Now that the Prez has vetoed government funding for embryonic stem cell research, I think that opponents of embryonic stem cell research should band together and bum rush fertilization clinics and rescue those embryos before they are discarded. I’m not sure what they are going to do with the embryos, but since they shouldn’t be used for research to cure diabetes, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries, maybe they can find something useful for them, rather than BEING DISCARDED and THROWN AWAY. Sheeesh….
July 19, 2006...5:37 pm
Rescue, or one man’s discard is another man’s cure
Jump to Comments
11 Comments
July 19, 2006 at 9:32 pm
Yup.
July 19, 2006 at 11:42 pm
I’ve always supported stem cell research, but having just been diagnosed with diabetes, it’s a personal issue now as well.
Shruberry’s veto of this bill underscores yet again his total disregard for what the vast majority of Americans want.
July 20, 2006 at 5:39 pm
John, Your “sheesh” at the end of this post displays real contempt for those who disagree with you on this issue. I understand that you see no danger or problem with, and in fact see major benefits coming from, the use of several thousand “leftover” embryos for medical research. I get it that you weigh the needs of the living more heavily than the rights of microscopic human beings. I get that you don’t see this as a slippery slope issue. You’re convinced that future generations will not take this step as justification for the use of other soon-to-be-discarded people for excellent medical causes.
But do you think you could reserve a little respect for those of us who see red flags all over the place when we look at this issue? “First they came for the leftover embryos and I did nothing, because I wasn’t a leftover embryo. Then they came for . . . ”
The statement put out by the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations, a group which SUPPORTS governmental funding of embryonic stem cell research, might serve as a model for you. They said, “We recognize that those who oppose this research and this legislation do so upon the basis of deeply and sincerely held moral beliefs. We appreciate the President’s position on this matter which allows this research to proceed when privately funded and his principled reservations against allowing taxpayer funds to support it.” The organization goes on to “respectfully disagree” with the president’s position.
All I hear from you, John, (and from some of your commenters) is disrespectful disagreement.
July 20, 2006 at 6:18 pm
Margaret,
You pointed to an example by 10 percent of the Jewish population.
The Reform adn Conservative movement strongly support stem cell research, and Haddasah, the women’s Zionist organization, has a strong leter writing campaign and calls to politicians who oppose stem cell research. In fact, Haddasah Hosipals across Israel are leaders in the field of stem cell research.
BTW, hello Margaret! It’s nice to meet John’s sister and glad to see you’re blogging, too. Mark Rose(ultra conservative) and I often do a civilized “Crossfire” on his blog, and it’s really good to see you and your bro doing this, too.
Do you also live in Nashville?
July 20, 2006 at 6:20 pm
PS
I’m not going to fix the typos on the previous post.
I apologize for them, but the eyes are going.
July 20, 2006 at 7:11 pm
Hey Margaret- don’t be dissing Newscoma or Sharon! I happen to know Sharon personally and Newscoma by blogging and they are both respectful people who are quite civil and level-headed.
Sharon - my sister Margaret, who despite what she says in her comment, I respect mightily (and with whom I also disagree mightily) lives in St. Louis. I thought it would be fun if she joined in the blogging. If I had the money and the energy, I’d set up a deal like the Moores, where I could be on the left and she could be on the right, but the amount of money and effort are way beyond what I wanna put into the blog.
Margaret - my sheesh was a sheesh of perplexity and disbelief. I really think the Senate and the House framed this issue perfectly. I don’t want embryos created for the sheer purpose of research any more than you do, but it just seems such a waste. Like I said before, I think we can control this and I don’t think it has to be a slippery slope. It seems like the slope angle is on your side of the issue because if you follow your position to the logical conclusion, we would pass a law similiar to Italy’s that says a woman has to implant every embryo created for fertilization purposes, regardless if they are damaged or diseased (of course, Italy now has liberal abortion laws, so, go figure).
I once again have to wonder why a discarded embryo seems to carry more weight than the destruction of human life engendered both by Hussein and the aftermath of his downfall.
