Wednesday, July 19, 2006

Where's My Unborn Peeps?

WASHINGTON, D.C. - President Bush cast the first veto of his 5-1/2 year presidency Wednesday, rejecting legislation to ease limits on federal funding for research on stem cells obtained from embryos. "This bill would support the taking of innocent human life of the hope of finding medical benefits for others. It crosses a moral boundary that our society needs to respect, so I vetoed it," Bush said at a White House event where he was surrounded by 18 families who "adopted" frozen embryos that were not used by other couples, and then used those left over embryos to have children.
Nice going George. You really know how to pick your fights. Surround yourself with a group of kooks who happen to agree with you and whip out your veto pen. Sure, why bother trying to find a cure for a disease that a living person has, when we can use those embryos to produce more people?
You make it sound as if we're going around stealing living embryos and using them for research against someone's will, when the exact opposite is true. Meanwhile, we can still get government money for lots of other less important things:
$60,000 to open a flower shop
$100,000 to open a pizza shop
$92,000 to start a dry cleaner shop
$150,000 to open a computer store
But you can't get ten cents from the government to help cure a disease like Alzheimer's or Parkinson's. That makes good nonsense. Britain has passed laws encouraging embryonic stem-cell research. Canada and New Zealand have passed legislation to fund it. So, why couldn't George go along with his Poodle Pal in England? How can we be so sure that we are right and they are wrong? The bill didn't concern drilling for oil or fighting his great boogeyman - terrorism, so it gets squashed.
I'd like to make a list of all the "moral boundaries" that George Bush has crossed since he became president, but I only have so much space.
As I have said before, the government is there for you - just don't get sick or become poor - that's when they stop caring.

8 comments:

Kate Michele said...

Ok I'm on the fence on this one...So hear me out. I don't think they should be able to, say abort, a fetus or an embryo for research cuase I just don't agree with abortion (thats about the only conseritive thing about me)... But on the other hand if it only applys to all the millions of embryos they have frozen in big freezer vaults in the hope of IVF or something than I think it could be good for research.

I mean the average couple going through IVF, stores like what a dozen eggs...What happens when they get pregnant finally and theres six left? Are they just to sit in a frezzer for years? I think if the couple wants to donate them for research then they should be able to do so.

I wanted to donate my babies cords and cord blood for the stem cells that are found in them for just that reason, however my hospital told me they don't offer that! Maybe next time.

Anthony said...

Your "other hand" scenario is the one that applies. No one is advocating aborting babies for research, which is where George and his pals get confused.

And they are easily confused.

Kate Michele said...

OOHH ok, well then I see absolutly no problem with it, it could lead to a cure for a whole handful of diseases!!! Why are they being so stubborn about it??

Beth said...

That. Veto. Made. Me. So. Angry. What a narrow-minded, idiotic putz.

Anonymous said...

Here are some links that I believe will be interested

Anonymous said...

Here are some links that I believe will be interested

Anonymous said...

Your are Excellent. And so is your site! Keep up the good work. Bookmarked.
»

Anonymous said...

Your are Nice. And so is your site! Maybe you need some more pictures. Will return in the near future.
»