Bush proves he's not the brightest -- again.

[quade 4]

(I'm trying to hold back and be subtle on this one, but it's really, really difficult.)
Bush calls for a ban on all types of human cloning -- stem cell research included.
Full text here.
Cloning of human stem cells shows great promise in the area of spinal cord injuries. Congress has already stopped government funding of the research in the U.S. and now Bush is calling for a ban in the U.S. which would stop research in the private sector as well.
Please read between the lines of his speech and see how he ties this into the abortion issue.
All I can say is . . . wow.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[bbarnhouse 0]

One step forward.........three steps back.
Welcome to Bush 201
It only takes a little pixie dust......

[freeflir29 0]

Well...I'll say this. I think this is a subject that needs to be approached with great caution. Let's not let the genie out of the bottle before we know the whole story.
"I'm a danger to myself and everyone around me!"-Clay

[rhino 0]

ummm... LOL
Blue Skies .....

[Sebazz1 2]

I thought George Bush was a clone himself?!?! What a hypacrite! Next they'll say we can't clone Marijuana plants..........j/k............

I swear i was kidding........where did all the suits come from?
SEBAZZ.......

[AndyMan 7]

Yeah, I was kinda shocked that went so strongly against medical cloning, considering that the ethical issues are so less compelling, and over 55% of the american population support it.
He said quite clearly, he would only sign a bill that banned both. He would never sign something that only bans reproductive cloning.
My take on this, is that the house will not give him the bill he wants, and if he stays true to his word the US will not have a anti-cloning law at all.
And that would suck.
_Am
ICQ: 5578907
MSN Messenger: andrewdmetcalfe at hotmail dot com
AIM: andrewdmetcalfe
Yahoo IM: ametcalf_1999

[quade 4]

Quote

Let's not let the genie out of the bottle before we know the whole story.

The problem with that is that you never know what the whole story ever is until many, many years later, therefore under your philosophy nothing would ever get done or anything useful become of it. You can't know what impact the law today will have on future generations in either direction.
For instance, who would have ever guessed that Voltaire fooling around with a "swamp gas" detector would eventually lead to the invention of the internal combustion engine? See this for books and books with further examples of how ya just never know how one invention connected with another invention leads to yet another invention.
All of that said, research by and in itself isn't the issue, Bush is trying to tie his personal religious beliefs about the start of human life into this. I really don't like that idea.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[james1010 0]

"Life is a creation, not a commodity."
That pretty much sums it up . . I mean, give me a break, there has to be a line you can't cross. Just my view . . . awful touchy subject.
James

[bbarnhouse 0]

Ummmm I could be wrong, but isn't there something about seperation of church and state? HIS religeous beliefs may not that of this nation. I have mixed feelings re:cloning. I agree that we should not clone other humans in their entirety (imagine another Clay running around yelling "boobies"). I do however, feel that stem cell research plays a vital part in repairing spinal injuries.
It only takes a little pixie dust......

[james1010 0]

"Bush is trying to tie his personal religious beliefs about the start of human life into this"
That's kinda what you're doing. You may not use the word 'religious', but if you don't accept creation then you must accept evolution, which is nothing more than a belief system itself that requires faith because it too is an unprovable theory. Don't let the fact that it's allowed in schools fool you . . . this is gonna turn into an awesome thread, I can see it comin . .

[SkySurfSnow 0]

I'd like to have a clone of me, but I probably couldn't stand to be around myself....
Realistically, the genie was out of the bottle when Watson and Crick discovered the spiral helix. Scientists in other countries do not face the same "ethical" challenges due to a different belief structure. Human cloning is probably going to happen in the very near future...
I hope that they create a clone and then implant it in a mother's womb...and I hope they do it in the U.S. That should create one of the most beautiful ethical dramas in history
Do we abort the fetus or allow a clone to live...
Yeehaaa!
I can't wait!
Sheep are food
We clone sheep
People eat sheep
We clone people
Sharks eat people
People are food
-Off the lithium

[freeflir29 0]

Quote

My take on this, is that the house will not give him the bill he wants, and if he stays true to his word the US will not have a anti-cloning law at all.

Before you go off Quade......Maybe this is the plan. I'm sure profits from this type of research will be staggering........Bush is a capitalist after all. "I'm a danger to myself and everyone around me!"-Clay

[james1010 0]

"I'm sure profits from this type of research will be staggering"
Very true . . . morals are always traded for profits.

[freeflir29 0]

Quote

Very true . . . morals are always traded for profits

Like anyone that gets to President has morals????? Were you raised in a closet?
"I'm a danger to myself and everyone around me!"-Clay

[ADRNALN 0]

Lets all remember that there is a separation of church and state but does not mean we should or do have a state without a religious ethic or basis. The US was based a puritan ethic thus there is a christian undertone to this country like it or not. I am not a church going guy but I don't believe it belongs in a closet either.