July 20, 2006 at 8:05 pm
John,
i’ve been trying to get a “Crossfire” type blog going for some time, mainly because I was the only liberal willing to do it.
Now that you’re back, and with the addition of Sean Braisted, we could pull it off.
Either way, I think it’s cool you’re doing this with your sister.
Welcome, Margaret!
July 21, 2006 at 12:05 am
Sharon,
Thanks for your kind welcome! I’m sorry if my broad-brushed swipe at what I considered disrespect painted you unfairly.
I’m sorry to hear about your diabetes and hope that you’re able to live a long and full life despite it.
BTW, I think you misunderstood my point about UJOC. They, apparently along with organizations representing the rest of the Jewish population, support ESC research. I just appreciated the fact that they still consider people on the opposite side of the issue to be reasonable and driven by serious moral and ethical concerns.
BTW, have you read what President Bush said after he vetoed the bill? You can find it at http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ODVlZWQwYzViMWVhMTRkODhiOTI4NmU1YzJlNmVlNmU=
After reading it, do you still think he just did it arbitrarily, in total disregard of what the vast majority of Americans want, or because he sincerely believes it would be wrong to do otherwise? If his action is indeed as unpopular as you think, perhaps that’s evidence of a desire to do what’s right regardless of the political consequences. That seems to me to make it an even more admirable act.
July 21, 2006 at 6:40 am
I don’t think I ever said that Bush was being a political animal by vetoing the stem cell research bill. In fact, to the contrary, I posted a comment on MCO’s blog, that if he going to make a decision on this issue based on political concerns, he would have signed the bill.
My argument is not that Bush is unethical or that you and the minority of Americans who think that embryonic stem cell research should not be funded by the feds are to be disrespected.
I just think you, (and Bush) are wrong. Obviously you think that I and many other people are wrong on this issue as well. Not sure where the disrespect angle is here. I’m sure the republic will survive our disagreement.
There are two parts of Bush’s ‘veto speech’ that need to be mentioned. One area that should be challenged is his assertation that the stem lines he approved previously are adequate for further research. Most scientists and doctors (including Senator Frist) believe the lines are ‘played’/worn out/pretty much at the end of the ‘line’.
Secondly, he mentions destruction of human embryos. This is the angle that I just don’t get. Many of these embryos ARE going to be destroyed. These embryos were not created for the purpose of research or stem cell exploitation. But, they are going to be discarded, nonetheless. I know you disagree on this point, but can’t you understand my frustration at the fact that something I consider to be incredibly useful is going to be tossed away and destroyed based on the fact that our President doesn’t want embroyos to be used for this purpose? I see irony here…
I don’t feel contempt towards you or anyone who disagrees with me on this issue. I do feel sad and perplexed and frustrated.
July 21, 2006 at 3:09 pm
Hey John, this commenting thing is harder than it looks. I was responding to Sharon in my last comment, not you. I know you never said anything about Bush’s political motivation for vetoing the bill.
Back to what you did say: I’m glad to hear that you just feel “sad, perplexed and frustrated” rather than contemptuous of yor opponents on this issue, but that’s not how it sounded. Are you aware of the fact that you come across as a tinge on the cynical and sarcastic side?! I know, I know - that’s your MO, and it’s part of your charm - but in this particular post, you sounded as though you thought that anyone who is against ESC research is an idiot (or worse) for not wanting to use PERFECTLY GOOD embryos to cure SICK PEOPLE, for cryin’ out loud - as if there are no legitimate arguments on the other side.
July 21, 2006 at 4:53 pm
sans cynisme et sarcasme, je ne suis rien
It took me a long time to figure this out (and i’m not being sarcastic or funny - maybe dumb..), but if you are responding to more than one person in a comment or responding to a specific person in a comment, it is helpful to start your comment with:
John, you ignorant slut..or
Sharon, You must not be as ignorant as my brother..
or some such (c;
Leave a Reply