PDA

View Full Version : Bush says suck-it to cancer victims/destroys U.S. science



Nickdfresh
07-19-2006, 03:49 PM
Bush vetoes embryonic stem-cell bill

Wednesday, July 19, 2006; Posted: 3:35 p.m. EDT (19:35 GMT)

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/POLITICS/07/19/stemcells.veto/story.stem.cnn.jpg
Bush meets with his intellectual equivalent Tuesday.

WASHINGTON (CNN) (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/19/stemcells.veto/index.html) -- President Bush on Wednesday used his veto power for the first time since taking office 5 1/2 years ago, saying that a embryonic stem-cell research bill "crossed a moral boundary."

The bill, which the Senate passed Tuesday in a 63-37 vote, would have loosened the restrictions on federal funding for stem-cell research.

House Republican leaders have said they would try for an override vote on the measure, but it's unlikely to pass, lacking the two-thirds majority needed in each chamber.

"This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," Bush said Wednesday afternoon. "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect. So I vetoed it."

Attending the White House event were a group of families with children who were born from "adopted" frozen embryos that had been left unused at fertility clinics.

"These boys and girls are not spare parts," he said of the children in the audience. "They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research. They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells."

The measure, which the House of Representatives passed in May, allows couples who have had embryos frozen for fertility treatments to donate them to researchers rather than let them be destroyed.

Bush said, "If this bill were to become law, American taxpayers would, for the first time in our history, be compelled to fund the deliberate destruction of human embryos, and I'm not going to allow it."

In August 2001, Bush announced that his administration would allow federal funding only for research on about 60 stem-cell lines that existed at the time. Researchers have since found that many of those lines are contaminated and unusable for research.

Scientists say stem cells could be a renewable source of replacement cells and tissues to treat Parkinson's and Alzheimer's diseases, spinal cord injuries, diabetes, strokes, burns and more.

The issue has split the Republican Party, with Bush siding with the Catholic Church and social conservatives against the GOP's more moderate voices. (Watch how the issue pits Bush against some Republicans -- 1:30)

The Senate bill's principal sponsor, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, who recently survived a brush with cancer, was joined by Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee, a physician who argued that Bush's policy is too restrictive.

"I am pro-life, but I disagree with the president's decision to veto the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act," Frist said in a statement. "Given the potential of this research and the limitations of the existing lines eligible for federally funded research, I think additional lines should be made available."

Also in a statement, Lawrence T. Smith, chairman of the American Diabetes Association, called the veto "a devastating setback for the 20.8 million American children and adults with diabetes -- and those who love and care for them."

Opponents argue that other alternatives, such as adult stem cells, are available. Two companion bills -- one to promote alternative means of developing stem-cell lines from sources such as placental blood and another to ban the commercial production of human fetal tissue, also known as "fetal farming" -- passed the Senate in 100-0 votes.

On Tuesday evening, the House approved the "fetal farming" bill 425-0 but didn't pass the measure promoting alternative stem-cell sources when backers failed to achieve the two-thirds majority that House rules required. The vote on the alternative-sources bill was 273-154.

Bush signed the "fetal farming" legislation and urged Congress to fund alternative research.

"I'm disappointed that the House failed to authorize funding for this vital and ethical research," he said. "It makes no sense to say that you're in favor of finding cures for terrible diseases as quickly as possible and then block a bill that would authorize funding for promising and ethical stem-cell research."

A House GOP aide said that the leadership would bring the funding bill back to the floor at another time under a different set of rules that would require a simple majority to pass the measure.


CNN's Dana Bash and Deirdre Walsh contributed to this report.

frets5150
07-19-2006, 04:09 PM
So what else is new again he Fucks something else up. I hope he gets brain cancer Oh wait Chimp does not have a brain. Then any type of cancer will have to do. :mad:

FORD
07-19-2006, 04:10 PM
Chimp and Ben "what's a Democrat?" Nelson can both go straight to fucking Hell.

Even the usual DLC suspects came out in favor of this one. Hillary, Lieberman, DiFi the Likud Warmonger.... only Ben Nelson decided to be a chickenshit asshole. And of course the 37 morons from the hard right wing, who would pass laws saying "masturbation is murder" if they could get away with it.

Can Catkiller get 4 of his fellow Klansmen to flip over for the veto-proof majority?

I'd like to think so, but I doubt it.

Ellyllions
07-19-2006, 04:21 PM
This is imporant research for sure. I'd love to have a cure for diabetes myself. Because one day the odds are that I'll have it sine my father and grandfather both have/had it.

Could it be that this could turn money back into the economy by making to funded by private companies? Because whomever releases the drugs from this research are going to be super mega rich in a very short amount of time.

Just trying to think outside the box...

FORD
07-19-2006, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by Ellyllions
This is imporant research for sure. I'd love to have a cure for diabetes myself. Because one day the odds are that I'll have it sine my father and grandfather both have/had it.

Could it be that this could turn money back into the economy by making to funded by private companies? Because whomever releases the drugs from this research are going to be super mega rich in a very short amount of time.

Just trying to think outside the box...

Nah, if this was all about the money, Frist would have opposed it, because his family owns the largest corporate hospital chain in the country.

And the issue here isn't drugs, but the ability to manipulate cells in the human body. Stem cells start out with a "generic" blueprint. They aren't really anything until they are programmed. In an embryo that is implanted in the womb, this programming comes from nature, but science is making great progress in programming these cells themselves to the point where you could arguably consider growing organs in a petri dish. Like a brand new pancreas for someone who is diabetic, for example.

The so called "pro-lifers" don't have a leg to stand on here. These embryos are "leftovers" from in vitro fertilization procedures, which would otherwise be thrown away anyway. It's not a matter of "killing babies" and not even comparable to abortion.

It's clear why Chimp opposes this research. His family has been pro-death for generations. Even when Chimpy's own sister died of cancer as a child, Poppy & Babs went golfing the next day, rather than have a funeral for the child.

Guitar Shark
07-19-2006, 04:51 PM
Originally posted by FORD
It's clear why Chimp opposes this research. His family has been pro-death for generations. Even when Chimpy's own sister died of cancer as a child, Poppy & Babs went golfing the next day, rather than have a funeral for the child.

:rolleyes:

Little Texan
07-19-2006, 06:13 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/POLITICS/07/19/stemcells.veto/story.stem.cnn.jpg
Bush meets with his intellectual equivalent Tuesday.



Don't insult that kid like that! His intellect is much greater than that of Bush, even at his young age!

Little Texan
07-19-2006, 06:17 PM
Didn't you know that Bush only believes in taking lives (pointless Iraq war), not saving them (stem cell research)!

Seshmeister
07-19-2006, 06:23 PM
Biomedical Science is going to be huge in the coming years.

Since China makes everything these days then the US should be all over this for her economy.

Don't worry about the cures and breakthroughs in medicine though. The less superstitious countries will make them instead and then sell them to you. If you have any money left by that point...

FORD
07-19-2006, 06:28 PM
Originally posted by Seshmeister
Biomedical Science is going to be huge in the coming years.

Since China makes everything these days then the US should be all over this for her economy.

Don't worry about the cures and breakthroughs in medicine though. The less superstitious countries will make them instead and then sell them to you. If you have any money left by that point...

Yeah, I can see it now......

Do it yourself home stem-cell therapy kits, made in China, sold at Wal-Mart (except in "Red" states where prohibited by Sharia law)

PumpedUpMidget
07-19-2006, 06:38 PM
This is the main reason, in my mind, that this sorry ass 'president' has to go....Stem cell research is a fucking no-brainer.

Seshmeister
07-19-2006, 06:50 PM
The only way countries in the West will be able to compete with China and India is in knowledge rich technical clever stuff.

The USA is tying one hand behind her back with this. The multinationals won't give a fuck, they'll just set up all their research labs in Europe.

DEMON CUNT
07-19-2006, 07:46 PM
What a total sack of shit!

blueturk
07-19-2006, 08:17 PM
"This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," Bush said Wednesday afternoon. "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect. So I vetoed it."

