The reason that Bush vetoed the stem cell bill


Recommended Posts

  • Founder and Owner

I admire President Bush for vetoing the stem cell bill. I didn't realize that the bill was for purposely creating embryos just so they could be destroyed for the purpose of embryonic stem cell research. I don't believe in doing that. Congress could have passed bills that other congressmen presented that would have increased research funding for stem cells that Bush said that he would have passed. Congress is playing political games! AGAIN! :furious:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been following this confusing story too and i think the Prez and his minions have been deliberately confusing H.R 810 too. It obvious some are very confused here too.

I think the info in the Times report is fairly accurate and to the issues. I listened and read Bush's remaiks on the veto.and unfortunately I do not believe very much of what he says anymore, especially in regards to this issue.

It too bad there aren't the votes to override the veto. Maybe there is??

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Founder and Owner

I watched the press conference myself and heard what he said. The bill, in fact, included the destroying of embryos for the sole purpose of stem cell research. That is pretty clear to me. You can blame Bush but it is not confusing that he said that he would pass a bill for the increased funding for stem cell research if it did not include the creating embryos just to destroy them for research.

 

The spending on stem cell research is slated to reach 20 billion dollars by 2010. It is currently at 2 billion dollars.

 

There is no ban on other types of stem cell research; cells that come from the umbilical chord or adult stem cells. Why isn't that reported?

 

Nobody else here has said if they believe that it is okay to purposely create an embryo just to destroy it for its stem cells. I would like to hear someone agree to doing this. How about it? Who here doesn't care if this is done?

 

Did you know that there is the potential for other stem cells to behave just like embryonic stem cells and that Bush wanted to fund research for this so that there would not have to be a debate over creating embryos just to destroy them for stem cell research? Did you see this fact reported?

 

Do you actually think that the article that Sandy put in her post was not written with a specific purpose in mind? Have you ever heard of a persuasive article? There was only one sentence devoted to the fact that embryos would have to be destroyed in order to perform stem cell research. All that fluff to obscure the real reason for why embryonic stem cell research is not allowed. Where is the substance for that argument. I agree that you cannot put every argument in one article but one little sentence!

 

The other problem is that the liberal media does not like Bush so they spin the facts to confuse everybody. This country is its own worst enemy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard on the news that they wanted to use embroys that were already frozen and would never be used. these from people who had them frozen for in vitro fertizilation, but so many in storage now, already frozen. That would be wasted otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's correct Bonnie. That's all this legislation would permit..only those embryonic stem cells that are already in existence and not going to be used and are otherwise deterioratring and will be destroyed. that's the facts.. Not some hype that Bush puts out and is believed and gets repeated over and over until people think it's the truth. Not some liberal media spin just the factual legislation. Maybe we should read it before we start telling everyone to support it and then change opionion on the fly. And if they choose to do so or not, then it's not someone elses opinion that we go blindly folloowing.

 

Pertinent Text of HR 810:

 

b) ETHICAL REQUIREMENTS.--Human embryonic stem cells

shall be eligible for use in any research conducted or supported

by the Secretary if the cells meet each of the following:

``(1) The stem cells were derived from human embryos

that have been donated from in vitro fertilization clinics, were

created for the purposes of fertility treatment, and were in

excess of the clinical need of the individuals seeking such

treatment.

``(2) Prior to the consideration of embryo donation and

through consultation with the individuals seeking fertility treat-

ment, it was determined that the embryos would never be

implanted in a woman and would otherwise be discarded.

``(3) The individuals seeking fertility treatment donated

the embryos with written informed consent and without

receiving any financial or other inducements to make the donation.

 

 

Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:Clap-Hands: well said STEVE.....any news with a New York byline attached to it can most times be seen as self-serving.....

 

but their cry is "its in the public's interest" yeah right if itREALLY< REALLY was you'd keep your yap shut....