[SpeedRacer 1]

I worry about just how these bills are worded...What about stem cells from adults, i.e. hematopoetic stem cells? There's no embryo used, and yet theoretically it might be possible to create a human being from one. And embryonic stem cell research is for treating such things as spinal cord injuries etc...not for cloning whole people.
There are already laws in place (of which I approve) that forbid either the woman or the hospital from receiving any sort of compensation for donating an aborted or miscarried embryo for the purposes of research...so therefore the use of these embryonic stem cells is not causing or encouraging one single additional abortion.
Speed Racer
"Fill your hand, you son-of-a-bitch!"

[quade 4]

James --
You're twisting this into a creation / evolution debate? Let's not go there at this point. M'kay?
Geeze, I look at Christopher Reeve and think to myself, what would be so bad about taking a few cells from him and growing him a new spinal connection. I think, what kind of asshole would deny a person that?
After all, it would BE HIM. It would be his DNA
Yet, GW is going to ban the kind of research that will make that possible, because it fits in with either
a) his religious beliefs (which even though I would disagree with I could understand) or
b) it fits in with his political agenda regarding the religious right and their beliefs (in other words, it helps him get re-elected).
Either way, even if I understand it, I still do not agree with it and I don't think it's the smartest way to address the actual issues.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[bbarnhouse 0]

Thanks Quade~
I didn't want to get heavily into this, once again.....you da bomb.
It only takes a little pixie dust......

[Sebazz1 2]

I think Quade just expressed my feelings exactly!
Thanks Quade..........Hey um can I use my own genes to creat a big uh you know what?
SEBAZZ.......

[ramon 0]

but I think he has made some sillier speeches
Asshole of Evil

[RedBull 0]

Quote

"Life is a creation, not a commodity."

It's this sort of thinking that lead to the organ donation problem that Freebird shared w/ us recently. There would be no organ problem if our "ethical" government allowed the families of the deceased to be compensated for their relative's parts, just a doctors and hospitals are allowed to profit from implanting the organs. People would be a lot more likely to sign up to donate if the burden of their funeral expenses were lifted form their survivors by the gesture. Not related, but an example of how government ideas of morality screw regular people.
As for cloning -- who cares? Luddites protested when in-vitro fertilization was developed, and now it's proved itself as a fantastic technology to allow infertile couples to conceive, and the resulting people didn't turn out to be freaks or soul-less zombies, as many probably feared. Research to aid in the prevention of disease and repair damaged tissue should obviously be allowed. As far as reproductive cloning -- that doesn't bother me either. Big deal, a much younger twin of someone already living is created. Yawn.
And another thing, I'm looking at a copy of the U.S. Constitution right now, and the chief executive's duties don't include "Morality Meister".
BTW. Evolution is not a theory. Natural selection is a theory, devised to explain the fact that species change over time (evolution).

"Screw you, fat guy. Get your own damn coconuts." - Beavis

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

Hey um can I use my own genes to creat a big uh you know what?

Sorry dude.. If your genes didn't do it the first time around....!
Speed Racer
"Fill your hand, you son-of-a-bitch!"

[rgoper 0]

**"Bush is trying to tie his personal religious beliefs about the start of human life into this"**
religous beliefs, he has none, that's a "show" c'mon. if your religous, you certainly wouldn't want to break any commandments! (on purpose that is) let's see "thou shalt not kill" yep, that's one of em all right. but that's another topic for another time, i have a son in the military right now. but getting back to dwubya, jeeezzz, i hate admitting to this, but i voted for him, well, what other choice of fools did i have? sometimes a man's gotta do, what a man's gotta do!
Richard
"Is It Pure Coiencidence That Florida Was The Deciding Stae In The Presidential Election?" HMMMM........

[FallingMarc 0]

Why does this have to be a religious issue? I don't understand how growing a new life for the specific purpose of killing it and using its cells can possibly be a good thing, regardless of how nobly those cells may be used. Does everybody here NOT agree that killing one life to help another is generally a bad thing?
And frankly, what does this have to do with Bush's intelligence? Your subject line is a cheap shot that has nothing to do with the article...
And I told myself I wouldn't get into these debates on here anymore...
Marc

[kallend 2,106]

<<you must accept evolution, which is nothing more than a belief system itself that requires faith because it
too is an unprovable theory. Don't let the fact that it's allowed in schools fool you . . . this is gonna turn
into an awesome thread, I can see it comin . . >>>
But no scientific theory can be proved; any theory is just good until it's disproved. Evolution makes predictions that can be tested so it can be (in principle) disproved - it is therefore good science. Quantum mechanics makes predictions that can be tested - it is good science. Creationism, or its latest manifestation, "intelligent design", makes no predictions that can be tested. It cannot be disproved - it is therefore NOT science, it is faith.