Yes, it's MUCH better to take innocent human life because you have a personal grudge to settle.

DEMON CUNT
07-19-2006, 08:42 PM
Originally posted by blueturk
"This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," Bush said Wednesday afternoon. "It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect. So I vetoed it."

Yes, it's MUCH better to take innocent human life because you have a personal grudge to settle.

Whenever Bush (Beast 666) mentions "innocent human life" he's talking about white people.

frets5150
07-19-2006, 09:20 PM
IMO I think there already is a cure for most cancers that we have not been told about. Do you know how much money would be lost in the Pharmaceutical buisness if they told people there is a cure.What do you think they make their money on asprin? Do you have any clue how much cancer fighting drugs cost? And think about it when was the last president you heard of that died from cancer? :mad:

FORD
07-19-2006, 09:52 PM
Originally posted by frets5150
And think about it when was the last president you heard of that died from cancer? :mad:

Probably LBJ, who died only about 5 years or so after leaving office. Of course he was also a heavy smoker, I believe.

But yeah, the pharmaceutical companies are a racket.

Pharmaceuticals do NOT cure diseases. Most of them merely address the symptoms, and do NOTHING to find the cause of the disease and stop the conditions allowing the disease to develop.

Any disease is a result of one or more of the following:

1) Too many toxins in the body. Since many pharmaceuticals are themselves TOXIC, you can not possibly cure or prevent an illness this way.

2) Nutritional deficiencies. - If you eat nothing but crap, you'll feel nothing but crappy. And it's not just the obvious junk food either, but also pesticides, hormones, and God knows what else in the food that you THINK is healthy. Best rule to live by: If it doesn't exist in nature, don't eat it. And grow it yourself if you can.

3)Electromagnetic Chaos - One of the curses of modern technology is electromagnetic fields everywhere. Your computer is generating them out. So's your cell phone, or any cell tower near you. And any electrical wiring, especially high voltage power lines (ever listened closely when you walk under those things? It sounds like a goddamned bowl of Rice Krispies)

All of these things charge the air with positive ions. And while the word "positive" is usually a good thing, not so much here. positive ions can really fuck with your body's own energy field. "negative" ions on the other hand, are very beneficial. Go to the beach, the mountain, a waterfall, anywhere where the forces of nature are at work and take in those life energizing negative ions.

Or if you can't do that, get one of those ionizers at Sharper Image.

4) Trapped mental and emotional stress. Call a therapist. Punch a wall. Strangle a sheep. Do whatever you need to do, but let it out, or it will kill you.

The only way to get sick other than that is to catch a common virus, and even then, if you took care of the 4 factors above, your immune system could blow off the virus.

ODShowtime
07-19-2006, 10:21 PM
Originally spoken by gw
saying that a embryonic stem-cell research bill "crossed a moral boundary."

of all the things to say....

you dirty son of a bitch. :rolleyes:

frets5150
07-19-2006, 10:23 PM
Read about this guy Kevin Trudeau

The United States Federal Trade Commission censored Kevin Trudeau’s first book, Natural Cures “They” Don’t Want You To Know About. That book still saved lives. Hundreds of thousands of people have reported better health and the curing of their diseases without drugs and surgery after reading it. Now, Kevin Trudeau takes on, and goes head-to-head against, governments worldwide, the international pharmaceutical medical cartels, and even the news media. He reveals for the first time never-before released secret information about his covert involvement with Big Pharma, the food industry, governments in over sixty countries, and some of the richest and most powerful families, people, and private organizations in the world. He is being called the most daring whistleblower of corporate and government corruption of all time. Risking potential criminal prosecution, Trudeau now releases the material previously censored by the U.S. Government: the specific product brand names that Trudeau believes can be used to prevent, treat, and cure diseasein his new book


http://www.calcompnutrition.com/natural-cures-kevin-trudeau.html

frets5150
07-19-2006, 10:24 PM
Not one sheep in here today? Hmm

ODShowtime
07-19-2006, 10:26 PM
Originally posted by PumpedUpMidget
This is the main reason, in my mind, that this sorry ass 'president' has to go....Stem cell research is a fucking no-brainer.

yeah, well so is ol' gw

frets5150
07-19-2006, 10:28 PM
Originally posted by blueturk
Yes, it's MUCH better to take innocent human life because you have a personal grudge to settle.


Brilliant comment That's about what it comes down to Dumb Fuckin Chimp :mad:

LoungeMachine
07-19-2006, 10:31 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
[


The measure, which the House of Representatives passed in May, allows couples who have had embryos frozen for fertility treatments to donate them to researchers rather than let them be destroyed.

.


So, if they're ultimately being "destroyed" how is THAT not throwing away human life???

I'm so sick to death of the blatant hypocrisy from the so-called "religious right" in this country I could puke.

FUCK YOU BUSH.

AND FUCK ANY OF YOU WHO SUPPORT THIS VETO.


God How I hate this man and EVERYTHING he touches.



How many lives could be saved?

How many could rise from their wheelchairs?

How many families could be made whole again?

:mad:

Seshmeister
07-19-2006, 10:46 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Probably LBJ, who died only about 5 years or so after leaving office. Of course he was also a heavy smoker, I believe.

But yeah, the pharmaceutical companies are a racket.

Pharmaceuticals do NOT cure diseases. Most of them merely address the symptoms, and do NOTHING to find the cause of the disease and stop the conditions allowing the disease to develop.

Any disease is a result of one or more of the following:

1) Too many toxins in the body. Since many pharmaceuticals are themselves TOXIC, you can not possibly cure or prevent an illness this way.

2) Nutritional deficiencies. - If you eat nothing but crap, you'll feel nothing but crappy. And it's not just the obvious junk food either, but also pesticides, hormones, and God knows what else in the food that you THINK is healthy. Best rule to live by: If it doesn't exist in nature, don't eat it. And grow it yourself if you can.

3)Electromagnetic Chaos - One of the curses of modern technology is electromagnetic fields everywhere. Your computer is generating them out. So's your cell phone, or any cell tower near you. And any electrical wiring, especially high voltage power lines (ever listened closely when you walk under those things? It sounds like a goddamned bowl of Rice Krispies)

All of these things charge the air with positive ions. And while the word "positive" is usually a good thing, not so much here. positive ions can really fuck with your body's own energy field. "negative" ions on the other hand, are very beneficial. Go to the beach, the mountain, a waterfall, anywhere where the forces of nature are at work and take in those life energizing negative ions.

Or if you can't do that, get one of those ionizers at Sharper Image.

4) Trapped mental and emotional stress. Call a therapist. Punch a wall. Strangle a sheep. Do whatever you need to do, but let it out, or it will kill you.

The only way to get sick other than that is to catch a common virus, and even then, if you took care of the 4 factors above, your immune system could blow off the virus.

Some nuttiness in this post.

The drug companies are dodgy. The most amzing fact about them which I think I posted before is that 15% of their turnover goes on R&D and 50% on marketing. Remember that the next time their spokesman comes on saying that if they didn't rip people off there would be no new drugs.

1) Saying drugs are toxic so don't take them is silly.

2) Fair enough up to a point but remember that when everyone used to only eat natural foods a few hundred years ago you would be doing well to live to 40.

3) Fucking stupid stuff. Tons of research has failed to show anything. You're a short step away from wind chimes and alternative bullshit with this nonsense.

4) I think there is a link between your mind and state of health. Punching a wall is usually a much better option than goin to a 'therapist'. Placebos seem to have an effect. Homeopathy which is just a placebo seems to make some people do better, Ijust wish that they wouldn't pretend it wasn't BS. Then again maybe it wouldn't work then. Problem is turning around to the people that have just lost a young relative and saying 'hey he didn't think himself better well enough...'