 

be honest its for the bottom line...most papers would sell out our safety for their profits....obviously their struggling because people are not interested in their quality (or should I say lack of integrity in reporting)or feel their angle/slant of most stories is off kilter...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Founder and Owner

Both those newspapers are run by the liberal media, Sandy! You should watch Fox News. They don't present a story without someone representing both sides and then they leave it to the viewer to decide which side to go with.

 

Bonnie, whatever you heard is not true! I watched every word out of Bush's mouth and what he said was that embryos were being created just so that they could be destroyed for stem cell research. There was no mention of using existing frozen embryos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Steve,

 

It comes as no surprise to me that your President has used his veto on this subject.

 

The reasons appear to be complex and somewhat misinformed but the words of Winston Churchill come to mind "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" which puts this, I did it for you into context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Mr. Bush were to enter a burning room and in one corner was a three old child and in another corner was a dish with five embryonic stem cells and Bush had time to only save the child or the dish with the five embryonic stem cells, which would he save?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seagull173

 

I believe that President Bush would give his own life trying to save both. My question to you is what would you do under the same circumstances?

Remember, that three year old child was an embryo at one time.

 

Vi

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would save the child. Since there is only two options available, your choice (suicide) for Mr. Bush is not an option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Founder and Owner

Let's stay on topic!

 

This debate is not about Bush's politics but is about the reason why he vetoed the stem cell bill. I don't want this thread to stray from the topic that I started because this is not letting our discussion go anywhere! They only serve to hijack this thread and might have to be removed!

 

My point was that he vetoed the bill for a good reason if you believe that it is not right to create embryos just to destroy them for stem cell research.

 

He would have passed a bill to increase funding for the research of making other types stem cells to behave similar to embryonic stem cells but it was not adopted.

 

My theory is that congress is playing games with politics and they are the ones who we should really be upset with. This does not have to be something that gets tied up with politics.

 

Congress needs to submit a bill that would get the ball rolling. Not something that they knew ahead of time that would never get passed! Do you think for one moment that Congress thought that this bill was going to go through the President? They knew darn well that it wouldn't and they played the game anyway at the cost to the American people.

 

This is what I am upset about! :2cents:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are right, Steve, and I apologize. I do agree with your theory.

 

Vi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve,

 

“if you believe that it is not right to create embryos just to destroy them for stem cell research.”

 

I don’t know of anyone suggesting, inferring, and/or advocating this. Do you think there are people, organized or otherwise, combining human cells (male sperm-female egg), for the express purpose of using them (destroying ) for stem cell research? That’s ludicrous and I don’t think anyone here or anywhere thinks that.

 

“making other types stem cells to behave similar to embryonic stem cells”

I am not sure that is possible. Do you knowsomething these scienctists don’t? I think the research community would rather use any other cell option if it was available, don’t you?

 

“Congress needs to submit a bill that would get the ball rolling.”

That’s what this bill did. I won’t bother to print parts of it again.. Go to a source you are comfortable with and read the HB 810. There is nothing in the admendment that even suggests that anyone wants to produce embryonic stem cells for the purpose of destroying them for research.

 

Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Founder and Owner

Tom, did you even see what the President said when he vetoed the stem cell bill?

 

It was televised and I watched it. He, in fact said, ,et al, the stem cell bill is being vetoed because it includes embryos being created only so they can be destroyed for the purpose of stem cell research.

 

He was talking about taking a frozen embryo that could potentially be turned into life and destroying it for stem cell research. There are 400,000 frozen embryos currently in storage. Bonnie, I apologize for saying what you heard is wrong.

 

Everybody is upset because there is the potential that they could be used for so many cures but they don't actually know. Do you understand how many uses they want to use embryonic stem cells for? Embryonic stem cells are supposed to be so great because they have so much potential!

 

I am not against using embryonic stem cells that would otherwise be discarded but I am against creating them specifically so they can be destroyed for stem cell research. It is my moral belief that this would be wrong and I agree with the President for vetoing the bill for this reason.

 

I would not doubt that he also foresaw the potential of this happening. Research of this magnitude could possibly go on forever. I am just guessing that he thought of this but this would be the only thing that I am against.

