So, no big shocker, Bush used his first veto ever to smack down the stem cell research bill yesterday, as he apparently thought it was just
that important to hinder scientific research. What freakin' blows my mind is that is only argument against it is that "the bill violated his principles on the sanctity of human life by encouraging the destruction of embryos left over from fertilization procedures." Ummm, OK, but does the man not realize that these embryos are being destroyed ANYWAY every day???
He doesn't seem to care enough about his "principles" to do anything about that... just let's not use them for potential
good, for God's sake!
I know this issue has been hyped up a lot in the media, so I won't belabor this point, but I just have to say, as a scientist and a rational human being, his decision baffles me, and as an American, it disgusts me.
He doesn't seem to care enough about his "principles" to do anything about that... just let's not use them for potential good, for God's sake! 
4 comments:
AAAAAARRGH! In a separate but related issue, I also heard something on the radio this morning that involved some scientology wackos. Why are so many people bound and determined to defy rationality? No matter how many times you jump off a cliff, your general trajectory is always going to be DOWN! Flying spaghetti monster, please save us!
well... also as a scientist, i have to say that i'm not all that concerned (i was more concerned that one of the less controversial stem cell bills - was it adult stem cells? - was almost not passed by the house or senate just because they were annoyed that they weren't going to get their way with this one). there's still so much that we don't know or understand about stem cells (biology-wise) and the future possibilities of what could be done with them (i'm thinking more ethical implications here), that i don't have a huge problem with sticking with the ones we have until we understand them a little better. and, i mean, at least this administration gives some federal funding for stem cell research; the last did not at all, which people forget.
i think the time will come for more lines, but now is just not the right time.
i think (read: know) the history of stem cell research, the type that is being debated here, started around 1998 with a group in wisconsin. so to accuse a previous administration for not really addressing the issue in 2 years time is a bit quick to the draw. most of the readers of this blog know general timeframes of science and progression and funding. and if the assumption is that we dont know or understand stem cells as an argument to prevent the use of these lines, it seems the scientific approach would be to study them as extensively as possible in order to gain the understanding that is lacking and reveal the potential of their use, ending the debate once and for all. as for the ethical implications...how does one determine what is ethical for a country of nearly 300 million individual, free-thinking minds. i imagine if any of us were potential candidates (unable to walk due to spinal cord injuries, suffering from juvenile diabetes, having life shortened by heart muscle damage) for the benefits of stem cell research our ethical viewpoint may be a bit different than someone who is opposed to them based on a more arbitrary ethical system.
I'm one of those...I've been a T1 diabetic since 16. I wear an insulin pump 24/7, everyday of my life. External insulin is not a cure, its a crutch keeping me alive until a REAL cure is found.
Granted I am not a scientist, but this decision caused quite a stir in the D world.
Post a Comment