FORD
07-19-2006, 10:48 PM
Originally posted by frets5150
Read about this guy Kevin Trudeau

The United States Federal Trade Commission censored Kevin Trudeau’s first book, Natural Cures “They” Don’t Want You To Know About. That book still saved lives. Hundreds of thousands of people have reported better health and the curing of their diseases without drugs and surgery after reading it. Now, Kevin Trudeau takes on, and goes head-to-head against, governments worldwide, the international pharmaceutical medical cartels, and even the news media. He reveals for the first time never-before released secret information about his covert involvement with Big Pharma, the food industry, governments in over sixty countries, and some of the richest and most powerful families, people, and private organizations in the world. He is being called the most daring whistleblower of corporate and government corruption of all time. Risking potential criminal prosecution, Trudeau now releases the material previously censored by the U.S. Government: the specific product brand names that Trudeau believes can be used to prevent, treat, and cure diseasein his new book


http://www.calcompnutrition.com/natural-cures-kevin-trudeau.html

Yeah, actually some of the stuff I quoted above was from Kevin Trudeau's book ""Natural Cures THEY Don't Want You To Know About".

He presents an excellent case, but a lot of this stuff is really just common sense when you think about it. Cancer, strokes, heart disease, MS, etc.... Some of these things didn't exist at all 100 years ago and the others were very rare. It's only logical that the causes of these diseases are things which human beings did not put in their bodies 100 years ago, but are all too common now. In our food, in our drugs, in the water, and even the air we breathe.

I've got a friend who's fighting cancer right now. It's a rare kind of cancer that won't respond to any of the typical treatments. They have tried three different types of chemotherapy on him. None of them have done a damn thing. So called "modern medicine" can't do a fucking thing to save his life.

So what he's doing now is trying to alternate his body chemistry. Eliminate all toxins that he can. Transform his body into an alkaline state, which can be done through simple dietary changes.

The theory here is that cancer requires an acid environment in which to live, and a body in an alkaline state will starve it out.

I honestly don't know if it's too late for him at this point, and the damage is done, but he's literally got nothing to lose by trying.

I'm applying the strategy myself...... as preventative medicine.

ODShowtime
07-19-2006, 10:49 PM
Originally posted by LoungeMachine
So, if they're ultimately being "destroyed" how is THAT not throwing away human life???

I'm so sick to death of the blatant hypocrisy from the so-called "religious right" in this country I could puke.

FUCK YOU BUSH.


:mad:


This bill would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," Bush said Wednesday afternoon. So I vetoed it."

Ok, it looks like you and gw aren't on the same page on this. Do you think gw might be somehow misled on the subject at hand?

It sounds like gw would rather throw something that could help save lives into the trash than think of a way to profit off it like a good American should.

diamondD
07-19-2006, 11:00 PM
Cancer, strokes and heart disese didn't exist a 100 years ago? Where do you get this crap?

FORD
07-19-2006, 11:01 PM
Originally posted by ODShowtime
Ok, it looks like you and gw aren't on the same page on this. Do you think gw might be somehow misled on the subject at hand?

It sounds like gw would rather throw something that could help save lives into the trash than think of a way to profit off it like a good American should.

This is why you might actually see Frist cracking the whip on this one.

That old cat-killing bastard sees the $$$$ to be made at Humana/HCA hospitals. He wants to get PAID.

FORD
07-19-2006, 11:04 PM
Originally posted by diamondD
Cancer, strokes and heart disese didn't exist a 100 years ago? Where do you get this crap?

I plainly said that those which DID exist were rare compared to now.

ODShowtime
07-19-2006, 11:05 PM
Originally posted by FORD
This is why you might actually see Frist cracking the whip on this one.

That old cat-killing bastard sees the $$$$ to be made at Humana/HCA hospitals. He wants to get PAID.

Don't we all.

gw just has no common sense. Who's profiting from this? Why would anyone not throw some federal money at a potential goldmine? It just doesn't make sense.

His FIRST veto in over 6 years? crazy.

Seshmeister
07-19-2006, 11:06 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Yeah, actually some of the stuff I quoted above was from Kevin Trudeau's book ""Natural Cures THEY Don't Want You To Know About".

He presents an excellent case, but a lot of this stuff is really just common sense when you think about it. Cancer, strokes, heart disease, MS, etc.... Some of these things didn't exist at all 100 years ago and the others were very rare. It's only logical that the causes of these diseases are things which human beings did not put in their bodies 100 years ago, but are all too common now. In our food, in our drugs, in the water, and even the air we breathe.

I've got a friend who's fighting cancer right now. It's a rare kind of cancer that won't respond to any of the typical treatments. They have tried three different types of chemotherapy on him. None of them have done a damn thing. So called "modern medicine" can't do a fucking thing to save his life.

So what he's doing now is trying to alternate his body chemistry. Eliminate all toxins that he can. Transform his body into an alkaline state, which can be done through simple dietary changes.

The theory here is that cancer requires an acid environment in which to live, and a body in an alkaline state will starve it out.

I honestly don't know if it's too late for him at this point, and the damage is done, but he's literally got nothing to lose by trying.

I'm applying the strategy myself...... as preventative medicine.

Good luck to him but I fear he's fucked.

I guess if there is no other proven treatment then anything has got to be worth a go.

My objection is more to the recent case of the 16 year old US kid who is refusing chemotherapy for Hodgkinson's Lymphona and instead trying to beat it with diet. That's just bullshit because chemo has a really good record with his condition. His parents support his dumb decision so it's a legal thing now like you get with the fuckwit Christian Scientist stuff.

Kevin is trying to sell a book. Sometimes additives are a good thing. Nature is not always best. Nature gives us things that eat us and fuck us up. Why not drink unpastuerised milk and see where that gets you?

If you go for the fundamentalist whole mother nature thing then just remember that mother nature or evolution or whatever you want to call it doesn't give a cunt about you once you reach 40 becasue by then you should have had your kids and got them to adulthood by natures laws. There is a theory that women live longer because they still serve a function to the pack at that point because they act as midwives whereas an old male is no use to anyone. I'm not so sure I think it's because they get more checkups.

Cheers!

:gulp:

frets5150
07-19-2006, 11:07 PM
Originally posted by FORD

I've got a friend who's fighting cancer right now. It's a rare kind of cancer that won't respond to any of the typical treatments. They have tried three different types of chemotherapy on him. None of them have done a damn thing. So called "modern medicine" can't do a fucking thing to save his life.


Sorry to hear that bro :(

thome
07-19-2006, 11:08 PM
Can they legally use the aborted babies before the grind them into pulp for the dumpster.?

Of course they will have to stop useing the vacume sucking method
of abortion there isn't mush-ch left of those little bags of jiggly Stem
Cells you all are calling non-life.

Why grow new ones we waste 1000s a day in the butcher shop..?

I guess it's about the same, Yes/No ?

floyd95
07-19-2006, 11:11 PM
I like what Stephen Colbert asks at the end of interviews, George W. Bush, Great President or The Greatest President?

Seshmeister
07-19-2006, 11:13 PM
Originally posted by FORD
I plainly said that those which DID exist were rare compared to now.


I'll give you the diet thing but a lot of the time people didn't live long enough to get them.

Short term human memory stuff going on here.

Ask your parents about TB.

1 generation back my folks tell me a few kids died in every class at grade school from TB before they even reached 11 years old.

A 10% chance of not making it to adulthood just one generation ago.

Bear that in mind with this psuedo science hippy bullshit.

Cheers!

:gulp:

Seshmeister
07-19-2006, 11:17 PM
Originally posted by thome
Can they legally use the aborted babies before the grind them into pulp for the dumpster.?

Of course they will have to stop useing the vacume sucking method
of abortion there isn't mush-ch left of those little bags of jiggly Stem
Cells you all are calling non-life.

Why grow new ones we waste 1000s a day in the butcher shop..?

I guess it's about the same, Yes/No ?

I think it's really important you go and read up on this subject because you have absolutely no idea at all what the fuck you are talking about. You being completely ignorant doesn't matter though because that's not your job and your stupidity doesn't affect other people.

Bush on the other hand has no excuse.

frets5150
07-19-2006, 11:18 PM
Originally posted by FORD
[B]Yeah, actually some of the stuff I quoted above was from Kevin Trudeau's book ""Natural Cures THEY Don't Want You To Know About".

