See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

1. #1
   On June 21st, 2007 at 9:00 am, Kaffir with a Capital K said:

   It’s harder and harder to understand some of the things the President is doing/has done. However, thank God he did this. The agenda-driven media and their abortionist liberal cohorts will never tell the actual facts. Thus far there has been much more progress and promise in using adult stem cells and cord blood. It only stands to reason that your body would accept your own adult cells than immature dead baby cells. Thank You President Bush!

2. #2
   On June 21st, 2007 at 10:01 am, laugrat said:

   I just held a two hour old baby in my arms. Her name is Maggie and she has blue eyes and dark hair. I wondered, as I looked into that small face, how anyone could ever think that 4 hours before, she didn’t matter as a human being.

   A baby is God’s opinion that the world should go on.

   CARL SANDBURG

3. #3
   On June 21st, 2007 at 10:43 am, ericire12 said:

   Thank God…..this is almost as bad as partial birth abortion

4. #4
   On June 21st, 2007 at 10:55 am, pgtips said:

   What I really fail to understand is why there is such a drive to popularize embryonic stem cell research, when this has yet to bear any fruit. On the other hand, adult stem cell research is widely used, and has had many success stories.

   President Bush is right in vetoing this bill. What I find really irritating about the media portrayal of the whole embryonic stem cell research is that nobody and I mean nobody mentions the fact that experiments with embryonic stem cells have failed, even after 20 years while many treatments exist today which successfully use adult stem cells. Just do a quick google search or look up on Wikipedia and you’ll have the proof of my statements.

   It offends me how the media portrays those who are against embryonic stem cell research as anti-science hill billies who go out of their way to hold back progress.

5. #5
   On June 21st, 2007 at 10:58 am, Bic said:

   What gets me most about this embryonic stem cell debate is that it always posed as the President banning research instead of the truth, that it is merely a restriction on Federal funding.

   No one in the MSM ever asks the question, “if this form of research is so revolutionary as to be the cure for all mans woes (as people like Pelosi and Edwards are so fond of telling everyone), why aren’t private companies willing to put up their own money to fund it?”

6. #6
   On June 21st, 2007 at 11:13 am, On-my-soap-box said:

   Embryonic stem cell research, Global warming, Michael Moore, Rosie-o. In twenty years they will be on the top 5 list of biggest liberal hoaxes in history. Fill in the blank for the fifth!!! Pardon the pun on the last two - LOL

7. #7
   On June 21st, 2007 at 11:30 am, dedalus said:

   Embryonic stem cells are pluripotent and can grow into any type of cell, while adult stem cells need to be targeted to the organ they came from and are more limited in their research value. Currently fertility clinics can legally destroy embryos but they can’t donate them for research. The status quo seems wasteful regardless of your viewpoint.

8. #8
   On June 21st, 2007 at 11:48 am, mangle1 said:

   Another defeat for American science.

9. #9
   On June 21st, 2007 at 12:12 pm, Terrier said:

   Bush didn’t ban embryonic stem cell research, only the federal funding of such.

10. #10
    On June 21st, 2007 at 12:29 pm, ElCee said:

    #7 - Actually, pluripotent stem cells have been found in various tissue: the spinal cord, the brain, and especially promising, the umbilical cord.

    And in my viewpoint, unused embryos should be buried or cremated as the human beings they are, not treated as research material.

11. #11
    On June 21st, 2007 at 12:36 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

    Right Terrier. The reason ESR is not publicly funded is it will die. No private sector is going to touch it when adult stem cells work and there is no instance where embryonic stem cells do a good job. The pluripotent argument does not hold water. If it did, you would not need government funding. You need government funding to keep it alive. Science did not take a hit. It is science that has kept embryonic stem cells out of the market. The fact is, adult stem cells work, are readily available and there is often little need for a donor. American science? What is that??

12. #12
    On June 21st, 2007 at 12:37 pm, pgtips said:

    #10 - Exactly. If you see embryos as human beings, you will treat them as human beings.

    #7 - Embryonic stem cell research is of dubious value. After 20 or so years, there is nothing to show for it. Not only that, as others have mentioned if embryonic stem cell research contains so much benefit, why isn’t there private investment into this area? Why do they need federal funding? That’s because business savvy people see no future in the area.

13. #13
    On June 21st, 2007 at 12:41 pm, On-my-soap-box said:

    HAHA pgtips - beat ya to it!

14. #14
    On June 21st, 2007 at 1:08 pm, deedledee said:

    Two quotes from Harry Potter, of all things, sum up my feelings

    “It is our choices Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.” We may someday have the ability to figure out how to use embryonic stem cells, but what does the choice to use embryos in the first place say about us?

