Victory on Stem Cells!

[KingCondanomation]

Bush didn't limit research there honest journalist man. He limited taxpayer funding of it.

You can bust a nut now that government is going to dump my money on it, but don't ever let me hear you bitch about pharm profits when your beloved big brother is subsidizing their research. Guess who's going to reap the profits? Do you nut all over Merck and Pfizer, Amgen?

Well said, none in the media raise this important point, they make it sound like without government funding it doesn't already happen, Obama man of science, etc...

A lot on the left are very opposed to bioengineered foods and prefer organic (it's an even bigger movement in Europe), yet with bioengineered foods we could do some amazing things, I'd ask all of the left - should government fund research for that?

 

[Cancel3]

I offer no legal objection to privately-funded embryonic stem cell research. What I oppose is forcing tax-payers to fund it, especially considering there are millions of Americans who believe it is immoral. Here is a thought: why not have a checkoff on tax forms, allowing those who support the research to allocate a portion of their tax dollars specifically toward that cause (similar to the option of allocating $3 to public funding of Presidential campaigns). This I believe is a reasonable compromise and a win-win situation. Would you oppose this ib1? If so, why?

Generally speaking I am opposed to government funding for any medical research whatsoever, as I believe the free market is best suited for that particular task. However, I would support a compromise.

Or we could make the tax forms really, really long and have checkoffs for wars, financial bailouts, capital punishment, subsidies for despotic leaders of other nations, and even the sweet healthcare deal congress gets.

If I could remove my tax dollars from those I would be much happier, and therefore much healthier.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

That is, as they say, a distinction without a difference. By eliminating tax payer funding he effectively limited the research.

And I sorta think it's going to be the people dying of presently incurable diseases that are going to reap the benefits.

No he did not. You and everyone who agrees with going forward with embryonic stem cell research could have raised as much money for the R&D as you wanted. There was NOTHING stopping you from doing so. Look what Stowers did in Missouri or Lokey at Stanford.

All Bush did was make sure those who do not support this line of stem cell research were not forced to fund it.

 

[Bonestorm]

No he did not. You and everyone who agrees with going forward with embryonic stem cell research could have raised as much money for the R&D as you wanted. There was NOTHING stopping you from doing so. Look what Stowers did in Missouri or Lokey at Stanford.

All Bush did was make sure those who do not support this line of stem cell research were not forced to fund it.

His action limited research. Whether it was justified or not is an entirely separate matter.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

His action limited research. Whether it was justified or not is an entirely separate matter.

Please explain how it limited research.

Because as far as I can see, as I stated, you and everyone who wanted to fund embryonic stem cell research could have raised $5 trillion for R&D if you wanted. Nothing was stopping you that I can see. So please explain what I am missing. How did Bush stop you from raising private money from those who support this line?

 

[Damocles]

Please explain how it limited research.

Because as far as I can see, as I stated, you and everyone who wanted to fund embryonic stem cell research could have raised $5 trillion for R&D if you wanted. Nothing was stopping you that I can see. So please explain what I am missing. How did Bush stop you from raising private money from those who support this line?

I would have donated. We donated both of our bio-kids umbilicals for stem cell research too.

 

[Bonestorm]

Please explain how it limited research.

Because as far as I can see, as I stated, you and everyone who wanted to fund embryonic stem cell research could have raised $5 trillion for R&D if you wanted. Nothing was stopping you that I can see. So please explain what I am missing. How did Bush stop you from raising private money from those who support this line?

I didn't say that Bush stopped private individuals from raising money for embryonic stem cell research. I said his action limited research, which it did.

If public funding were available through the NIH more research would have been conducted. Limiting the funds available for research limited the amount of research that was conducted.

 

[Chapdog]

I think bio tech and alt energy are two fields that really do need govt money to help them during infancy. It also will help to regulate the ethics questions.

Keep in mind the wars, American deaths, and tax payer dollars we have paid to keep oil flowing as well.

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

You'd have a checkoff box for Nazi's to not give money to holocaust victims.

i know you are being facetious but i agree with this

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

Or we could make the tax forms really, really long and have checkoffs for wars, financial bailouts, capital punishment, subsidies for despotic leaders of other nations, and even the sweet healthcare deal congress gets.

If I could remove my tax dollars from those I would be much happier, and therefore much healthier.

yes i agree with this. this would be the ideal tax system.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I didn't say that Bush stopped private individuals from raising money for embryonic stem cell research. I said his action limited research, which it did.

If public funding were available through the NIH more research would have been conducted. Limiting the funds available for research limited the amount of research that was conducted.

That is complete bullshit. In NO way did he limit the research. Private funding could have raised an endless amount of money for the research. Period. For every tax dollar that 'might' have gone to this particular line... you could have raised $10 privately and donated it to the research. As long as there wasnt a limit on fund raising in the private side, it was not limited.