He presents an excellent case, but a lot of this stuff is really just common sense when you think about it. Cancer, strokes, heart disease, MS, etc.... Some of these things didn't exist at all 100 years ago and the others were very rare. It's only logical that the causes of these diseases are things which human beings did not put in their bodies 100 years ago, but are all too common now. In our food, in our drugs, in the water, and even the air we breathe.


I think they did exist but at a way lower level.I had relatives in Italy on my fathers side and all of them lived from their mid 80's to upper 90's they took care of themselfes.Their lifestyle was way differant than over here they lived off their land had farms etc.They also knew what they were eating they would kill all the animals them selfs not like today where they shoot steroids into the animals to make them bigger and we the consumers get sick because of it.

Seshmeister
07-19-2006, 11:24 PM
Genes are 50% of the equation. One of my grandfather's is 95 and started smoking at 7 years old. He still smokes like fuck, never took any exercise, eats rubbish and is as sharp as a pin.


You have to be careful with the anecdotal stuff there's a lot of luck going on too. All his pals died 20/30 years ago.

There does seem to be something in the Mediterranean diet though. French drink and smoke more than most and seem to get away with it demographically.

Seshmeister
07-19-2006, 11:30 PM
On the genetically modified thing I guess we'll find out soon enough if it's harmful because the US has embraced it for 10 years at least now and much of Europe including Britain has totally banned it.

thome
07-19-2006, 11:37 PM
Originally posted by Seshmeister
I think it's really important you go and read up on this subject because you have absolutely no idea at all what the fuck you are talking about. You being completely ignorant doesn't matter though because that's not your job and your stupidity doesn't affect other people.

Bush on the other hand has no excuse.

What makes you think my statement has any less research involved in it than yours do.

There is three ways to find these cell adults, cord blood, embryos .
Cloning is one other way.

Who should be cloned ,you, some one you don't know, wino jack off
the street ,do you want his DNA changing yours.

Perhaps you are the one who needs to stop preaching and do the research.

Cathedral
07-19-2006, 11:59 PM
When i first heard about stem cell research i was against it, then i actually learned something about it and realized that it wasn't about breeding embryo's...that changed everything.

The last time i took my wife to the nuerologist he was talking about great advances that were coming down the pike for MS, Parkinson's, and Alzheimer's that would be out near the end of the year.

It could have happened sooner had the funding been there from the first time the stem cell bill came to the floor.

We were excited about it, it gave us hope that if they could use stem cells to re=grow mylan...MS could be cured.

Unfortunately, none of this matters anymore because my wife died in April from end stage MS. her last 9 days on this earth made the last 7 years seem like a vacation.

I am sooooo GOD DAMNED furious with people who stand on their soap boxes and legislate death to people.
Do you know how hard it is to tell an 11 year old child that her mother is gone?
I feel so bad for those who are in that boat and now realize that they will soon be in ours.

I've had enough, man...I can't believe he vetoed this bill after the bullshit he pulled with Terri Schiavo.
Then it was all about saving life at all costs, WTF?
What does it cost to use embryo's that are going to be destroyed anyway.

I DON'T FUCKING GET IT, PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THAT FUCKER IS MAKING ANY SENSE....GOD DAMMIT!

frets5150
07-20-2006, 12:09 AM
Sorry to hear about your wife Cathedral.


:(

thome
07-20-2006, 12:16 AM
Here Cat read this, I ain't bitchi,n just showing a side of the argument
that has nothing to do with everthing said in this forum on this subject, and many more, has nothing to do with the subject, it has more to do with the forum, is full of ,ITS BUSHES FAULT.

The people in here are not talking about Stem Cell Research they are
expanding thier effort to others to hate Bush.That is all they are saying can you see that..

CNN dot
The bill, which the Senate passed Tuesday, 63-37, would have loosened the restrictions on federal funding for stem-cell research.

House Republican leaders tried Thursday evening to override the veto, but that vote was 235 to 193, short of the necessary two-thirds majority.
---------------------------------------------------
Attending the White House event were a group of families with children who were born from "adopted" frozen embryos that had been left unused at fertility clinics.

"These boys and girls are not spare parts," he said of the children in the audience. "They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research. They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells."

frets5150
07-20-2006, 12:40 AM
Originally posted by thome
Here Cat read this, I ain't bitchi,n just showing a side of the argument
that has nothing to do with everthing said in this forum on this subject, and many more, has nothing to do with the subject, it has more to do with the forum, is full of ,ITS BUSHES FAULT.

The people in here are not talking about Stem Cell Research they are
expanding thier effort to others to hate Bush.That is all they are saying can you see that..

CNN dot
The bill, which the Senate passed Tuesday, 63-37, would have loosened the restrictions on federal funding for stem-cell research.

House Republican leaders tried Thursday evening to override the veto, but that vote was 235 to 193, short of the necessary two-thirds majority.
---------------------------------------------------
Attending the White House event were a group of families with children who were born from "adopted" frozen embryos that had been left unused at fertility clinics.

"These boys and girls are not spare parts," he said of the children in the audience. "They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research. They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells."



Agreed they are all Cocksuckers But bottom line The ball was in his court and Bush Vetoed the Stem Cell Research


:mad:

Cathedral
07-20-2006, 12:42 AM
Originally posted by thome
Here Cat read this, I ain't bitchi,n just showing a side of the argument
that has nothing to do with everthing said in this forum on this subject, and many more, has nothing to do with the subject, it has more to do with the forum, is full of ,ITS BUSHES FAULT.

The people in here are not talking about Stem Cell Research they are
expanding thier effort to others to hate Bush.That is all they are saying can you see that..

CNN dot
The bill, which the Senate passed Tuesday, 63-37, would have loosened the restrictions on federal funding for stem-cell research.

House Republican leaders tried Thursday evening to override the veto, but that vote was 235 to 193, short of the necessary two-thirds majority.
---------------------------------------------------
Attending the White House event were a group of families with children who were born from "adopted" frozen embryos that had been left unused at fertility clinics.

"These boys and girls are not spare parts," he said of the children in the audience. "They remind us of what is lost when embryos are destroyed in the name of research. They remind us that we all begin our lives as a small collection of cells."

Fine, then it's time to outlaw abortion then.
If life begins at a cellular level, It's murder.

Cathedral
07-20-2006, 12:49 AM
Originally posted by frets5150
Sorry to hear about your wife Cathedral.


:(

I appreciate that, thanks.

However, i do not want to hijack the thread, this isn't about me, it's about a great many poeple who are losing the battle with nuerological disorders that this research can help.

The treatments her doctor told us about are a direct result of this research.
And once they get the approval from the FDA they are going to help a great many people. not cure them, but help them live a little longer in hopes that cure is found soon.

I heard a Priest on tv today say that there haven't been any advances found by this research...he is wrong, as i said, some drugs are about to do just that and they are a direct result of that research.

Nickdfresh
07-20-2006, 12:50 AM
Originally posted by Cathedral
Fine, then it's time to outlaw abortion then.
If life begins at a cellular level, It's murder.

Then so is jerking off...

Cathedral
07-20-2006, 12:52 AM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Then so is jerking off...

Exactly...

Seshmeister
07-20-2006, 12:59 AM
Originally posted by Cathedral
When i first heard about stem cell research i was against it, then i actually learned something about it and realized that it wasn't about breeding embryo's...that changed everything.

The last time i took my wife to the nuerologist he was talking about great advances that were coming down the pike for MS, Parkinson's, and Alzheimer's that would be out near the end of the year.

It could have happened sooner had the funding been there from the first time the stem cell bill came to the floor.

We were excited about it, it gave us hope that if they could use stem cells to re=grow mylan...MS could be cured.

Unfortunately, none of this matters anymore because my wife died in April from end stage MS. her last 9 days on this earth made the last 7 years seem like a vacation.

I am sooooo GOD DAMNED furious with people who stand on their soap boxes and legislate death to people.
Do you know how hard it is to tell an 11 year old child that her mother is gone?
I feel so bad for those who are in that boat and now realize that they will soon be in ours.

