Bush: A Pro-Life Hypocrite?

[melon]

This is definitely a valid debate. In case you didn't know, Mr. Bush just allowed limited stem-cell research, much to the anger of the Catholic Church and slightly shook other right-wing Protestant sects (showing how truly political over moral they are).

But I don't wish to rehash. Read the article yourself, and feel free to comment:

http://asia.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/08/09/stem.cell.bush/index.html

Melon

------------------
?Confused by thoughts, we experience duality in life. Unencumbered by ideas, the enlightened see the one reality.? - Hui-neng (638-713)

 

[Henry Rollins]

I don't think he is being a hypocrite here, I think he is making the best use of embryos that are already going to be discarded of no matter what happens. So there is no chance to save these and develop them into human beings. Stopping abortion is trying to save a life, here there is nothing to be saved. It is making use of something that is going to be thrown away. I also have other reasons for thinking this is good even when I myself am against abortion in most cases. I am suffering from multiple sclerosis and this is great hope to bring a cure to my disease.

~rougerum

 

[U2Bama]

I knew one of you was going to have a problem with this decision, either for it not going far enough, or for it being alleged "hypocrisy."

I think he made a wise decison.

~U2Alabama

 

[Rono]

Yesterday i saw the video of the echo from
the live inside m sister in law. 12 weeks and
6 days and you can see everything.
It is a wonder, let use it for cloning and research.

I do not know to express myself but i only
know, it is alive.

------------------
I can`t change the world but i can
change the world in me.

Read you, Rono.

 

[radiodivision]

Plus, remember he is for the death penalty...we're still executing them down here.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Melon, what in the heck are you talking about? This in no way shows hypocrisy. This decion is VERY VERY limited. 60 stem cell lines exist. He is allowing federal funds for research on these only. No new ones. Nohing like that at all. The life and death decision on the embryos these stem cells came from have already been made. You're grasping here, Melon.

 

[U2Bama]

The thing is, if Bush had not allowed ANY embryonic stem cell research funding, they would be saying "Bush is just bowing to the religious right and keeping is in the dark ages, not allowing the advances of sceinse to save dying people."

Accuse me of putting word in peoples' mouths, but I guarantee you that would have happened.

Rono, are you saying we should clone and fully develop humans for research?

~U2Alabama

 

[Rono]

No, that remark was ehh, mockery

But it seems it is now, stem cell . before we know
it we are experimenting on older embryo`s.

Btw, my sister in law is getting a baby, in
february

 

[U2Bama]

Congratulations on your new niece or nephew, Rono.

I'm comfortable with the limited scope of stem cell funding, but I am 100% against human cloning. I've heard peopl, both conservative AND liberal, say that human cloning would be good for all kinds of reasons, but these are the 2 freakiest:

(1) when people are born, a duplicate could be made for spare parts so the person's live could be extended again and again whenever something goes wrong (yet this "duplicate" would be 100% human, therefore it would have feelings, emotions, pain, etc.!!!)

(2) we could create a clone class to use for military combat situations (yes, it has really been said!) and for scientific research at various stages of life. Politicians would like this because they could create more people that could vote for them.

Although either of those seems highly unlikely, people have discussed the possibilities.

~U2Alabama

 

[melon]

Originally posted by 80sU2isBest:
You're grasping here, Melon.

I'm not grasping here, and I don't know how any of you pro-lifers can accept this--but I've never seen how any of you can accept the death penalty or our gun culture either. Of course, you have to remember, folks, that I'm Catholic in background. There are some obvious and grave ideological differences between Catholicism and Calvinist Protestantism (the predominant Protestant ideology in America).

Now, admittedly, I'm at odds with Catholicism on a few obvious fronts, but one thing I do agree with is the sacredness of all life, whether it be a prisoner or a fetus or a zygote for that matter. Where I am divided, of course, is to where to draw the line.

Now, while 80s was obviously thinking I was setting bait, I was really just grappling with the issue myself. Is embryonic research important? Are the use of embryos completely necessary? I know it is the easiest way, but how about adult cells? We did learn how to reverse differentiation and rebuild telomeres in adult cells, without them becoming cancer cells (cancers are, in my simplest understanding, rogue embryonic cells with unending telomere regeneration). Is it possible to use tissue from miscarriages and then clone cells? What about umbilical cord tissue? Or, is it as Bush recently allowed, ethical to use embryos that are warranted for destruction? Perhaps this is a Pandora's Box that should never have been opened twenty years ago. Perhaps this is a gift bestowed upon us not to be wasted. Perhaps it's a test to see what we value more: our own lives or the lives of little frozen human beings we wish to dissect and culture and destroy. Life is never very simple, now is it?

Melon

------------------
?Confused by thoughts, we experience duality in life. Unencumbered by ideas, the enlightened see the one reality.? - Hui-neng (638-713)

 

[bonoman]

I think he made a bad decison but he handled the situation well.

I think diseases are around as kind of a population control. If some of these diseases were ever cured(cancers)then the world population would skyrocket. Death is natural. If we did not have diseases then we would have an over populated world.

I do think it is killing. Just because they are destent to be destoryed doesnt make them good subjects. All humans are dying. We dont use tests that will kill us do we. Science really needs to slow down and take a deep breath and stop trying to do to much to quickly.

------------------
Running to Stand Still-"you gotta cry without weeping, talk without speaking, scream without raising your voice."

"we're not burning out we're burning up...we're the loudest folk band in the world!"-Bono

 

[tiny dancer]

In my opinion Mr. Bush is trying to plesase both sides. In other words it's all political!

 

[Klodomir]

Originally posted by U2Bama:
[...]these are the 2 freakiest:

(1) when people are born, a duplicate could be made for spare parts so the person's live could be extended again and again whenever something goes wrong (yet this "duplicate" would be 100% human, therefore it would have feelings, emotions, pain, etc.!!!)

Even freakier, when people bring up the argument you sort of pose in your last sentence, I have heard the response that the clones would be created without heads, only enough brain function to keep the body functioning.

I'm for now okay with Bush' decision on this, but that wasn't Melon's question. No, I don't believe that he is a hypocrite on this issue, because once you make the decision to create embryos outside of the womb, you also have to deal with the fact that some of them have to be destroyed. As long as embryos aren't "grown" specifically for research purposes, I don't think it goes against what Bush believes, so he isn't a hypocrite. Also, he is president of a huge country, so I can't blame him for seeking the middle ground here.

Bonoman: I see your point about diseases keeping the world population down, but are you also against vaccines and other modern medicine?

 

[Klodomir]

How did I manage to kill this thread?