Archive for Monday, July 2, 2007

Lieutenant governor joins stem cell protest

July 2, 2007

Advertisement

Lt. Gov. Mark Parkinson and nine other Democratic lieutenant governors have written a letter to President Bush, voicing disapproval of Bush's veto of legislation that would have provided federal support of stem cell research.

"The majority of Americans believe we must take advantage of this opportunity to seek an end to so many terrible diseases," Parkinson said Friday.

"This research holds remarkable potential to create new treatments and cures for the thousands of Kansans who suffer from Alzheimer's, spinal cord injuries, juvenile diabetes and other debilitating illnesses, and I'm very disappointed the president continues to stand in the way," Parkinson said.

Last month, Bush vetoed the stem cell measure approved by Congress, saying it would have put tax dollars toward destroying human embryos.

Parkinson was joined by the lieutenant governors of California, Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island and Wisconsin.

Comments

jmadison 7 years, 10 months ago

Bush opposes federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, not adult stem cell research, which has actually shown some benefit. If embryonic stem cell research has so much potential, private companies are free to provide funding for such research.

jonas 7 years, 10 months ago

And before someone talks about how it only bans federal funding, that's the only thing it needs to ban. The research is too young for a private firm to see any incentive in providing the funding for research, as its application into commercial technology, and thus profits, which are the only reasons private firms do anything, for the most part, is too far off, and too uncertain to give them any incentive to engage in it. So no one will engage in it without federal funding.

I'm also pretty sure a number of you knew that fairly well as you were making the argument.

Ragingbear 7 years, 10 months ago

No, Bush is trying to outlaw ALL stem cell research. He doesn't know the difference.

SettingTheRecordStraight 7 years, 10 months ago

Why doesn't this report differentiate between destroying human embryos for their stem cells and using adult stem cells?

Ragingbear 7 years, 10 months ago

Because stem cell research is considered the "holy grail" of medicine. Already we have seen it CURE Type II Diabetes in South America. It is looking like kidney failure, liver damage, heart damage, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, Multiple Sclerosis, Muscular Dystrophy and a gigantic array of diseases and disorders will not be treated with stem-cell therapy, but CURED.

You don't think that Big Pharmaceutical companies don't have a stake in this? Notice how common prescription drug commercials are? That's because they have a lot of sway in DC. Bush is just doing what his friends paid him to do.

Let's also keep in mind that the embryonic cells used would NEVER be viable due to where they are harvest from. That would be abortion clinics. That's like saying to somebody "Hey! You can't take the cans out of my trash, and use them to survive. They belong in a landfill!". The stuff would be trash. Why there is such a big fight over what would be trash anyways?

purplesage 7 years, 10 months ago

Stem cell research, fine. Embryonic stem cell research. Absolutely not. I'm thankful we have a President with moral conviction who vetoed this bill.

Godot 7 years, 10 months ago

Parkinson and the other democrat Lt. Governors are just shilling for more taxpayer money to fund Big University Research. Is Parkinson being paid by Hemenway? If not, he should be.

jonas 7 years, 10 months ago

"SettingTheRecordStraight (Anonymous) says:

Why doesn't this report differentiate between destroying human embryos for their stem cells and using adult stem cells?"

Because, in reality, there's no reason to differentiate between them.

SettingTheRecordStraight 7 years, 10 months ago

"Because I said so," doesn't work, Jonas. You'll have to learn to use more than circular logic.

Uhlrick_Hetfield_III 7 years, 10 months ago

Not my issue, folks, but I'm betting Parkinson's protest was funded by the Stowers Institute, as do all of Governor Roundheels positions on healthcare, including selling out KU Hospital to the Missouri folks.

pelliott 7 years, 10 months ago

Church property should be taxed, they don't need a free ride at everyone's expense.

Godot 7 years, 10 months ago

Pelliott, I agree. In fact, there should be no such thing as a "not-for-profit" tax exemption. Tax big charity!!

Ragingbear 7 years, 10 months ago

Agnostick, it was my understanding that originally that such a consent form was given to those receiving abortions for that very reason. But it is the idiotic uber-cons that determined that abortion is immoral, so anything that can come from it, no matter how good, is automatically bad, hence should be illegal.

The problem about embryonic stem cell research is that we don't really need them anymore. We have found ways to harvest adult stem cells and use those. These cells can be found in everything from spinal fluid to the fat taken from liposuction. Yet idiot puppets like Bush and Darth Cheney still see them as evil because the modern harvesting method was discovered as a result of embryonic stem cell research.

In other words, everyone is stupid. I am smart. Therefore, I am your god. Kneel before me and bring me food and virgins!

Godot 7 years, 10 months ago

Ragingbear, last I heard, there is no ban on federal funding of adult stem cell research.

Bradley Kemp 7 years, 10 months ago

Ragingbear said:

"Let's also keep in mind that the embryonic cells used would NEVER be viable due to where they are harvest from. That would be abortion clinics. That's like saying to somebody "Hey! You can't take the cans out of my trash, and use them to survive. They belong in a landfill!". The stuff would be trash. Why there is such a big fight over what would be trash anyways?"

And while the sentiment is accurate, the facts aren't.

No embryonic stem cells come from aborted embryos or fetuses. After only a few days of development after fertilization, there ARE NO embryonic stem cells left, so even an embryo aborted after a couple of weeks would contain only adult stem cells.

Embryonic stem cells do come from fertilized eggs being stored in fertility clinics and donated by couples who have completed their families and will not use the surplus embryos. The embryos can remain frozen for some time, but eventually they'll become medical waste.

They also come from a process that uses a donated human egg and the nucleus of a cell from a patient to create embryonic stem cells that are a genetic match for the patient.

mr_economy 7 years, 10 months ago

I am morally opposed to the war in Iraq, so Mr. President, why don't you veto Iraq spending Bills from now on using the grounds that "many Americans do not want their tax dollars going to a cause they feel is immoral." After all, that is the rationale he's using, and there is no reason to limit its application to embryonic stem cell research.

Godot 7 years, 10 months ago

Yeah, and I feel that the education that resulted in the thought processes of mr_economy is immoral, as well. End the federal funding of incoherent higher education.

Crossfire 7 years, 10 months ago

Just another JoCo idiot. Phriend of Phill.

mr_economy 7 years, 10 months ago

Why make a real argument when it is much easier to resort to ad-hom attacks... If you would care to point out why or how my logic is faulty, please do so. I could save you the time and say it is not, but I am sure you would find that outcome quite disagreeable. The only incoherence present in this commentary, aside from your sad attempt at displaying wit, is the neo-conservative approach to federal funding.

jonas 7 years, 10 months ago

SettingRecord: Circular logic is pretty amusing, coming from you.

How about: because both fetal stem cells and adult stem cells are socially the same, being simply non-viable yet potentially useful pieces of genetic material, that will never become a new life, are not, by their nature, sentient life, and because the only given reason against the practice is a necessarily non-factual emotional appeal by people who tend to only see in terms of plus and , in my opinion incorrectly, when the issue of biological life (at least amongst humans) is concerned.

Is that any better? Now, perhaps you could explain to me why we should differentiate amongst them?

Aside from the scientists that say that the fetal cells are potentially more useful. I assume that's not the direction that you want this to go.

jonas 7 years, 10 months ago

crap, I assume that was supposed to be plus and minus, but I've forgotten, after numerous Tsingtao's to celebrate America's birthday.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.