I've had enough, man...I can't believe he vetoed this bill after the bullshit he pulled with Terri Schiavo.
Then it was all about saving life at all costs, WTF?
What does it cost to use embryo's that are going to be destroyed anyway.

I DON'T FUCKING GET IT, PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW THAT FUCKER IS MAKING ANY SENSE....GOD DAMMIT!


Yup that's the fucking bottom line.

Thank you for posting that. In a tiny way we are lucky that your wife's senseless death might at least get what 40 people who read this thread to get a fucking grip.

Misguided fucking shit based on childish superstion or fake retarded morality makes me angry in a hypothetical way so fuck knows how bad you feel.

Seshmeister
07-20-2006, 01:03 AM
Originally posted by thome
What makes you think my statement has any less research involved in it than yours do.


Well because you posted spastic shit about how they got stem cells from putting aborted kids through a mincer.

Jeez...

frets5150
07-20-2006, 01:26 AM
A thought just came to me why are we sending rovers to mars to do research Spending in the Billions for what? But we can't spend that on stem cell research to help people? Man we live in a Fuckin retarted country.


:o

thome
07-20-2006, 03:14 AM
Originally posted by Seshmeister
Well because you posted spastic shit about how they got stem cells from putting aborted kids through a mincer.

Jeez...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by thome
[B]Can they legally use the aborted babies before the grind them into pulp for the dumpster.?

My own anger may have mislead you --Before--- they are destroyed by the clinics.

I think there are ways to get the stem cell wich doesn't include
destruction of the fetus .

like most bills that don't get passed by -Every- president it is usually
in the wording of the bill.

Now remember these people who draw up these bill jobs depend
on contovercy hassle and putting off actual conclusion of problems,
they get re-elected because things need to be done, the less they
do the more thay get re-elected .

That's where my truth lies in the originators of the Bill the way they worded it what they asked for .

They knew already where Bush stood on this yet they still aked for
what they knew he would Veto.



My sickness.in my head askes this. My op.

thome
07-20-2006, 03:55 AM
. It fell to Senate majority leader Bill Frist, once a Bush ally on stem cells and a heart surgeon himself, to break with the President and build a compromise package with something for everyone to like. One bill increases funding to explore sources of stem cells other than embryos, such as umbilical-cord blood. Another proposal outlaws trade in tissue produced by "fetus farming," pregnancies that are aborted specifically to harvest the tissue for research. ("As far as I am aware," Frist admitted when he announced the bill, "this is not a method currently employed. But it is not out of the realm of possibility.") The part that inspired the promise of Bush's first veto was House Resolution 810, which would allow federal funding for research on any leftover embryos donated by fertility-clinic patients.

Leaving aside election-year sensitivities, supporters point to the moral logic of their position. Leftover embryos are routinely thrown away; surely there is no sin in scientists' deriving potentially lifesaving treatment from them first. Opponents respond that there is nothing to stop scientists from doing that. The issue is federal funding, which Bush believes should focus on research that does not require the destruction of embryos. But aren't those particular leftover embryos already doomed? "We don't take death-row inmates and use their organs either," says David Christensen, the conservative Family Research Council's director of congressional affairs. "We should not kill humans for body parts, at any stage of development."

The promise of embryonic stem cells has been oversold, they argue, while actual progress using adult stem cells has been overlooked. Though advocates talk longingly about the 400,000 frozen embryos in fertility clinics, a Rand Corp. study in 2003 found that 86% of them have been designated by patients for their future

Time Mag

These are the thing us SHEEP will tell you and no one else, like i said
it's not about BUSH!

frets5150
07-20-2006, 04:24 AM
Different subject same principle When a bakery or restaurant closes for the day they have left over food correct?Most of them especially a bakery has tons of left over bread so instead of throwing it in the garbage they give it to the homeless so they don't stavre. what would you rather have them do throw the bread away since by the next day the bread will be no good anymore or would you rather see it go to someone who is hungry? Samething here these leftover embryos will be throw away so why the Fuck can't they be used to help find a cure for all of these diseases? I don't get it it's not like they we are aborting babys 5 months along they are just embryos not even resembling a baby.

diamondD
07-20-2006, 07:12 AM
Originally posted by FORD
I plainly said that those which DID exist were rare compared to now.


And I plainly asked, where do you get this crap? ;)

BigBadBrian
07-20-2006, 07:26 AM
I'm torn on this issue, I really am.

As one who has a rather significant autoimmune neurological disease myself (which is under control...thanks for asking :D ), I think embryonic stem-cell research offers a wealth of potential advances into a variety of medical research avenues.

I can support embryonic stem-cell research as long as it remains strictly with embryos that have been obtained through fertility treatments and not through abortions of convenience.

:)

BigBadBrian
07-20-2006, 07:35 AM
Originally posted by FORD

He presents an excellent case, but a lot of this stuff is really just common sense when you think about it. Cancer, strokes, heart disease, MS, etc.... Some of these things didn't exist at all 100 years ago and the others were very rare.

Bullshit!




I've got a friend who's fighting cancer right now. It's a rare kind of cancer that won't respond to any of the typical treatments. They have tried three different types of chemotherapy on him. None of them have done a damn thing. So called "modern medicine" can't do a fucking thing to save his life.

I'm sorry about your friend, I really am.

However, it seems as if you're blaming "modern medicine."

I've got a friend who's mother succumbed to colon cancer just yesterday. It was first diagnosed in late April. It went that fast. Cancer and other diseases are not all cut-and-dried. They behave different in different people.

I hope your friend has a positive attitude...that's half the battle.



I'm applying the strategy myself...... as preventative medicine.

Massive amounts of Guiness are considered "preventative medicine?"

:cool:

SensibleShoes
07-20-2006, 08:18 AM
Well, Bush is an asshole, and just vetoed something that could have saved Ronald Reagan's brain from clogging up with shit. (Maybe that wouldn't have been a good thing anyway)

Well I disrespect Chimpy just as much as the next gal, but where I live, when somebody says no, you just move on to the next potential solution.

Somebody needs to organize a national clearing house where people can donate a small portion of baby's cord blood to research, and then save the rest, frozen, for treatment later in life. Freezing cord blood will become SOP for every baby born within the next 20 years. Shoe's prediction. Invest in Cryogenics.

Let the right wing conservative bible beaters have their way. They are the religious zealots that will preserve truth justice and the AMerican way while the rest of us figure out how to do more important things in spite of them. Larger intelligence will prevail.

The Jesus sheep serve their purpose too.

BigBadBrian
07-20-2006, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by SensibleShoes
Larger intelligence will prevail.



That leaves out Liberals.

:gulp:

Nickdfresh
07-20-2006, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
That leaves out Liberals.

:gulp:

All evidence to the contrary...

SensibleShoes
07-20-2006, 02:01 PM
Brian seems to imply that only liberals support Stem Cell Research. I disagree, and would suggest that the stem cell/embryonic cell issue is divided along religious rather than political lines. Politics only becomes involved when politicians worry about pissing off fundamentalist Christians. My guess is that the majority of them support stem cell research but are forced to vote in the opposite manner because of their overevangelizing constituants.

Very very VERY sad.

FORD
07-20-2006, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by SensibleShoes
Brian seems to imply that only liberals support Stem Cell Research. I disagree, and would suggest that the stem cell/embryonic cell issue is divided along religious rather than political lines. Politics only becomes involved when politicians worry about pissing off fundamentalist Christians. My guess is that the majority of them support stem cell research but are forced to vote in the opposite manner because of their overevangelizing constituants.

Very very VERY sad.

Nancy Reagan certainly wasn't a "liberal". Nor is Bill "Cat butcher" Frist.

This is another election year wedge issue like flag burning or gay weddings. Only difference is that nobody's gonna die if a flag does or doesn't get burned.

Nickdfresh
07-20-2006, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Nancy Reagan certainly wasn't a "liberal". Nor is Bill "Cat butcher" Frist.

This is another election year wedge issue like flag burning or gay weddings. Only difference is that nobody's gonna die if a flag does or doesn't get burned.