    “Dark and difficult times lie ahead. Soon we must all face the choice between what is right and what is easy” That is what it comes down to…what is right? As the sister of a brother who was brain damaged by a virus and lived almost 5 years after, I know what these illnesses can do to a family, but to abuse the lives of our pre-born to me would be as bad as saying my brother was a useless, non-productive, medical-resource-wasting non-entity. Oh, where have I heard that before…Terri Schindler Schiavo? Some lives are not worth respecting and protecting?

15. #15
    On June 21st, 2007 at 1:32 pm, BKennedy said:

    You know, its funny how the “pro-science” crowd gets so squeamish about showing women sonograms depicting the inside of their wombs, then turn around and say if we don’t support funding for embryonic stem cell research, a crapshoot with no results thus far, we are anti-science.

    Apparently, you’re only “pro-science” if you feel Hitler’s experiments on human beings were not ethically challenged.

    More chilling still is that there are a lot of “bioethicists” that have no problem with cloning, embryonic stem cell research, or any other experiment where human beings are killed for “the greater good(TM).”

16. #16
    On June 21st, 2007 at 1:40 pm, EdDantes said:

    dedalus, you’re wrong. Not all Adult Stem Cells have to be targeted to the organ they came from, some are pluripotent(they are, however, as you suggest, not as adaptable as ESCs are assumed to be, which makes ASCs much safer for use). For disease curing purposes, multipotent cells such as the adult progenitor cells found in bone marrow are perfectly useful seeing as how they are just a more advanced stem cell.

    The fact is there has not been any plausible scientific evidence that shows that the use of ESC lines is beneficial. John Edwards, however, calls ESC research
    

    responsible, life-saving medical research.

    On the contrary, ESCs have been shown to cause tumors, uncontrollable proliferation, and are genetically unstable. What’s responsible and lifesaving about that? You also won’t hear proponents of ESC research talk about how ESCs have to be genetically altered to have any chance of working, even in mice (this is called therapeutic cloning and is actually one step removed from reproductive cloning). That’s almost 10 years of scientific study with no results.

    On the other hand, ASCs have been shown to produce nerve cells, skeletal muscle, and cardiac muscle when harvested from bone marrow. Also, the federal government currently provides funding for ASC research.

    But I applaud your style, “never let the facts get in the way of a good argument.”

    The BLuR

17. #17
    On June 21st, 2007 at 1:43 pm, chow said:

    The fact that there is not progress (and likely will be no progress) from embryonic stem cells does not matter in this controversy. It is widely known that all the stem cell research which has shown progress have been of the non-stem variety.

18. #18
    On June 21st, 2007 at 1:57 pm, miron said:

    Prez Bush deserves credit for this. The merchants of death have been prevented from plying their trade on this one. Thanks.

19. #19
    On June 21st, 2007 at 4:35 pm, Malleus Rex said:

    I watched Dem leadership response in the afternoon on C-Spam. Typical lies: Bush has banned research. (not true - he banned taxpayer funded research)

    67% of Americans support research. (not true - the question is loaded - makes no mention that human life is destroyed as a result of the reseach)

    Dems weren’t twisting words - they were flat out lying.

20. #20
    On June 22nd, 2007 at 12:35 pm, EdDantes said:

    #19-that would be because they don’t know what they’re talking about.

21. #21
    On June 22nd, 2007 at 1:32 pm, Wanderlust said:

    So, mangle1, “American science” is so weak that it must be funded by tax dollars or else it will die?

    Last I checked, the commercial biotech industry in the US is quite healthy, and (by any indication from the investment $$$ poured into that sector from venture capitalists) very lucrative.

    Yet this research dog, embryonic stem cell research, can only survive if the US Government funds it, according to your side of the political aisle.

    Silly.

22. #22
    On June 22nd, 2007 at 2:53 pm, ammonrae said:

    Yea I support the veto…children need love and mercy….

23. #23
    On June 23rd, 2007 at 1:37 pm, dedalus said:

    Thanks to EdDantes for the info and the link to theBLuR. I agree with most of your points in your June 21 posting and recommend it to others as a great read.

    Governments do infrastructure—from roads, to security, to disease control—that the capital markets aren’t effective at funding. Some infrastructure investments are foolish boondoggles and some greatly improve our quality of life and provide the foundation for private investment. I’m particularly grateful for some of the work that DARPA did in the 1960’s which laid the ground work for me to watch videos on Hot Air four decades later.

    President Bush has made a principled (rather than a scientific) argument against embryonic stem cell research. You correctly call out the Dems for wildly hyping the near-term applications of embryonic stem cell research, but President Bush in his veto called the work done by scientists in this field “unethical”. If he genuinely believes that shouldn’t he more tightly regulate the destruction of zygotes and blastocysts during IVF? Perhaps enforce the continued cryopreservation of the 400,000 embryos that are currently frozen?