The bottom line is this... the research line is not as promising as it is being made out to be. Otherwise more money (than already raised) would have been raised in the private side. You are simply pissed that we weren't forced to explore this line. You are simply ignorant of the fact that those who did strongly believe in the embryonic line DID fund the R&D.

Those scientists who are pissing and moaning that Bush somehow limited them are simply bitching because it meant they had to actually work to raise money rather than feed off the government tit.

 

[Bonestorm]

That is complete bullshit. In NO way did he limit the research. Private funding could have raised an endless amount of money for the research. Period. For every tax dollar that 'might' have gone to this particular line... you could have raised $10 privately and donated it to the research. As long as there wasnt a limit on fund raising in the private side, it was not limited.

The bottom line is this... the research line is not as promising as it is being made out to be. Otherwise more money (than already raised) would have been raised in the private side. You are simply pissed that we weren't forced to explore this line. You are simply ignorant of the fact that those who did strongly believe in the embryonic line DID fund the R&D.

Those scientists who are pissing and moaning that Bush somehow limited them are simply bitching because it meant they had to actually work to raise money rather than feed off the government tit.

Why do you even bother with this stuff? It is just plain stupid. It's like arguing that cutting funding for DARPA would have no impact on future weapons development. Or that cutting funding for highways would have no impact on highway development.

But for Bush's reversal of the Clinton regulations there would have been much more research on embryonic stem cell research. End of story.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Libfascist. LOL. Seriously, go euthanize yourself, Watermarxist...

Libertarianism is fascism under a new name.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Why do you even bother with this stuff? It is just plain stupid. It's like arguing that cutting funding for DARPA would have no impact on future weapons development. Or that cutting funding for highways would have no impact on highway development.

But for Bush's reversal of the Clinton regulations there would have been much more research on embryonic stem cell research. End of story.

Which is again the same line of bullshit that you continue to spew. Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true.

If Federal money was cut to any of the above programs, the public would then decide how important they were to them. States would do the same. You are of the moronic mindset that if the FED doesn't do it, it wont get done.

That is blatantly false.

Bottom line is .... while their "MAY" have been more research done if the Fed had funded it... You do not KNOW that is true. You are simply guessing.

Bottom line is... NOTHING limited or stopped you from donating as much as you wanted to this line of research. NOTHING. Thus to proclaim that funding was limited is nothing more than a dependancy issue that you have with the FED. Period.

 

[Damocles]

Which is pretty much my point. A "war on science" would entail making it 100% illegal, hunting down scientists and putting them in prison, etc. Like they do for the "war on drugs". There was no systemic "war on science", scientists are just taking a page from the Christian's persecution syndrome. If you make enough people think what you say is true then it will shield you from a future attempt at the same type of ethical dilemma creating a change in research funding.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

The problem lies in the fact that the scientists who are bitching about it are doing so because it means they dont have the government tit running for their particular projects. So now they have to go to state and private money sources and convince them that their projects are worthwhile. Boo friggin hoo.

 

[Bonestorm]

Which is again the same line of bullshit that you continue to spew. Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true.

If Federal money was cut to any of the above programs, the public would then decide how important they were to them. States would do the same. You are of the moronic mindset that if the FED doesn't do it, it wont get done.

That is blatantly false.

Bottom line is .... while their "MAY" have been more research done if the Fed had funded it... You do not KNOW that is true. You are simply guessing.

Bottom line is... NOTHING limited or stopped you from donating as much as you wanted to this line of research. NOTHING. Thus to proclaim that funding was limited is nothing more than a dependancy issue that you have with the FED. Period.

I see that you are going to continue with the silliness. OK.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I see that you are going to continue with the silliness. OK.

LMAO... you are the delusional one...

Answer this question....

Were there any restrictions by Bush on States and private money to invest in this line of research?

If your answer is no... then there were no limits to overall funding.

Do you comprehend that?

Or are you just going to pretend that what I am saying is 'silly' so that you can avoid admitting you are an idiot?

 

[Bonestorm]

Which is pretty much my point. A "war on science" would entail making it 100% illegal, hunting down scientists and putting them in prison, etc. Like they do for the "war on drugs". There was no systemic "war on science", scientists are just taking a page from the Christian's persecution syndrome. If you make enough people think what you say is true then it will shield you from a future attempt at the same type of ethical dilemma creating a change in research funding.

Are you channeling Dixie today? No one mentioned a "war on science" except for you. Congratulations, you defeated your strawman.

 

[Bonestorm]

LMAO... you are the delusional one...

Answer this question....

Were there any restrictions by Bush on States and private money to invest in this line of research?

If your answer is no... then there were no limits to overall funding.

Do you comprehend that?

Or are you just going to pretend that what I am saying is 'silly' so that you can avoid admitting you are an idiot?

The issue, my little friend, is whether the statement "by eliminating tax payer funding [Bush] effectively limited the research." That statement is true and is not even controverted by anyone anywhere but you.

No one is claiming that Bush put limits on private funding. Just that the Bush limitations on federal funding effectively limited the research.