Thursday, July 20, 2006

Bush Embryos

I was chilling yesterday while I read the paper and had a beer after work. In the paper was a brief article on the house voting to support additional federal funding of stem cell research. Before I go any further, a few points:

Many people criticize Bush for not supporting stem cell research. This isn't quite accurate as federal funding for stem cell research was allocated under Bush, not Clinton or any other previous president. It's also important to note what he is being lambasted for is FEDERAL FUNDING.... not preventing research. This means it's a question of whether or not your tax dollars pay for it or the companies have to do it with their own money.

Secondly, there are multiple types of stem cells. Most scientists are working with adult stem cells and trying to culture and grow them. The raging debate is over embryonic stem cells, which are the cells of an embryo before they have been "assigned" to become any type of specific tissue. There is a great potential for research in embryonic stem cells.

Now I am not going to tell you that utilizing embryonic stem cells is either right or wrong. That is a religious debate for which I don't want to get in to. What I will tell you is that it looks like the vote is going to pass to support additional federal funding and that Bush is saying he will veto it.

This makes me very unhappy. I think there is a lot of potential in medical science with regards to stem cell research. I think, that if the people elect to spend their tax dollars on it then it is a good thing (I might also add that I don't think companies that benefit from this should be able to completely privatize their revenue when they come up with something). I don't like Bush intervening because he doesn't have the same religious belief as the majority of the house. Bush hasn't vetoed anything in his presidency, yet. Why this? Why does he have to impose his ultra-conservative beliefs on the entire United States?

I do not think that having a sense of values and morals is a bad thing. In fact, I think our country has lost too many values and we are on a downward spiral. I think something really bad will have to happen before it gets better. But where do you draw the line? Our country is supposed to be based on a basic democratic process (though it's not a true democracy). This is one thing about Bush that I definitely do not like or support.

3 comments:

Miss Carnivorous said...

I saw a pundit on TV and she said that Bush did 2 things with the Stem Cell veto. 1, he appealed to his very conservative Christian base. All good for him, he is living up to campaign promises. 2, he gave the moderate Republicans a chance to look good, by distancing themselves from Bush's radical Christian agenda. They look good to their moderate base and up the chances of being re-elected in their disticts by saying in their campaigns that they differed with an unpopular President. Brilliant strategy.

Miss Carnivorous said...

I saw a pundit on TV and she said that Bush did 2 things with the Stem Cell veto. 1, he appealed to his very conservative Christian base. All good for him, he is living up to campaign promises. 2, he gave the moderate Republicans a chance to look good, by distancing themselves from Bush's radical Christian agenda. They look good to their moderate base and up the chances of being re-elected in their disticts by saying in their campaigns that they differed with an unpopular President. Brilliant strategy.

Miss Carnivorous said...

Sorry, posted twice, please delete!