Democrats sat on their hands during this section of President Bush's State of the Union address last night...
On matters of science and life, we must trust in the innovative spirit of medical researchers and empower them to discover new treatments while respecting moral boundaries. In November, we witnessed a landmark achievement when scientists discovered a way to reprogram adult skin cells to act like embryonic stem cells. This breakthrough has the potential to move us beyond the divisive debates of the past by extending the frontiers of medicine without the destruction of human life. So we are expanding funding for this type of ethical medical research.
How in the world could anyone oppose that, except, of course, if fixated on death?
Meanwhile, almost everyone in the house gave him a standing o when calling for a ban on human cloning:
And as we explore promising avenues of research, we must also ensure that all life is treated with the dignity it deserves. So I call on the Congress to pass legislation that bans unethical practices such as the buying, selling, patenting, or cloning of human life.
But liberals were lying. They only appeared to support a ban on cloning because the American public does. Mark my words, no ban on human cloning will come from this Congress unless it is a sham bill outlawing "reproductive" human cloning but not "therapeutic" human cloning.
Cloning is the only possible means to make human embryo experimentation work. It is the only theoretical way to provide an exact match between donor and recipient.
Right on, Jill. Unfortunately, there have indeed been phony bans on human cloning that we have seen those in power attempt to pass, like the Feinstein/Hatch S. 812 bill, which redefines human cloning to how they see fit. I can respect and tolerate different ethical concerns, but I am quite shocked by the downright and irrefutable deception that is sometimes shown by those pushing for so-called therapeutic cloning.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at January 29, 2008 3:18 PM
Be careful with your definitions, here. If banning "therapeutic" cloning unintentionally includes the process of cultivating stem cells from skin cells, you have sort of defeated yourselves.Posted by: Ray at January 29, 2008 3:23 PM
FREE AMERICA! VOTE RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT IN 2008!Posted by: Anonymous at January 29, 2008 3:25 PM
I hear ya Ray. But I think by therapeutic cloning, one usually means experimenting with the product of somatic cell nuclear transfer (which is an embryo) in order to cultivate the cells to help someone. So I guess technically speaking, it's the SCNT that pro-lifers would want a ban on. It's not the extraction of the cells that anyone has a problem with, it's the fact that when you extract the cells from an embryo, it is destroyed. God love you, Ray. Hey, BTW, I never heard about your baby... you must have had your child by now, ehh?Posted by: Bobby Bambino at January 29, 2008 3:31 PM
Hey Bobby, my boy is 9 weeks old, born at home in late November. I haven't had an uninterrupted night of sleep since, but other than that all is well. He is holding his head up fairly confidently, now, and sharing smiles with him is a joy. How is it going with yours?
PS Some of you folks start yours out young with protesting and such, and so do we...he was a hit at a Roe vs. Wade anniversary celebration last week.Posted by: Ray at January 29, 2008 3:44 PM
Ray, I'm so happy for you. I guess our babies are only two weeks apart. It's such a blessing to smile back and forth with the her, too. But yeah, turns out that sleep is indeed overrated. Fantastic.Posted by: Bobby Bambino at January 29, 2008 3:50 PM
Ray, 3:23p, legislators aren't stupid.
And congrats on taking your baby to a Roe celebration, something to write in his baby book, I'm sure.Posted by: Jill Stanek at January 29, 2008 3:57 PM
In November, we witnessed a landmark achievement when scientists discovered a way to reprogram adult skin cells to act like embryonic stem cells. This breakthrough has the potential to move us beyond the divisive debates of the past by extending the frontiers of medicine without the destruction of human life.
The "landmark achievement" he speaks of actually used embryonic cells from two aborted pregnancies.
DON'T RELY ON CUTTING-EDGE TECHNOLOGY FROM A MAN WHO SAYS "NUC-U-LAR."
(You might risk the life of an "em-by-ro.")
I am informed by reliable sources who live in Texas that this is a regional dialectic pronunciation. Everybody in Texas says it that way. I agree that it's funny, but it is not indicative of ignorance.Posted by: EH at January 29, 2008 5:23 PM
As a youngster growing up in a Democrat household it has been painful watching the Democrats self-destruct ever since. That they sat on their hands means either their hatred for "W" is so great they cannot conceed that he was right on this issue, or that they are willing to go to the mat in their willingness to destroy living human embryos even when promising alternatives will likely be available. If the Democrat's were not so beholden to the extreme left they would have celebrated the breakthrough. It is interesting that those who said that Bush was against science when he vetoed embryonic stem cell research monies, are themselves against the science that gave us this breakthough.Posted by: Jerry N at January 29, 2008 5:51 PM
Jerry, the Dems are not NEARLY as far left as they could be. I know people who far more liberal, myself included.
Many of my conservative friends (well I guess they'd be considered "mostly conservative") justify some (what would be) incredibly liberal ideas with conservative reasoning.
Guess it all depends on how you define the two camps, is it their stances or reasoning behind the stances? hmm...Posted by: Dan at January 29, 2008 6:01 PM
who far more liberal = who ARE far more liberalPosted by: Dan at January 29, 2008 6:01 PM
And congrats on taking your baby to a Roe celebration, something to write in his baby book, I'm sure.
I'm every bit as proud as those parents who bring their kids out to harass women in front of clinics, if not more so, Jill.Posted by: Ray at January 29, 2008 10:08 PM
I'm sorry, guys, but that research that produced "non-embryonic stem cells" isn't completely without ethical debate. Let me explain....while the cells produced were not ESC, the process in their transformation included human fetal cells- HEK, or human embryonic kidney. The published research papers from the very scientists on the project(which I've read), camouflage the name of these cells (whether purposely or not I do not know). I could send the paper to you if you'd like. These HEK cells are cultivated for multitudes of different types of research, and in this case, they were used as "factories" for the production of viruses used in transmitting the transforming "factors" into the cells desired to become pluripotent/totipotent. I won't go into too much detail...but it's really fascinating.
Actually, it might cause you some distress, but the HEK cells used for over thirty years for untold amounts of research were taken from two electively aborted fetuses- and the use of HEK cells is not likely to stop. They are useful, easy to work with, and many of the biggest breakthroughs of the past few decades in medical science have been helped along by them. Sad but true...many of your medicines and treatments have been developed by techniques with HEK's.Posted by: Lyssie at January 30, 2008 7:38 AM
Nuke-U-Ler, Jew-Leh-Ree, Chim-Ley, Ree-La-Ter (for "realtor").... Auuuugghh!!
And what's with the changes I see and hear in the media? Used to be "Joe Blow is in the hospital tonight," and now it's often "is in hospital tonight," as is said in the British Isles....?
Formerly, it'd be "Jane Doe pled 'guilty' to charges of so-and-so," and now it's often "pleaded...."
I know both are correct, but why change now? Is there no respect for tradition?
DougPosted by: Doug at January 31, 2008 6:15 PM