House Passes Stem Cell Bill
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
LOL. Much of the whole Stem Cell thing does the same thing. The research is not necessary to be produced by cloning (which is also seriously tentative at this moment) when there is another option (equally tentative but definitely a compromise worthwhile to look into).
Pretending that cloning, which isn't a viable option at this time, is the only option is pretense to fit your argument. Amazingly this one has been done and can likely be reproduced while cloning hasn't had quite such success. The only declared human cloning has been found to not be, while this one has been found to have merit. Let's not pretend our way into a corner that doesn't need to be, let's actually look at viable alternatives that would actually work for both sides without moralistic issues.
But they don't. We are speaking of human cloning (not currently viable) and a workable alternative (done once, likely to be reproduced). You either misunderstand the issues at hand and thus produce slogans and bumperstickers, or you are also content with pretense to produce the result you want rather than looking into alternatives to your POV that can actually fit the bill for both sides.
I think nothing of the sort. "You know that I think"... right. You, of all people, who seem to have the most difficulty understanding simple sentences if they are written by me, have no way to say that you "know what I think" on any issue whatsoever.
I have stated, and will again so that you may read it again and possibly understand. This particular issue would not hurt him any further if he vetoed it because those 35% that still approve of him are likely to be the same 35% that would approve of such a veto, whether it be on Party Loyalty grounds or religious grounds, those 35% are not likely to ditch him ON THIS ISSUE... as was promoted earlier in the thread.
You’re wrong in assuming that all 35% who still support him (if indeed his numbers are still that high, I’ve lost track of how low his numbers have hit), are religious cons. They are not.
There are still some left in there who are simple neocon hawks, and other who could give a crap about social issues but who are afraid of terrorists and would go so far as to promote a genocide against Arabs. I know two of them. If I know two of them, here in NY, how many more are around? Enough to sink his numbers further? I don’t know, but neither do you.
And either way, he vetoes this bill, he puts the hurt on the Republican party.
There are still some left in there who are simple neocon hawks, and other who could give a crap about social issues but who are afraid of terrorists and would go so far as to promote a genocide against Arabs. I know two of them. If I know two of them, here in NY, how many more are around? Enough to sink his numbers further? I don’t know, but neither do you.
And either way, he vetoes this bill, he puts the hurt on the Republican party.
I know that this research, according to all non-whacko experts, is the most promising of research to lead to cures to many life threatning and live injuring of ailments. I know that the embroys used are embroys that were heading to the incinerator. To me thats enough! I dont care much if it offends people, this will save lives and make lives better without destroying any lives that were not already to be destroyed!
Notice I said "Whether it is for Party Loyalty or Religious reasons"...
So, I most certainly DID NOT say that they were all religious cons....
Yes, it will. However, I was talking about his percentage in the polls. I simply do not believe it would be overly effected by a veto of this bill.
I know that I have not once argued against this research at all so you are arguing points that have not been made, the very definition of the strawman.
I know that we are not talking, Ornot and I are not, about not using those embryos, we are talking about the need to clone humans for the research.
So, you are clearly not understanding the topic we were discussing. Probably because you came in so late....
Right now, I am stating that there would likely be no need to clone humans in order to advance this study. First of all because there is a more viable alternative that would cause less issues with the moralistic crowd.
So, I know that I have not argued against the use of embryos slated for destruction. In fact, I have specifically stated that my religion would not call them human beings until they have thought, which is far, far later in the pregnancy. Therefore, please do not assume you know my opinion.
Once again, from the fact that you quoted my posts, you are not on the right subject. We are not talking about those embryos slated for destruction, we are talking about the need to clone vs. using the conversion method that creates new lines using adult cells...
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
"Because, if we don't, it will ONLY be done in other countries. This kind of research is exceedingly expensive. It is almost quintessentially "Big Science."
Please Ornot, stop with the diatribe that only governments will do this. The private industry is fully capable of sinking funds into long term R & D projects. They have done so in the past and will continue doing so in the future.
This whole concept of the government must do it is a myth. Nothing more. This is NOT the governments job.
