Bush set to veto stem cell bill

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It does happen

You could turn this around and suggest Clinton was also in the wrong when he vetoed a ban on partial birth abortion in spite of it being passed by Congress and generally supported by opinion polls (an override was successful in the house but not the senate so ultimately failed)

True that's why posted the 'use of veto' comparisons. This clearly isn't new that the veto has been used in a political context outside of its original intended use.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Couple more articles on this. Seems Bush is copping a lot of flak about this from the scientific community as well as politicians from both parties.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5197926.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5197372.stm

[LaL 418]

Couple more articles on this. Seems Bush is copping a lot of flak about this from the scientific community as well as politicians from both parties.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5197926.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5197372.stm

I hope he IS getting flak and continues to! this angers me more than anything. people like me have to suffer with little hope of progress and he imposes his version of moral code upon us.

[Fuzzness 2]

What I find disturbing is he is calling this a moral issue

[Veiled Princess 1]

Anyone watching the Daily Show tonight?

Jon Stewart is talking about this. He's comparing Bush's statements regarding the precious life of these embryos and how he dismissed 30,000 Iraqi deaths. Someone commented that they were symptoms of the outcome (paraphrasing). Jon calls it "the diarea (sp?) and upset stomach of freedom".

[BelwinMills 0]

Anyone watching the Daily Show tonight?

Jon Stewart is talking about this. He's comparing Bush's statements regarding the precious life of these embryos and how he dismissed 30,000 Iraqi deaths. Someone commented that they were symptoms of the outcome (paraphrasing). Jon calls it "the diarea (sp?) and upset stomach of freedom".

I agree fully and that is moral? hmmm

[Veiled Princess 1]

Anyone watching the Daily Show tonight?

Jon Stewart is talking about this. He's comparing Bush's statements regarding the precious life of these embryos and how he dismissed 30,000 Iraqi deaths. Someone commented that they were symptoms of the outcome (paraphrasing). Jon calls it "the diarea (sp?) and upset stomach of freedom".

I agree fully and that is moral? hmmm

I would say Bush's sense of morality comes and goes to suit his personal interests.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It just goes to show how easily the Presidential veto can be used for the purposes of political grandstanding. He seems to think that this is an abortion-related issue, and so he has made a decision simply to appeal to his core supporters. Once again its party first...

He is wrong about this - just as he has been wrong on every other decision that has been left (entirely) to him - Harriet Miers? Immigration reform? His choices always seem to cause friction and alienate almost everyone regardless of political persuasion.

[pedroh 21]

not only bush.. if it were immoral to destroy human life.. why a lotta people are pro-death penalty? supporting death penalty and not supporting stem cell research is a hipocrisy

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

not only bush.. if it were immoral to destroy human life.. why a lotta people are pro-death penalty? supporting death penalty and not supporting stem cell research is a hipocrisy

Hmmmm again I think its important to differentiate Stem Cell Research from Abortion - as they are not really the same.

[Veiled Princess 1]

not only bush.. if it were immoral to destroy human life.. why a lotta people are pro-death penalty? supporting death penalty and not supporting stem cell research is a hipocrisy

I don't agree.... pro-death penalty = a person has proven they can't and no longer have the right to exist in society.... anti-stem cell research / abortion = those babies haven't had the opportunity to make any mistakes to condemn them to death...

I don't agree with Bush on a lot of things... this one I do... killing innocent people (including ones who haven't been born yet) is wrong.

Unfortunately, his morality does not extend to anyone beyond US borders.

Hmmmm again I think its important to differentiate Stem Cell Research from Abortion - as they are not really the same.

How so?

[pedroh 21]

not only bush.. if it were immoral to destroy human life.. why a lotta people are pro-death penalty? supporting death penalty and not supporting stem cell research is a hipocrisy

I don't agree.... pro-death penalty = a person has proven they can't and no longer have the right to exist in society.... anti-stem cell research / abortion = those babies haven't had the opportunity to make any mistakes to condemn them to death...

I don't agree with Bush on a lot of things... this one I do... killing innocent people (including ones who haven't been born yet) is wrong.

Unfortunately, his morality does not extend to anyone beyond US borders.

Hmmmm again I think its important to differentiate Stem Cell Research from Abortion - as they are not really the same.

How so?

well.. becoming all happy christian like bush et al.. who are we to decide if a murderer's life has the right to exist or not?

[Veiled Princess 1]

not only bush.. if it were immoral to destroy human life.. why a lotta people are pro-death penalty? supporting death penalty and not supporting stem cell research is a hipocrisy

I don't agree.... pro-death penalty = a person has proven they can't and no longer have the right to exist in society.... anti-stem cell research / abortion = those babies haven't had the opportunity to make any mistakes to condemn them to death...

I don't agree with Bush on a lot of things... this one I do... killing innocent people (including ones who haven't been born yet) is wrong.

Unfortunately, his morality does not extend to anyone beyond US borders.

Hmmmm again I think its important to differentiate Stem Cell Research from Abortion - as they are not really the same.

How so?

well.. becoming all happy christian like bush et al.. who are we to decide if a murderer's life has the right to exist or not?

It depends on the crime.... If someone kills another in cold blood for no justifiable reason, therein taking the right of that person to live, the killer then gives up his right to exist in our society = menace to society. If the killer does not respect the righs of others to live he loses that right himself. It is to protect the society. We can't have murderers running around all willy-nilly

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

not only bush.. if it were immoral to destroy human life.. why a lotta people are pro-death penalty? supporting death penalty and not supporting stem cell research is a hipocrisy

Hmmmm again I think its important to differentiate Stem Cell Research from Abortion - as they are not really the same.

Yes!!!! totally different.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

not only bush.. if it were immoral to destroy human life.. why a lotta people are pro-death penalty? supporting death penalty and not supporting stem cell research is a hipocrisy

I don't agree.... pro-death penalty = a person has proven they can't and no longer have the right to exist in society.... anti-stem cell research / abortion = those babies haven't had the opportunity to make any mistakes to condemn them to death...

I don't agree with Bush on a lot of things... this one I do... killing innocent people (including ones who haven't been born yet) is wrong.

Unfortunately, his morality does not extend to anyone beyond US borders.

Hmmmm again I think its important to differentiate Stem Cell Research from Abortion - as they are not really the same.

How so?

There are ethical concerns certainly - but the crucial difference is that one deals with the terminations of natural pregnancies, for largely social reasons. The other involves the creation of embryo material for scientific purposes that never intended for actual birth (and which could not develop and 'go to term' without further medical intervention).

The issues involved in each are very different and deserve to be debated on their own merits.

IMO there isn't much of an ethical difference between stem cell research and other forms of genetic engineering that have been used over the past couple of decades.

I think Bush is out of touch on this issue - he has a right to his opinion, but to use the presidential veto in this manner (which is quite apart from its intended purpose) is simply wrong.

This is quite interesting:

But Graeme Laurie, an expert in the legal side of medicine from Edinburgh University, said there was an "underlying hypocrisy" in Mr Bush's position.

"The stated reason for President Bush's objection to embryonic stem cell research is that 'murder is wrong'; why then does he not intervene to regulate or ban [embryonic] stem cell research carried out with private funds and which is happening across the US?" he asked.

"It is a strange morality indeed that pins the moral status and life of the embryo on the question of who is paying for the research."

What's fine and dandy for millionaires and private research companies is not ok for the public? Hmmm...