You forgot the critically important, existential issue of The Pledge of Allegiance.

thome
07-26-2006, 11:22 AM
Where do all of these little globs of cells come from.

Rich selfish Kunts who freeze a few -I'm Pregnant rite Now If i wanna be but not at this point in my career i just couldn't handle the pressure- potential Babies...?

Cronic Tossing off in the clinic for cash, by homeless joe..?

How about the women and men who don't want to fuk up thier youth and freeze, a few for later, after thier eggs and sperm are no longer viable, just in case they mite want some kids, after thier 45...?

Then they die in a freek car accident and the state owns the fetuses..?

Or they just forget about the little suspended animation children they left in Detroit..?

Do the children fight over the rites to the parents frozen baby cells in the Will..?

If I am the highest bidder can i be impregnated by some rich couples
frozen Heirs and contest the Will...?


Seems to me if people were a lot less flippant and unconcerned with selfishness when it came to thier dirty little secrets we wouldn't have
all of these fetuses that need to be thrown out..?

SensibleShoes
07-26-2006, 11:27 AM
Oh. A holier than thou type.

Apologies, I always fail to kneel at the feet of greatness.

thome
07-26-2006, 11:36 AM
SENATOR ARLAN SPECTOR:
"I believe we should strive for party unity by making the abortion issue an irrelevancy. There's nothing in the "Contract with America" about abortion. I believe that the Republican Party ought to have a platform which is neutral. I'm very much personally opposed to abortion, but I do not believe it can be controlled by the government. I'm not looking for a pro-choice plank, but I don't think it's acceptable to have an anti-choice plank. When a leader of one Republican group said about ten days ago, that someone who is pro-choice is not qualified to be the Republican nominee for President, I was very offended for myself and for about half of the Republican Party. I don't think it is appropriate to put about half of the Republicans as second class citizens. So what I say we do with the divisive abortion issue is: Let's leave it alone. Let's unite behind core Republican values, smaller government, less spending, less taxes, strong crime control, strong national defense, civil rights."

The Senate bill's principal sponsor, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, who recently survived a brush with cancer, was joined by Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee, a physician who argued that Bush's policy is too restrictive.

Irrelivent Abortion---- Relavant Useing Fetuses for Research.

Specter a real american hero...

thome
07-26-2006, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by SensibleShoes
Oh. A holier than thou type.

Apologies, I always fail to kneel at the feet of greatness.

I don't think i'm any different than most ,nothing to see here, nothing
special, just a man, with a op on these issues.

Perhaps my side of arguments lie in the -cause- of these problems not
in the discussion of rite and wrong.

Perhaps i do feel some rite and wrong but my stand will always jump to
who is at fault.

Ps. I will never feel any remorse for the adults who need to be removed from this planet they have made thier choices and said thier
piece. However i do feel that Experimenting on unborn people is
wrong and not going to lead to any greatness in our future history yet to be told/written.

So call me what you will .

Nickdfresh
07-26-2006, 11:52 AM
Um ChromedomeThome, why is it "murder" (Tony Snow, WH Press Secretary's exact term) for stem cell research to be Federally funded. Yet:

A.) He said it was a good investment for the private sector

B.) The embryo/blastocysts get thrown away anyways

C.) He's not outlawing research on embryos for fertility purposes

Why am I arguing with this retard? Jesus Thome, go get drunk and spam the main you idiot....

thome
07-26-2006, 12:14 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Um ChromedomeThome, why is it "murder" (Tony Snow, WH Press Secretary's exact term) for stem cell research to be Federally funded. Yet:

A.) He said it was a good investment for the private sector

I don't feel that way, Fuk Him.

B.) The embryo/blastocysts get thrown away anyways

Why are they there in the first place, who is responsible for them being
determined trash.

C.) He's not outlawing research on embryos for fertility purposes

I don't feel that way, Fuk Him.


Why am I arguing with this retard? Jesus Thome, go get drunk and spam the main you idiot....

However i do feel that Experimenting on unborn people is
wrong and not going to lead to any greatness in our future history yet to be told/written.

You know damn good and well all iv'e said, will not change the world, help it or hinder it.

I just feel we should look at all angles and most things will be found wrong, foolish and uneventfull in the long run.

Designer Babies will be next if this little bit of restictions on fetal experimentation passes and becomes the norm.

Then you and i will be told who can and who can't have children by your DNA.

I see no great acomplishments with StemCells only looser restictions on Govt' control of My Body and the future of who lives and who doesn't.

Nickdfresh
07-26-2006, 01:30 PM
So fuck all of the living, with alzheimer's and cancer, just because a few discarded embryos will be considered people (only if the gov't funds it). :rolleyes: Whatever...

thome
07-26-2006, 01:53 PM
Some say Alheimers is caused by too much Aluminum in our diets.

Some say it's the natural progression of the ageing prosess.

Some say it's caused by the tightening(shrinking) of the Brain Stem.

Some say your life and times as far as disease and illness in Cancer
matters is in your genetic structure at time of -conception-.

I say we need more info on the -cause- before grasping at straws for
a possible fix.

I do not want people to become or stay, sick, Nick.

I just don't like the idea of saving my -life- with another that is deemed unworthy of -birth- and is not seen as a human -life-.
(see above sentence)___Some Say Your Life...................Conception.

Little Texan
07-26-2006, 03:39 PM
Is it just me, or can I hardly ever understand any of thome's posts? :confused:

Cathedral
07-26-2006, 03:42 PM
Either way, someone's life is being deemed, unworthy...

End of Story!

Little Texan
07-26-2006, 03:52 PM
I think the masturbation analogy is a very good one in this case. If life is deemed as beginning on a cellular level, then wouldn't the release of semen into a paper towel and eventual death of sperm,
therein, not also be considered destroying a living lifeform(s), if you are going by Bush's logic (if it's at all possible for him to possess any)? If so, then I'm committing genocide on a near daily basis! (Oops, just told on myself! :D) I'm all for stem cell research...the good far outweighs the bad, imo. Why not use stem cells from embryos that are going to be destroyed, anyway?

FORD
07-26-2006, 04:09 PM
Originally posted by Little Texan
I think the masturbation analogy is a very good one in this case. If life is deemed as beginning on a cellular level, then wouldn't the release of semen into a paper towel and eventual death of sperm,
therein, not also be considered destroying a living lifeform(s), if you are going by Bush's logic (if it's at all possible for him to possess any)? If so, then I'm committing genocide on a near daily basis! (Oops, just told on myself! :D) I'm all for stem cell research...the good far outweighs the bad, imo. Why not use stem cells from embryos that are going to be destroyed, anyway?


The answer to your question was provided by Monty Python years ago........

"Every Sperm Is Sacred", Lyrics by Michael Palin and Terry Jones.

There are Jews in the world, there are Buddists,
There are Hindus and Mormons and then
There are those that follow Mohammad, but
I've never been one of them.

I'm a Roman Catholic,
And have been since before I was born,
And the one thing they say about Catholics is
They'll take you as soon as you're warm.

You don't have to be a six footer,
You don't have to have a great brain,
You don't have to have any clothes on,
You're a Catholic the moment Dad came, because

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

Let the heathen spill theirs,
On the dusty ground,
God shall make them pay for
Each sperm that can't be found.

Every sperm is wanted,
Every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed,
In your neighborhood.

Hindu, Taoist, Morman,
Spill theirs just anywhere,
But God loves those who treat their
Semen with more care.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed,
In your neighborhood.

Every sperm is useful,
Every sperm is fine,
God needs everybody's,
Mine, and mine, and mine.

Let the pagans spill theirs,
O'er mountain, hill and plain.
God shall strike them down for
Each sperm that's spilt in vain.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed,
In your neighborhood.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

Nickdfresh
07-26-2006, 04:38 PM
I was waiting for that!:D

Cathedral
07-26-2006, 04:40 PM
Originally posted by Little Texan
I think the masturbation analogy is a very good one in this case. If life is deemed as beginning on a cellular level, then wouldn't the release of semen into a paper towel and eventual death of sperm,
therein, not also be considered destroying a living lifeform(s), if you are going by Bush's logic (if it's at all possible for him to possess any)? If so, then I'm committing genocide on a near daily basis! (Oops, just told on myself! :D) I'm all for stem cell research...the good far outweighs the bad, imo. Why not use stem cells from embryos that are going to be destroyed, anyway?

