Obama Okay's Using Human Embryos as Lab Rats
Let's be clear about exactly what President Obama ordered into practice today by ending the ban on government funded human embryonic stem cell research.
Each embryo is a tiny human being in his/her earliest stage of development, yet unique as any individual, each a one of a kind blueprint, frozen.
Embryonic stem cell research is experimentation on those not yet born but not-dead human beings. The president gave the green light to growing humans to use in science experiments. Nice.
If humans are going to take on laboratory creation of life (and we have) then humans must accept the responsibility for protecting it. Growing humans for their parts for experimentation is not exactly protecting life.
Whether or not you agree that life begins at conception, you cannot deny that each embryo cannot be anyone (or any thing) but that one individual person who's genetic blueprint defines that specific embryo. Even twins are different. That embryo is that person forever.
Meanwhile the left continues to ignore the existing proven science that embryonic stem cells are not needed since adult stem cells provide all the same benefits without killing the donor and are already being funded by US government research grants. The left also ignores the fact that there is already nothing to prevent embryonic stem cell research...as long as it's privately funded.
Let me be clear.
I support stem cell research.
Republicans support stem cell research.
We support adult stem cell research because it has proven to provide results and no one had to die to do it.
Each embryo is a tiny human being in his/her earliest stage of development, yet unique as any individual, each a one of a kind blueprint, frozen.
Embryonic stem cell research is experimentation on those not yet born but not-dead human beings. The president gave the green light to growing humans to use in science experiments. Nice.
If humans are going to take on laboratory creation of life (and we have) then humans must accept the responsibility for protecting it. Growing humans for their parts for experimentation is not exactly protecting life.
Whether or not you agree that life begins at conception, you cannot deny that each embryo cannot be anyone (or any thing) but that one individual person who's genetic blueprint defines that specific embryo. Even twins are different. That embryo is that person forever.
Meanwhile the left continues to ignore the existing proven science that embryonic stem cells are not needed since adult stem cells provide all the same benefits without killing the donor and are already being funded by US government research grants. The left also ignores the fact that there is already nothing to prevent embryonic stem cell research...as long as it's privately funded.
Let me be clear.
I support stem cell research.
Republicans support stem cell research.
We support adult stem cell research because it has proven to provide results and no one had to die to do it.
posted by RD at 5:05 PM
AOL Sports Hottest Athlete
9 Comments:
off subject:
When your detractors finally figure out that Rush takes his talking points from you their face will be redder than your logo.
Those early morning conference calls do the trick.... me and El Rushbo and Sean Hannity and Karl Rove all get our stories straight over coffee.
(as if).
It is completely understandable for a person to be confused or not sure as to where life begins, whether or not at conception or at another stage in development.
As for me, I would rather not be sure but err on the side of a baby's life.
I guess it's understandable if they haven't taken the time to actually think about it seriously... which is the case for most people. It's easier to just ignore it than deal with it by far.
But I think you made the right call obviously.
But one thing is for sure as I said, those are humans and we are using them for lab rats including cloning. Not good.
Red - You are not accounting for the fact that these stem cells are currently being THROWN AWAY. How can one claim to be in favor of protecting human life while being willing to incinerate a possible cure for Cancer, Alzheimer's or Parkinson's? No one is killing babies for stem cells! You conservatives can quit kidding yourselves that you're pro-human now.
Stevsie
False- No they're not. Bush allowed for existing lines to be used for stem cell research... Obama opened it up to CREATING NEW embryos specifically and cloning them for experimentation and destruction after stealing some parts... you liberals can quit kidding yourselves that you are pro-anything but pro-death. Grow a spine or did you lose yours as an embryo?
War loving, gun-hugging, pro-capital punishment conservatives accuse others of being pro-death -you're funny. In one paragraph, explain how my strong desire to cure our deadliest deseases makes me pro-death, please show your work.
hey anon... get your own blog and I'll come over there and boss you around okay?
I've written pages and pages on it... take a moment out of your taking points practice and read.
Here's a quick pop quiz for you since you wanna play classroom.
There already has been and is already ongoing embryonic stem cell research and the results are not encouraging... in fact it's really no contest.
"Of the 15 US biotech companies solely devoted to developing cures using stem cells, only two focus on embryos. Embryo stem cell research is at the drawing-board stage - not for lack of funds but for lack of promising research to finance. Venture capitalists have no agenda beyond making money; if they see embryo projects that are likely to bear fruit over the next five to seven years - the usual VC time horizon - they will fund them. That the market is speaking so loudly against embryo stem cell research probably explains why embryo researchers are so eager to reverse the ban on government funding."
Diane Irving, Ph.D., a former professor of biology at Georgetown University and former biochemist with the National Cancer Institute, said, "I have argued that adult stem cells are better because they are closer to the stage of differentiation than embryonic or fetal cells - therefore they do not have as long a distance to travel differentiation-wise as the younger cells. Therefore there is far less of a chance for genetic errors to be accumulated in the implanted cells and less side effects for the patient to deal with."
Embryonic Stem Cells not needed
“Despite all the rhetoric that we still need embryos, a lot of embryonic stem cell labs are switching over to the induced pluripotent stem cell technology,” he said. “To put it simply, induced pluripotent stem cell is where a scientist takes a skin cell add a few genes and reprograms the cell to look and act just like an embryonic stem cells without embryos.”
Stem cells from embryos are actually becoming obsolete. Induced pluripotent stem cell technology was labeled the scientific breakthrough of the year for 2008 by the journal Science, he said."
Okay hotshot, adult stem cells have proven to provide all of the perceived benefits (in fact more) as embryonic stem cells (without the unacceptable side affects) in fact adult stem cell research has worked to find cures, whereas embryonic stem cell research HAS NOT found any benefits which are not also found in adult stem cells.
With this in mind, please explain why the unnecessary creation and destruction of a human life (death) is required?
For 100 bonus points explain the difference between the innocent unborn and a guilty mass murderer.
btw- I think if you might find my answer to your question in there too.
Post a Comment
<< Home