 

 

The president specifically, and CLEARLY IN ENGLISH, said that he would have approved funding of research to find out if other stem cells can behave like embryonic stem cells.

 

How do you know what can and cannot be done with stem cells? That is what research is for.

 

I am no scientist but I worked with them in a laboratory for years, as an engineer. It was not a medical research laboratory but I was taught the same principles that are used in any field. The scientific principle is that you start with a hypothesis. A research study is necessary to prove or disprove that hypothesis. Anything is possible and I am not ready to rule anything out at this point.

 

The President would not have stated that he would have approved the funding to research whether other stem cells can behave like embryonic stem cells unless his scientific advisory community suggested that it be researched. Maybe, science would have to think outside of the boxing but that is not something new to science.

 

I am not making up what I heard and saw with my own ears and eyes. Anybody that knows me will know that I am not the type of person who says things that are not true. What I am saying here when I started this thread was not my opinion nor is something that I heard or read. This is first hand knowledge. There is no heresay .

 

Sorry that you cannot accept the facts.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Founder and Owner

This is an excerpt from HR 810 from the Library of Congress

 

SEC. 2. HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH.

 

Part H of title IV of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 289 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 498C the following:

 

`SEC. 498D. HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH.

 

`(a) In General- Notwithstanding any other provision of law (including any regulation or guidance), the Secretary shall conduct and support research that utilizes human embryonic stem cells in accordance with this section (regardless of the date on which the stem cells were derived from a human embryo) .

 

`(b) Ethical Requirements- Human embryonic stem cells shall be eligible for use in any research conducted or supported by the Secretary if the cells meet each of the following:

`(1) The stem cells were derived from human embryos that have been donated from in vitro fertilization clinics, were created for the purposes of fertility treatment, and were in excess of the clinical need of the individuals seeking such treatment.

 

`(2) Prior to the consideration of embryo donation and through consultation with the individuals seeking fertility treatment, it was determined that the embryos would never be implanted in a woman and would otherwise be discarded.

 

`(3) The individuals seeking fertility treatment donated the embryos with written informed consent and without receiving any financial or other inducements to make the donation.

 

 

The area that is in italics speaks of the 800,000 frozen embryos, Tom!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Tom, I agree with you. Nothing in the HR 810 bill even remotely suggests harvesting newly created embryonic stem cells for experimentation. In fact, I believe there was an accompanying bill addressing that very issue...

 

If all else fails, us liberal Californians, with our liberal press, TV, culture and lifestyle, would love to have you here. Arnie put his money where his mouth is instead of panding to some conservative coalition ...

 

James

 

State loans $150 million to stem cell effort

By Kevin Yamamura -- Bee Capitol Bureau

Published 1:39 pm PDT Thursday, July 20, 2006

 

A day after President Bush vetoed legislation to expand federally-funded stem-cell programs, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Thursday directed a $150 million bridge loan to California's stem-cell institute, attempting to counter any message sent by the Republican president.

California voters approved a $3 billion stem-cell initiative in November 2004, but the state has been unable to issue bonds because of legal challenges filed by religious and taxpayers groups. In the interim, the state has raised funding for the stem-cell agency, the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine, by selling as much as $50 million in bond anticipation notes to philanthropists and organizations.

 

 

The Republican governor's action Thursday added another $150 million in bridge funding for the CIRM, which will go toward studies at existing state research institutions and may be available within several months, according to Zach Hall, the institute's president.

The $150 million loan is backed by the state's general fund and would be repaid assuming the state overcomes its legal challenges and starts selling $3 billion in stem-cell bonds. Schwarzenegger's communications director, Adam Mendelsohn, said Thursday that the governor ultimately believes the bond sale will occur. An Alameda County judge in April upheld the stem-cell program, though opponents have appealed.

 

Schwarzenegger backed the stem-cell initiative, Proposition 71, in 2004. Mendelsohn denied that the Republican governor was trying to use the $150 million loan to create political distance from the Republican president, who is unpopular in California.

