As I mentioned in another message, he and his posse have some sort of twisted ideas about in vitro fertilization. They've never heard of otherwise happy, married couples using the method when one party or the other has problems.
I vaguely remember what you're talking about in the Mary Cheney thread, but I thought that was about artificial insemination instead of in vitro fertilization. OTOH, I may not have read all of the posts in that thread, or may be misremembering...
Cathy
Either way, their ideas are really hallucinations.
No Cathy, I'm just saying that there wasn't any stem cell funding before Bush allowed for it. Without the support that Bush allowed, there would be no stem cell research with government monies. Not to say that someone else wouldn't have approved of it, but it is to say that it is intellectually dishonest to say that Bush impeded it.
This was not the first time fake Christians meddled in reproductive issues. If they hadn't caused death with their meddling, it would be a yawn.
The concern was using embryos beyond the certain count allowed, or for better clarification, what was on hand. With that said, stem cells from umbilical cords also were used but not with much fanfare. I tend to believe President Bush has acted responsibly on this matter. Recently, news about a little girl, her parents with the help of hospital doctors, performed a mutilation on the little girl so she will forever remain a little girl. It's called the Peter Pan effect. It turned my stomach to read they got away with it. My gawd, there's sane alternatives. It's really getting to the point doctors will do anything for money and notoriety. mark_
The content of the consultations between patient and care giver (in this case Planned Parenthood) differ from the content between pro abortion lobby and lawmakers. One is subjective and the other is objective in nature. mark_
No it wasn't. Bush's ban was for all embryos, including those left over from in vitro fertilization.
Hardly. He acted out of ignorance, like the rest of the ignorant religious right wing pricks.
Then you should volunteer your time and money to help care for her. If you're not willing to do that, then shut your pompous self rightous pie hole, 'cause you have no idea what those people are dealing with and have no buisiness butting in.
What about his not wanting surplus in vitro fertilization embryos to be used for stem cell research? By not allowing their use, it boils down to him saying that he'd rather they be discarded than used for a positive purpose. To me, this makes *no* sense.
Cathy
Then you should volunteer your time and money to help care for her. If you're not willing to do that, then shut your pompous self rightous pie hole, 'cause you have no idea what those people are dealing with and have no buisiness butting in.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- For two years I made it my business by sitting in on a legal ethics board. When I say there are alternatives, I truely mean there are alternatives. mark_
How I acquire knowledge about this subject is through additional medical channels. Much of what we see and hear through public announcements are sometimes slanted to make a point. Or, geared for an audience with an average attention span.
I'm responding to your response simply to let you know I've read yours. Thanks.
Well goody for you.
Ok, then read up on their situation, the condition of the girl, the care needed for that girl, what is required of time and money to care for the girl, and lets hear your more ethical solution.
And that you can't answer her question cause you don't have a clue to what your talking about.
Maybe they should have used the Teri Shiavo method. That seemed to work well to remove the problem.
The crux of the matter is:
At stake was whether research on cells taken from human embryos ? considered by scientists to be the most promising approach to developing potential treatments or cures for dozens of diseases ? should be underwritten with taxpayer funds.
The debate raises passions since the research typically involves the destruction of frozen embryos created for in vitro fertilization, which ensures fierce opposition from anti-abortion lawmakers and like-minded constituents who believe their taxes should not fund such research. ³I simply believe it¹s morally wrong to create human life to destroy it for research,² said GOP conservative Mike Pence of Indiana, echoing Bush¹s rationale for his veto in July. ³This debate is not about whether research that involves the destruction of human embryos should be legal. This debate is about who pays for it.²
What problem? A man fulfilling his wife's wish not to be kept artificially alive? Like 99% of all people would want. I don't get your analogy?
This makes no sense. He says, and you quote: "I simply believe it=C2=B9s morally wrong to create human life to destroy it for research,=C2=B2 said GOP conservative Mike Pence of Indiana, echoing Bush=C2=B9s rationale for his veto in July" then you go on to quote "This debate is not about whether research that involves the destruction of human embryos should be legal. This debate is about who pays for it.=C2=B2"
What a bunch of bull. Are you saying now that the debate is only about the funding of medical research at all?
You know exactly what I mean. Teri Schiavo was too much trouble for her husband to deal with anymore even though he had moved on to a new woman and kids. Her parents wanted custody of her and were willing to assume the burden. He wasn't going to give up legal custody even though he had given up emotional custody. I also don't believe he was performing her wishes, more like his own wishes.
This child was going to be a bigger burden for the parents than she already was so they decided to prevent her body from growing anymore by removing body parts and drugging her up. The argument used by the anti-save-Schiavo crowd was that she was a vegetable and was going to die anyway. It would be better to just take care of it now. Well, the same argument could be used for the little girl. She's just a vegetable and has no quality of life. If she could talk she would want the same thing, just kill her and everyone will be rid of that burden.
Now your just showing your pompous ass holier than thou side. You have no idea what his motives were, any more than anybody in that situation. In other words, its none of your's or any other pruitan asshole's F'ing business to interfere in other peoples difficult personal problems.
And she did. Isn't that what God wanted?
It would be better to just take care of it now. Well, the
Well I guess if God wanted her to live, she'd be able to feed herself. But then they are choosing to give her as good of a quality of life as they are able to give. You got a problem with that, then you adopt her and quit passing jugdment.
Teri Schiavo's parents were willing to adopt her.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.