Be careful, you are on a slippery slope here with Nick.
Ya see, to use that logic it puts the abortion issue right up front and in people's faces.
Bab's Boxer, and a slew of other abortion supporters (notice i didn't use the words Democrat or liberal?) think that a baby isn't a baby (life) until you bring it home from the hospital.

So, that said, if life begins on the cellular level, at the ejoculation of the sperm, then aborting a fetus would be considered murder because you are extinguishing a human life.

You see, i don't see a difference in an embryo in a lab, or an embryo in the womb, or an embryo in the garbage at your local abortion clinic.

It's hypocritical what Bush did based on that argument alone.
They have no problem allowing the continued practice of aborting a healthy fetus, but all of a sudden, using an embryo that isn't in a womb for stem cell research is immoral?

Excuse me, but give me a mother fucking break while i puke.

Seshmeister
07-26-2006, 05:58 PM
I find it quite simple. Abortion should be illegal from the point that the fetus is viable outside the womb. With the latest technology thats at about 23 weeks. Until then it is part of the mother so hers to do what she wants to do with it.

If she aborts then she would have made a shit mother so society is better off.

If you don't want to be the father of an abortion don't fuck women without a rubber that will then abort.

It's really quite a simple moral position and the law in most civilised Western countries. I don't know why so many Americans get themselves in such a pickle about it. I guess it's because of the high uptake of superstitions over there.

Most importantly abortion prevents crime. I don't want some unwanted skank whore's DNA growing up in misery and then attacking my kids.

An exert from the apolotical excellent Freakonomics book.

http://www.freakonomics.com/ch4.php


Perhaps the most dramatic effect of legalized abortion, and one that would take years to reveal itself, was its impact on crime.

In the early 1990s, just as the first cohort of children born after Roe v. Wade was hitting its late teen years-the years during which young men enter their criminal prime-the rate of crime began to fall. What this cohort was missing, of course, were the children who stood the greatest chance of becoming criminals. And the crime rate continued to fall as an entire generation came of age minus the children whose mothers had not wanted to bring a child into the world. Legalized abortion led to less unwantedness; unwantedness leads to high crime; legalized abortion, therefore, led to less crime.

This theory is bound to provoke a variety of reactions, ranging from disbelief to revulsion, and a variety of objections, ranging from the quotidian to the moral. The likeliest first objection is the most straightforward one: is the theory true? Perhaps abortion and crime are merely correlated and not causal.

It may be more comforting to believe what the newspapers say, that the drop in crime was due to brilliant policing and clever gun control and a surging economy. We have evolved with a tendency to link causality to things we can touch or feel, not to some distant or difficult phenomenon. We believe especially in near-term causes: a snake bites your friend, he screams with pain, and he dies. The snakebite, you conclude, must have killed him. Most of the time, such a reckoning is correct. But when it comes to cause and effect, there is often a trap in such open-and-shut thinking. We smirk now when we think of ancient cultures that embraced faulty causes-the warriors who believed, for instance, that it was their raping of a virgin that brought them victory on the battlefield. But we too embrace faulty causes, usually at the urging of an expert proclaiming a truth in which he has a vested interest.

How, then, can we tell if the abortion-crime link is a case of causality rather than simply correlation?

One way to test the effect of abortion on crime would be to measure crime data in the five states where abortion was made legal before the Supreme Court extended abortion rights to the rest of the country.

In New York, California, Washington, Alaska, and Hawaii, a woman had been able to obtain a legal abortion for at least two years before Roe v. Wade. And indeed, those early-legalizing states saw crime begin to fall earlier than the other forty-five states and the District of Columbia. Between 1988 and 1994, violent crime in the earlylegalizing states fell 13 percent compared to the other states; between 1994 and 1997, their murder rates fell 23 percent more than those of the other states.

But what if those early legalizers simply got lucky? What else might we look for in the data to establish an abortion-crime link? One factor to look for would be a correlation between each state's abortion rate and its crime rate. Sure enough, the states with the highest abortion rates in the 1970s experienced the greatest crime drops in the 1990s, while states with low abortion rates experienced smaller crime drops. (This correlation exists even when controlling for a variety of factors that influence crime: a state's level of incarceration, number of police, and its economic situation.) Since 1985, states with high abortion rates have experienced a roughly 30 percent drop in crime relative to low-abortion states. (New York City had high abortion rates and lay within an early-legalizing state, a pair of facts that further dampen the claim that innovative policing caused the crime drop.) Moreover, there was no link between a given state's abortion rate and its crime rate before the late 1980s-when the first cohort affected by legalized abortion was reaching its criminal prime-which is yet another indication that Roe v. Wade was indeed the event that tipped the crime scale.

There are even more correlations, positive and negative, that shore up the abortion-crime link.






Cheers!

:gulp:

Nickdfresh
07-26-2006, 07:14 PM
Originally posted by Cathedral
Be careful, you are on a slippery slope here with Nick.
Ya see, to use that logic it puts the abortion issue right up front and in people's faces.
Bab's Boxer, and a slew of other abortion supporters (notice i didn't use the words Democrat or liberal?) think that a baby isn't a baby (life) until you bring it home from the hospital.

I'm not sure that's what they would say or what they think. That's what other's have said about them in order to falsely, or exaggeratedly, radicalize their positions. I.E. Late term abortions, which is a crock of shit issue since they're rarely performed, and only done so for the health of the mother...


So, that said, if life begins on the cellular level, at the ejoculation of the sperm, then aborting a fetus would be considered murder because you are extinguishing a human life.

You see, i don't see a difference in an embryo in a lab, or an embryo in the womb, or an embryo in the garbage at your local abortion clinic.

It's hypocritical what Bush did based on that argument alone.
They have no problem allowing the continued practice of aborting a healthy fetus, but all of a sudden, using an embryo that isn't in a womb for stem cell research is immoral?

Excuse me, but give me a mother fucking break while i puke.

Well, I can only agree 100%. I wanted to fucking slap Tony Snow(&blowjob) upside the head as he basically said Bush banned funding because it was murder, but it was okay to do as long as it was privately funded...

Cathedral
07-26-2006, 07:41 PM
Originally posted by Seshmeister
I find it quite simple. Abortion should be illegal from the point that the fetus is viable outside the womb. With the latest technology thats at about 23 weeks. Until then it is part of the mother so hers to do what she wants to do with it.

I agree with this for the most part, except for the mother being the sole, let's say, owner, of the baby. this is where i ask for equal right's for the donor of the sperm, meaning the father if he wants the child and is willing to raise it. It took two to create it, it should take two to decide its ultimate fate.

If she aborts then she would have made a shit mother so society is better off.

This is not necessarily true. if the father is abusive or the woman was raped i think it should be looked at for its circumstances rather than generalized in this way.

If you don't want to be the father of an abortion don't fuck women without a rubber that will then abort.

If you don't want to be a father, don't be stupid, period, lol.

It's really quite a simple moral position and the law in most civilised Western countries. I don't know why so many Americans get themselves in such a pickle about it. I guess it's because of the high uptake of superstitions over there.

It's personal for me, and the reason i am all for allowing fathers, or donors, to have some say in what happens to the fetus after conception...religion has a little to do with it, but it isn't the only reason I am against this practice.

Most importantly abortion prevents crime. I don't want some unwanted skank whore's DNA growing up in misery and then attacking my kids.

Hmmmmm, i think you've generalized the issue here. not all adopted children grow up to be criminals.

An exert from the apolotical excellent Freakonomics book.

http://www.freakonomics.com/ch4.php







Cheers!