 

"The veto sent the wrong message to the nation and the world that stem cell research is not important, and the governor felt it was important to send the opposite message," Mendelsohn said.

 

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides accused Schwarzenegger of political opportunism. He also took credit for leading efforts as state treasurer to authorize the $200 million in bridge money that included the $150 million tapped Thursday by Schwarzenegger.

 

"Today's action is another gubernatorial campaign smokescreen to cloud the memory of California voters that it was Arnold Schwarzenegger who campaigned for President Bush in Ohio and helped put him back into office," Angelides said in a statement. "For the past year, while I was fighting for immediate funding for the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine, the Governor failed to lift a finger to stand up to the anti-research activists who thwarted the will of the voters and blocked Proposition 71."

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve,

 

I seriously doubt that anyone here is suggesting that you don't know what you heard the president say about the bill he vetoed and if they do doubt it, the text of his speeches are easily found with White House press releases like those at this link: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20060719-3.html

 

What people are questioning---judging from what I read up above---is whether or not President Bush and his political advisers are deliberately miss-representing H.B. 810 in order to pander to their main financial base, the Religous Right.

 

 

Sandy,

 

To me, there are way too many ethical questions regarding stem cell research that need to be debated, agreed upon and spelled out in black and white before we rush into something that could seriously change life on this planet, if the powers of scientific study should fall into the wrong hands.

 

Jean

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve,

Yes I can accept the facts.. But just because you or the prez or anyone else says something, in english or any language, doesn't make it true. We' have found that out about alot of what Bush has said and I am giving him the benefit of doiubt because other people told him and they were suppose to know the truth. Obviously I'm referring to WMDs and other Irag things. But I digress.

 

The part you highlighted is just one of 3 tests the stem cells MUST meet. And there is nothing about creating them for the purpose of destroying them for research either.

 

were created for the purposes of fertility treatment, and were in excess of the clinical need of the individuals seeking such treatment

 

I don't think there are any prohibitions about reasearch to determine if other cells can act like embryonic cells. But it makes sense to me that you would have to find out how embryonic stem cells act. and then you are right back to where you strarted, needing embryonic cells for research.

 

Finally, I am not suggesting that you are making things up. I heard and read what he said too. But unlike you I'

am unwilling to take him at his word. And I am for sure not one to let him be my moral decesion maker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Founder and Owner

Here it goes one more time.

 

 

`(b) Ethical Requirements- Human embryonic stem cells shall be eligible for use in any research conducted or supported by the Secretary if the cells meet each of the following:

 

`(1) The stem cells were derived from human embryos that have been donated from in vitro fertilization clinics, were created for the purposes of fertility treatment, and were in excess of the clinical need of the individuals seeking such treatment.

 

 

You don't see the word frozen but how do you think that they are being handled?

 

The embryos were created for in vitro fertilization. They are frozen in storage right now.

 

Nobody ever said that these particular embryos were created just for research and so that they could be destroyed.

 

 

 

Sandy, you got my point! It's the covert harvesting that I am against.

 

Jean, the President did not purposely misrepresent anything. The stem cells that he is concerned about right now are the 800,000 frozen stem cells that we are talking about in HR 810. They have the potential for being human life and his own moral conscience prevents him from agreeing that they be destroyed for research.

 

I suspect that he shares my concern that embryos could be created purposely in the future only to be destroyed for research.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it possible that the veto of stem cell research is to create a further foundation to his belief of conception as the beginning of life, and (okay, you all may consider me just a bit suspicious here) then use this as a platform for his anti abortion movement?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi cara

 

i just replied to your post in the Medication forum..You may wish to introduce yourself..

 

To the thread at hand:

 

I didn't want to bring the topc up, cause i wanted to stay with the stem Cell issue, BUT,

 

as I was afraid. and I think Cara is hitting on it and Steve and others did too.

 

All this stem cell biz is just a guise for the abortion debate. IMHO

 

And I'm sorry but I'm not going there..

 

 

 

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.