Please Ornot, stop with the diatribe that only governments will do this. The private industry is fully capable of sinking funds into long term R & D projects. They have done so in the past and will continue doing so in the future.
This whole concept of the government must do it is a myth. Nothing more. This is NOT the governments job.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Ornot...
1) just to be clear... I do not personally have a problem with embryonic stem cell research. Just the obsession that only the government can do it.
2) If we are indeed close to being able to do the embryonic research WITHOUT destroying the embryo, why the rush?
3) Why not allow individuals to put their money where they want it to go and let those that CHOOSE to invest in this research be the ones to profit from it. IF enough people actually believe in this line of research, then send your money to those conducting it. There is again, NO reason that the government should be involved.
1) just to be clear... I do not personally have a problem with embryonic stem cell research. Just the obsession that only the government can do it.
2) If we are indeed close to being able to do the embryonic research WITHOUT destroying the embryo, why the rush?
3) Why not allow individuals to put their money where they want it to go and let those that CHOOSE to invest in this research be the ones to profit from it. IF enough people actually believe in this line of research, then send your money to those conducting it. There is again, NO reason that the government should be involved.
This whole concept of the government must do it is a myth. Nothing more. This is NOT the governments job….just to be clear... I do not personally have a problem with embryonic stem cell research. Just the obsession that only the government can do it.
Dude, the government did "do it". Stem cells from humans were first derived at a public university research lab. University of Wisconsin, I think.
Where do you think MOST basic scientific and medical research has been done in this country? Public universities and labs, which are publically funded.
Ornot's right. Private industry does a great job on applied research, where a clear and compelling profit motive has been established.
Basic scientitic research - where there is no clear profit motive - is done to a large degree with public subsidies - and universities and labs.
Dude, the government did "do it". Stem cells from humans were first derived at a public university research lab. University of Wisconsin, I think.
Where do you think MOST basic scientific and medical research has been done in this country? Public universities and labs, which are publically funded.
Ornot's right. Private industry does a great job on applied research, where a clear and compelling profit motive has been established.
Basic scientitic research - where there is no clear profit motive - is done to a large degree with public subsidies - and universities and labs.
OrnotBitwise
Watermelon
Sorry, but you're wrong. Name just one current, major basic research project that is privately funded. I'll bet you can't.
As I said, private industry is good at applied research but not basic research. The last great private laboratory was Bell Labs, and they got out of basic research probably before you were born.
The key phrase is basic research. That's where private industry tends to lose interest.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
you are so far off base it isn't funny. Corporations (especially in the medical/healthcare sectors) understand that R & D is their long term lifeblood.
As the above link points out. About 2/3 of R & D is done at the corporate level, with the remaining third done with government funding.
As the above link points out. About 2/3 of R & D is done at the corporate level, with the remaining third done with government funding.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
As with virtually all government activity that is not directly concerned with protecting national freedom, non-defense-related government-funded research is considered unethical and/or inefficient by libertarians, as it necessarily involves taxation and the allocation of resources by non-market means, which is considered to be always inferior to the alternative of leaving the matter to the free market. An often-quoted example used to illustrate the difference in efficiency between government-funded and privately funded research projects is the quest of mapping the human genome. The U.S. government was funding such a mission, called the Human Genome Project, while at the same time the quest was being pursued separately with private venture capital by Celera Genomics. Celera Genomics used a newer, albeit riskier technique and proceeded at a faster pace and at a fraction of the cost of the tax-funded project (approximately $3 billion of taxpayer dollars versus about $300 million of private funding). Some HGP researchers claimed Celera's method of genome sequencing "would not work," however that project eventually adopted some of Celera's methods.
Wikipedia put a cautionary note on this article:
"Some information in this article or section has not been verified and may not be reliable. Please check for inaccuracies, and modify and cite sources as needed."
Secondly, the article makes no distinction between basic research, and applied research.
Its true that private industry does a LOT of research. Defense contractors are constantly engineering new defense systems, pharmacueticals are constantly working on new generic drugs, and taking basic research from universities and publically-funded labs to develop consumer products.
BASIC scientific research is still largely done at universities and public labs - funded by public dollars.