tell.


Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Mr. Beef]

Sure you can argue that it's hypocritical, but how the fuck is that a reason for stem cell research?
As for the cruelty accusation, it's only cruel if conservatives secretly value the life of a fetus as little their opponents, which is ridiculous.
The ignorance accusation is irrelevant since the conservative standpoint is a moral one, which only requires the most fundamental understanding of the dilemma.



I completely agree with you on the issue of hypocrisy....this has little to do with the validity of the decision. However, I would disagree with your assessment of the "cruelty" of the decision. Your argument is based on the false premise that "conservatives must have made the decision for reasons other than moral concern" in order for the decision to be considered cruel. This premise, however is false, as the motivations of the decision-maker do not affect the morality of the decision itself. Many people would consider the decision immoral because it is placing higher value on the lives of thousands of mindless organisms than the lives of millions of sentient human beings. I know I know, "you can't put a value on human life", but you sort of can, actually. The situation is basically like this: terminate a number of fetuses in order to save a larger number of people, or let a bunch of people die and save a smaller number of fetuses (which are likely not conscious beings). If we assume that intentionally letting someone die is as wrong as killing someone, then it's just a matter of math. But, as morality is relative, the issue is more complicated, but this is irrelevant to my argument. Case-in-point, it's not neccessarily NOT a cruel decision like you claim since your premise is false. The ignorance point is relevant because what the president decided isn't necessarily moral. The Republican standpoint is a moral one, so the president should make moral decisions. But who's to say this was the more moral of the two options?

[PsiKik]

This veto is nothing more than an effort to give a boost to Bush's religious/right wing/conservative base. Simple as that.

[Spartan26]

Actually, I don't think this bill would've gotten so far if Big Pharma wasn't to stand to make billions on this. They're already equipt with the infastructure to house the research facilities, complete the clinical trials and have databases of research on applicable condtions already completed, etc. Even for genetic research companies making new inroads, Big Pharma would have the capital to buy in. There would be laws that I bet would be updated. Certain areas w/in genetic research and/or treatment I should probably say is outside of the FDA's jurisdiction, (at least there were some things a couple of years ago when I was doing some research for a project). So you could have a "dietary supplement" that would be as innocuous as treating male pattern baldness, or erectile disfunction as a result of genetic research, not necessarily stem cell research, mind you, but I guarantee the weight of Big Pharma and it's henchmen of the FDA would be on congress and on the courts to do away with them.

Last year, or maybe year before, there was a big bill that was passed for genetic and stem cell research to take place in California via massive funding/tax incentives and the like. Only briefly was there any discussion, just media commentators, about the possibility of federal laws or court orders being sought to upend the measure. I couldn't even tell you what's happened since then.

[Heleuiski]

He cares about embryos but what about all the children suffering from asthma due to his blinkered approach on pollution and global warming?

What a prick.

[Nighthawk]

Another big step backward in healthcare. Meanwhile, there rest of the world continues to surpass the USA in this, and many other areas.

[NoahFence]

Maybe someone should propose that we start working on Arab fetuses?


NoahFence, I am grateful that you have reinforced my point made earlier in other threads that America is a plutocracy.

Ahh but this is the United States. We're a plutocracy for four years...then we fill the hat again. Those in control now are a small minority and will be gone soon.

[NoahFence]

This veto is nothing more than an effort to give a boost to Bush's religious/right wing/conservative base. Simple as that.

You, sir, failed your will save. Don't believe the hype. Watch what he does, not what he says. Morality issues are the red flag he waves at the very angry bull of the common American. Follow the money.