It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NEWS: House OKs Bill to Ease Stem Cell Limits

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 25 2005 @ 09:07 AM
The House of Representatives passed a bill Tuesday that reverses President Bush's decision in 2001 to limit embryonic stem cell research. President Bush said that he would veto the bill if it passed in the Senate.
The 238-194 vote meant the bipartisan legislation to allow federal funding of embryonic stem cell research fell far short of the 290 House votes that would be needed to overturn a potential Bush veto, which would be the first of his presidency.

Tuesday's House debate was emotional and divided both parties. Opponents said embryonic research amounted to destroying human life in its earliest stages. They also said that adult stem cells offered more potential.

Most scientists argue that research on all types of stem cells is needed, suggesting the embryonic cells may offer the most flexibility to target a wide range of conditions, including diabetes and Parkinson's and Lou Gehrig's diseases, heart disease and spinal cord injuries. They also warned that Bush's 2001 decision gave a competitive edge to scientists in other countries.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Stem cell research will take place in the world regardless of American legislation. If the President vetoes this bill and it does not get passed, then America will simply trail behind other countries in medical research.

There is nothing to lose from passing this bill, and sick people all over the world have everything to gain. I have heard a lot from ATSers that are pro-stem-cell-research... Are there any ATSers against it?

Related News Links:

posted on May, 25 2005 @ 02:29 PM
As long as the holy dogma is enforced in the white house, this will get vetoed. No ifs ands or buts about it. Bush will smite it and probably say its Gods will. I find it very rediculas that we have the technology to save hundreds of thousands of lives and Bush tells us we cant persue it even though every one and there grandmother is dumping millions into Stem Cell research.

posted on May, 25 2005 @ 02:35 PM
bush is stupied, if he care so much about stoping to kill life to save life wtf are we in iraq for??? + the research will save more life, and the life we kill are not even born yet for god sake.

posted on May, 25 2005 @ 03:50 PM
Maybe Bush is against this for other reasons -- like, for instance, if stem cell research leads to longer lives for people, then there will be more folks seeking social security money.


posted on May, 25 2005 @ 06:42 PM

like, for instance, if stem cell research leads to longer lives for people, then there will be more folks seeking social security money.

So you are saying that the other reason Bush is considering is that we cant afford to feed the herd so its time for some culling?
Yeah, that sounds about right.

posted on May, 26 2005 @ 08:37 AM
It may sound funny but you've got to admit that advances in medical science aren't conducive to a favorable social security future or to the pending energy crisis.

It is in the government's interest that people die on time, and that the population stays relatively small.


posted on May, 26 2005 @ 09:16 AM
current stem cell reasurch has nothing to do with killing or destroying protential embryo's. They are using unfertilized eggs, injecting them with DNA and growth limiters. This is about as close to destroying embryo's as a womens period is.

[edit on 5/26/2005 by Jehosephat]

posted on May, 26 2005 @ 09:42 AM
Here's a link to the news story about Korea's advances in stem cell science -- the short thread includes the thoughts of a person directly affected by all of this.

by Ikena
BTW, Ityped this message with a stick that I bite down on with my teeth, just to give a little insight.

Sometimes it is difficult to put legislation like this in perspective without a little first-hand input from those directly affected.'


[edit on 26-5-2005 by Zipdot]

posted on May, 26 2005 @ 01:19 PM
just a stupid question, if these embryos are alive, and well, his objection is that we shouldn't be creating life to destroy it, well, why is he not reacting to them crreating the life to destroy it, since well, this is already being done, and is how these embryos were created to begin with, with the intention of using a few and destroying alot.....
so, well, I don't think his gripe is with stem cell research, but rather with the fertility clinics.

posted on May, 26 2005 @ 01:33 PM
Someone made a similar arguement about aborted fetuses that kind of goes like, "hey, the researchers aren't aborting the fetuses, they're just using aborted fetuses that would otherwise end up as medical waste..." Waste not, want not, eh?

I can't blame the researchers and I'm not going to judge these mothers who have or have had abortions. I haven't figured out how I really feel about it, and probably won't make up my mind as long as I live, how I feel about abortion.

Of course, what we're talking about in these couple of threads has nothing to do whatsoever with fetuses. We're just talking about eggs and nucleic matter. I just thought I'd throw that out there, though.


posted on May, 26 2005 @ 02:33 PM
yes, but embrionic, would mean embryos, right, which would mean fertilized eggs, right, little teeny tiny human lifeforms that shouldn't be killed according to the anti-abortionists...
personally, I don't really care what they do, but I've gotten the impression that some seem to feel that these embryos shouldn't be considered the same as the ones that were fertilized and growing within the womb for some reason, and well, I find that objectionable. if the only difference between the two is one happens to be in a petri dish and the other happens to have a human host, if we can't see, to think of them as being basically the same, well, we have no business messing with this kind of stuff!

new topics

top topics


log in