:gulp:

Cathedral
07-26-2006, 07:44 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I'm not sure that's what they would say or what they think. That's what other's have said about them in order to falsely, or exaggeratedly, radicalize their positions. I.E. Late term abortions, which is a crock of shit issue since they're rarely performed, and only done so for the health of the mother...



Well, I can only agree 100%. I wanted to fucking slap Tony Snow(&blowjob) upside the head as he basically said Bush banned funding because it was murder, but it was okay to do as long as it was privately funded...

Well, Ms. Boxer said exactly that some time ago which is why i used her as an example.
But i know conservatives who have had abortions, so i can't view the issue from a political position.
To me, it is and will always be murder with very little wiggle room that does not include a life and death threat to the mother.

Seshmeister
07-26-2006, 08:02 PM
In the UK at least, if the fetus is not in the womb of the mother then the father does have a veto on what happens to it.

I could have worded a couple of things a bit better there.

If the mother wants to abort the fetus then very often she will be a shit mother to that child. Say in a rape or whatever it doesn't mean she won't be a great mum to a later kid. If god forbid the SM was raped now leading to a pregnncy then I'm pretty sure we would abort it but that wouldn't stop her from being a spectacular mum to our kids.

Secondly I understand that this is personal for you and I respect that. I don't see really how you can have an equal say because if you both disagree you can't have a compromise where you half have the baby.

Adoption is fine but there aren't anywhere near enough adopters.

I had a quick look at the stats and I have to say I was pretty shocked.

I never realised before just how many abortions were happening.

In Russia it's nearly 60% of pregnancies are aborted.
In the US it's 24%.
In Scotland it's 19%.

That's fucked up in this day in age it really is just dumb even from a womans health point of view.

I notice that Holland is down at 12%. Holland has a teenage pregancy rate far far lower than the US or UK. They also teach sex education in detail from about 9 years old. It's a shame it has to be that way but that seems to be the best option.

When we were in hospital when the kids were born last year there was an 11 year old girl on the maternity ward...

Cheers!

:gulp:

Seshmeister
07-26-2006, 08:16 PM
If Gulliano does stand for President it would be brilliant if someone hit him with the data I posted above in a presidential debate.

His 'zero tolerence' thing which seemed to work so well in NYC was far more likely the result of abortions in the 1970s than anything he did.

That would put the cat amongst the pigeons...:)

Nickdfresh
07-26-2006, 08:53 PM
"I notice that Holland is down at 12%. Holland has a teenage pregancy rate far far lower than the US or UK. They also teach sex education in detail from about 9 years old. It's a shame it has to be that way but that seems to be the best option."

That's the real key, but people here don't want to hear this...

MERRYKISSMASS2U
07-26-2006, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Then so is jerking off...

If you don't get action or jerk off, it's a fact that you WILL explode after a week or so.

ODShowtime
07-26-2006, 09:10 PM
Originally posted by thome
Where do all of these little globs of cells come from.

Rich selfish Kunts who freeze a few -I'm Pregnant rite Now If i wanna be but not at this point in my career i just couldn't handle the pressure- potential Babies...?

Cronic Tossing off in the clinic for cash, by homeless joe..?


Seems to me if people were a lot less flippant and unconcerned with selfishness when it came to thier dirty little secrets we wouldn't have
all of these fetuses that need to be thrown out..?

yeah, and like selfish people who have cancer...

ODShowtime
07-26-2006, 09:15 PM
Originally posted by thome
SENATOR ARLAN SPECTOR:
"I believe we should strive for party unity by making the abortion issue an irrelevancy.

So what I say we do with the divisive abortion issue is: Let's leave it alone. Let's unite behind core Republican values, smaller government, less spending, less taxes, strong crime control, strong national defense, civil rights."


Specter a real american hero...

exactly. It's called running the country instead of wasting everyone's time with your psuedo-religious anti-science bullshit.

You and your kind are wasting everyone's time.

"core Republican values"

Do you have any idea what that means?

Cathedral
07-26-2006, 09:26 PM
Originally posted by Seshmeister
In the UK at least, if the fetus is not in the womb of the mother then the father does have a veto on what happens to it.

I could have worded a couple of things a bit better there.

If the mother wants to abort the fetus then very often she will be a shit mother to that child. Say in a rape or whatever it doesn't mean she won't be a great mum to a later kid. If god forbid the SM was raped now leading to a pregnncy then I'm pretty sure we would abort it but that wouldn't stop her from being a spectacular mum to our kids.

Secondly I understand that this is personal for you and I respect that. I don't see really how you can have an equal say because if you both disagree you can't have a compromise where you half have the baby.

Adoption is fine but there aren't anywhere near enough adopters.

I had a quick look at the stats and I have to say I was pretty shocked.

I never realised before just how many abortions were happening.

In Russia it's nearly 60% of pregnancies are aborted.
In the US it's 24%.
In Scotland it's 19%.

That's fucked up in this day in age it really is just dumb even from a womans health point of view.

I notice that Holland is down at 12%. Holland has a teenage pregancy rate far far lower than the US or UK. They also teach sex education in detail from about 9 years old. It's a shame it has to be that way but that seems to be the best option.

When we were in hospital when the kids were born last year there was an 11 year old girl on the maternity ward...

Cheers!

:gulp:

Damn, only 24% here in the states? The rate is coming down which makes me smile, not happy, but it's a positive step in the right direction. Last i checked those numbers they were at 27%.

If people just used their heads when being sexually active those numbers will drop even more.

Russia is just nuts, those numbers are rediculous, end comment.

Scotland, those are impressive numbers that also make me smile wide.

I agree that 9 years old is a bit early, but i know of 5 year old boys who know way more than they should and it's due to the cultural exposure. parents have to be proactive in the childs life.
If you don't know how to parent a child then that child really has no chance to learn what they should. left to their own devices kids experiment on their own and mistakes will surely follow.

By the way, i never congratulated you on the Mini-Seshmeisters.

Congrat's to you and the Mrs. on your budding family!

Cathedral
07-26-2006, 09:36 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
"I notice that Holland is down at 12%. Holland has a teenage pregancy rate far far lower than the US or UK. They also teach sex education in detail from about 9 years old. It's a shame it has to be that way but that seems to be the best option."

That's the real key, but people here don't want to hear this...

Sure they do, it's how it is addressed that most parents, including myself, have issue with.

In our school district they seem to promote safe sex practices rather than sex education and how to abstain from it.

If you hand a kid a condom they will either blow it up like a balloon or put it on and hunt down someone to 'experiment' with.

This year my daughter is returning to the public school system in Kentucky. they aren't as fucked up in Clay County as they are in the cities. Parents aren't either.
Hillbillies aren't the brightest folk in the world but, they certainly are responsible for the most part where i'm from and going back too.

Let me be clear that on abortion and sex education, I hold the parents accountable before i do any teacher, school board, or politician.

Sure, I lobby for Roe vs. Wade to be overturned, but i'd rather see the populous turn that around than Washington further legislating about things they really had no business in to begin with.

Seshmeister
07-26-2006, 09:41 PM
I think they were 2002 figures for the US.

I have 3 daughters under 3 basically my life is fucking over...:)

I can't believe the clothes that teenage girls are wearing in my upmarket neighborhood here. When I was say 14 with rampant hormones most of the girls were not dressed in a sexy way at all, didn't know how to do their makeup and generally were just not that hot even to a 14 year old. I would still walk over hot coals to get to even second base.

Now every other kid is mini Britney.

I may have posted this before but I was in a cab the other month and the driver told me he had 2 14 year old girls in the back and he was asked to settle an argument. One said it was ok that she give her 'boyfriend' blowjobs even though he didn't like her enough to kiss her and her pal was saying that wasn't right.

Jesus.

Cheers

:gulp:

BigBadBrian
07-27-2006, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by SensibleShoes
Brian seems to imply that only liberals support Stem Cell Research.

Nope, that's not what I meant.

:gulp:

LoungeMachine
07-27-2006, 09:36 AM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Nope, that's not what I meant.

:gulp:


.........however you'll have to say pretty-please if you want me to say what I actually meant

:gulp: