Stem Cell Debate: What’s Your Opinion?
It would be exceedingly difficult to attempt a complete review of the stem cell debate in this post. Besides, by now everyone should be familiar enough with the topic to offer an opinion. The references presented below outline the status of the debate in terms of the House, Senate and Bush Administration. Both houses of Congress have legislation and the Senate passed a bill that President Bush pledges to veto. A decision and its result may be coming soon.
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com
Share your opinion on this topic.
Senate Passes Stem Cell Bill Despite Veto Threat
Sci-Tech Today - Apr 13, 2007
The House, which passed similar legislation earlier in the year, is expected to adopt the Senate’s version in the next several weeks for Bush’s veto. …
Senate approves embryonic stem cell bill
Houston Chronicle, TX - Apr 12, 2007
By DAVID ESPO AP Special Correspondent. © 2007 AP. WASHINGTON — A stubborn Senate voted Wednesday to ease restrictions on federally funded embryonic stem …
Bush vows to veto stem cell bill passed in Democratic-controlled …
Boston Herald, MA - Apr 12, 2007
By AP. WASHINGTON - President Bush remains opposed to easing restrictions on embryonic stem cell research, vowing to veto a measure the Senate hopes will …
H.R.3
Title: To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for human embryonic stem cell research.
Sponsor: Rep DeGette, Diana [CO-1] (introduced 1/5/2007) Cosponsors (217)
Related Bills: H.RES.6, S.5, S.997
Latest Major Action: 1/12/2007 Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 6.
S.5
Title: A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for human embryonic stem cell research.
Sponsor: Sen Reid, Harry [NV] (introduced 1/4/2007) Cosponsors (41)
Related Bills: H.R.3, S.997
Latest Major Action: 4/11/2007 Passed/agreed to in Senate. Status: Passed Senate, having acquired the 60 votes required under unanimous consent, without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 63 - 34. Record Vote Number: 127.
H.R.322
Title: To derive human pluripotent stem cell lines using techniques that do not harm human embryos.
Sponsor: Rep Bartlett, Roscoe G. [MD-6] (introduced 1/9/2007) Cosponsors (34)
Latest Major Action: 2/2/2007 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
S.30
Title: A bill to intensify research to derive human pluripotent stem cell lines.
Sponsor: Sen Coleman, Norm [MN] (introduced 3/29/2007) Cosponsors (6)
Latest Major Action: 4/11/2007 Passed/agreed to in Senate. Status: Passed Senate, having acquired the 60 votes required under unanimous consent, without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 70 - 28. Record Vote Number: 128.
Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson’s Website, Is It Just Me?, The Virtuous Republic, Shadowscope, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, Pursuing Holiness, , Pet’s Garden Blog, Rightlinx, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, , stikNstein… has no mercy, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Right Pundits, 123beta, Maggie’s Notebook, Adam’s Blog, basil’s blog, Phastidio.net, The Bullwinkle Blog, Cao’s Blog, The Pet Haven, , Jo’s Cafe, Conservative Cat, Conservative Thoughts, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Allie Is Wired, Faultline USA, Sujet- Celebrities, stikNstein… has no mercy, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Gone Hollywood, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
April 14th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
I think people are somewhat confused as to the difference between adult stem cell research that has produced results, and embryonic stem cell research which hasn’t. Embryonic stem cell research hasn’t shown any benefits aside from destroying/killing human life; sadly, scientists use the Theory of Evolution as their criteria for medical ethics today. So the result is a modern day Mengele infused research criteria - experimentation and murder of unborn children is being advocated with no scientific basis. Adult stem cells have given us much more to work with - even though headlines talk about possibilities for embryonic stem cell research - stem cells from embyros are the problem; and what is in my opinion unethical.
From NRO’s Kathryn Jean Lopez’s interview with David Prentice, Professor of Life and Sciences at State University and an adjunct professor of medical &
molecular genetics at the Indiana University School of Medicine:
Human embryonic stem-cell research is illegal, immoral, and unnecessary.
It is ILLEGAL regarding use of federal funds because Congress has stated that no funds should be used for research which involves the creation or destruction of human embryos for research purposes, and human embryos are destroyed in the process of deriving human embryonic stem cells.
It is IMMORAL, because human beings are killed in the process. Scientifically there is no disputing that we are a human being even at the one-cell stage. It has never been acceptable to sacrifice one set of human lives for the potential benefit of others (and they are only potential benefits at this point.) Human embryonic stem cell research assigns different values to different human beings, designating some as people and some as property.
It is totally UNNECESSARY. Ethical alternatives exist such as adult stem cells which have already shown much more promise than embryonic cells, these results for adult stem cells are fully detailed in the scientific literature, and that adult stem cells are already being used clinically, making good on the potential that embryonic stem cells only promise.
April 14th, 2007 at 7:28 pm
Cao’s pegged it correctly. With phenomenal results for adult stem cells already on the books (such as adult stem cells already being used–in so far successful Phase II clinical trials–to repair heart damage after a heart attack), advocating expanding the use of embryonic stem cells in research (especially since ONLY adult stem cell research has yet shown positive results!) is, in Cao’s wiords, “illegal, immoral, and unnecessary.”
And if President Bush can resist being nice to disingenuous advocates of infanticide, it’ll stay illegal in this country to expand the use of embryonic stem cell research using MY tax dollars (embryonic stem cell research can still be done with private monies and can still be done using the existing lines of embryonic stem cells, even with government funding, so the claims that a presidential veto of this bill is against stem cell research is triply bogus).
Let the market decide. The market stampede is toward adult stem cell research (because it has so far shown not only “promise” but results).
April 15th, 2007 at 1:41 am
This question is for both Cao and David. Are both of you on the pro-life side of the abortion issue or pro-choice?
April 15th, 2007 at 5:03 pm
Tax-Time Open Weekend Trackbacks…
Just days left to find some last minute deductions……
April 15th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
It would be nice, when tracking back to a post other than ‘open’ trackback linkfests, if the topic of the trackback was related to the post. Call me crazy, but tax-time and the stem cell debate don’t appear related.
April 15th, 2007 at 11:38 pm
I’m definitely pro-choice. BUT I believe in being fair about it. Give the foetus a chance to grow to be old enough to choose for itself whether it wants to be killed by its mother.
Fair’s fair. She already made the choice to have sex; now its only fair to give the child a choice.