| Topic Name: |
Idea for Stem Cell Controversy |
| Message Name: |
Perhaps the |
| Date Posted: |
06/01/2005 |
| In Reply To: |
I wish the politicians who've opposed embryonic stem cells and voted against the research would have to sign a pledge.
It would say that no one in their family would agree to accept the cure for diabetes, alzheimer's, etc. once it is found. That's because embryonic stem cells were used in the research and cure.
Something tells me those politicians wouldn't sign it, or they wouldn't honor it down the road.
I can't understand the conservatives who are so outspoken on embryonic stem cells ... yet those same folks say nothing about in-vitro fertilization. By law, any eggs that are not used by the donors have to be destroyed. embryos-destroyed. No one speaks out about that. I guess no one wants to tell a good Christian family they can't have children? But they'll say plenty about how those diabetic kids will have to live their lives.
What hypocrites.
|
| Message: |
real story here is the overselling of embryonic stem cell research in California - and the glaring conflicts of interest, lack of any real governmental oversight planning, direction, and billions of tax-payer dollars (the most expensive proposal ever enacted in the state) pouring into the pockets of technocrats and scientists.
Now that the votes have been counted the most these people can agree upon when pressed is that any solid development vis a vis embryonic stem cells could be decades down the road if ever.
You would never have heard them admitting as much before election day. The Democratics promised us that Christopher Reeve would get up out of his wheelchair and walk.
On the other hand - that statement was made by the type of guy who's going to profit more than anyone in the end - a malpractice attorney.
|
|
