The Unconscionable Claims of Michael J. Fox

Discussion in 'Politics' started by carpro, Oct 26, 2006.

  1. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,896
    Likes Received:
    294
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/10/the_unconscionable_claims_of_m.html

    October 25, 2006
    The Unconscionable Claims of Michael J. Fox
    By Mary Davenport

    The popular and appealing actor Michael J. Fox has taken to the airwaves in Senate battleground states Missouri, Maryland, and New Jersey with a highly misleading ad urging defeat of Republican Senatorial candidates opposing the use of taxpayer dollars to fund new embryonic stem cell line research. He states,

    "Stem cell research offers hope to millions of Americans with diseases like diabetes, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's.... But George Bush and Michael Steele would put limits on the most promising stem cell research."

    Mr. Fox and his ads' sponsors are guilty of conflating embryonic stem cell research, which the GOP candidates and many Americans oppose for destroying a human life in the name of curing other people's diseases, with stem cell research in general, which includes adult stem cell research and umbilical cord blood stem cell research.

    The only limits in question are on federal funding of new embryonic stem cell lines, requiring the sacrifice of new embryos. Private and state-funded research (California voters are spending six billion dollars borrowing money to fund this) is ongoing.

    The implicit claim that research based on new embryos is "the most promising" is absurd, completely unsupported by the scientific literature, and an insult to voters, based as it is on the assumption that they are incapable of understanding the issue. Too stupid to tell the difference, is the elitist assumption underlying this campaign.
     
  2. genesis 12-15

    genesis 12-15
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2006
    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks, carpro. Keep on keepin' on. Fox worships at that shrine, ignoring the data clearly showing placenta and other stem cells just as effective. His kind of stem cell "research" will end up in abortion mills. "Stem cells, only $19.95! But wait, if you order right now, get a second quart absolutely free! Pay only shipping & handling."
     
  3. StraightAndNarrow

    StraightAndNarrow
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2003
    Messages:
    2,508
    Likes Received:
    3
    I think that until In Vitro Vertilization is stopped the "extra embryos" left frozen until they are discarded should be used for research. The murder of the unborn has already been done by the couple trying to have a baby by unnatural means.
     
  4. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yep. www.stemcellresearch.org.
     
  5. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    I pray that Christians will turn from our wicked ways, and I pray that God will heal our land.

    I pray that God will judge the murderers, and that He will kill them for their evil sin.
     
  6. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    So, is it murder when those frozen embryos are destroyed?
     
  7. Filmproducer

    Filmproducer
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    You do realize that you just publicly asked God to kill those couples who have, or try to have, children through invitro fertilization, right? Where do you think the embryos come from? I hardly call that "loving your enemies".
     
  8. North Carolina Tentmaker

    North Carolina Tentmaker
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,355
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes it is. Are they human? Are they capable of life? Are we making the choice to end that life? They may have been conceived by unnatural means, but they are still human.
     
  9. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,896
    Likes Received:
    294
    http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200610/NAT20061027a.html

    Missouri Cloning 'Ban' Misleading, Group Says
    By Nathan Burchfiel
    CNSNews.com Staff Writer
    October 27, 2006

    EXCERPT

    (CNSNews.com) - Anti-cloning organizers in Missouri are criticizing a proposed amendment to the state's constitution that they say would trick voters into supporting embryonic stem cell research under the guise of banning cloning.

    The Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative, more commonly called Amendment 2, states that "no person may clone or attempt to clone a human being," but several anti-cloning groups are urging residents of the state to vote against it.

    The groups argue that while it appears to ban cloning, the amendment's definition of cloning is inaccurate and will in fact create a constitutional right to create human embryos for stem cell experimentation.

    "It appears to ban human cloning when actually the fine print would put the right to do human cloning in the Missouri Constitution," Cathy Ruse, a spokeswoman for Missourians Against Human Cloning (MAHC), told Cybercast News Service .

    Ruse said the amendment's definition of cloning, which will not be included in the summary of the amendment on ballots Nov. 7, "gives biotech firms the right to do somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), which is the scientific term for cloning."
     
  10. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    So the new process of culling stem cells from embryos without destroying the embryo should be banned as a form of cloning?
     
    #10 Daisy, Oct 27, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 27, 2006
  11. tragic_pizza

    tragic_pizza
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Messages:
    3,395
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, 'cause God is all about killin' people you don't like, huh?
     
  12. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,896
    Likes Received:
    294

    "On its website, the NIH (National Institutes of Health) defines somatic cell nuclear transfer as "the scientific term for cloning," saying it "can be used for therapeutic (medical) or reproductive purposes, but the initial stage that combines the enucleated egg and a somatic cell nucleus is the same."
     
  13. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    I'd feel better about cloning, if we could build bridges & dams that never failed. Science has a nasty habit of not seeing years ahead of it'self, the Australian cane Toad, and the New Orleans levees display. There is no way to know the long-term prognosis of a clone, no way to know if we thought of everthing that could go wrong, until it does.

    I think it is a good Christian trait to admit our knowledge is finite, that we are no way as smart as we think.

    I also shudder at the thought that practicing medicine on animals is morally wrong, but on frtilized human eggs is acceptable.
     
  14. Not_hard_to_find

    Not_hard_to_find
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    713
    Likes Received:
    0
    Shades of Westworld. Surely nothing could go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go...
     
  15. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's not that kind of cloning - it will never be implanted in a womb, it will never develop into a fetus. The whole point of this is to get compatible tissue.

    The whole "cloning" thing is just a scare issue.
     
  16. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    I don't believe that, Daisy.
     
  17. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why don't you believe it? You know the Feds have banned reproductive cloning. Missouri's Amendment 2 specifically says that Federal law would be followed.
     
  18. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,896
    Likes Received:
    294
    "It appears to ban human cloning when actually the fine print would put the right to do human cloning in the Missouri Constitution," Cathy Ruse, a spokeswoman for Missourians Against Human Cloning (MAHC), told Cybercast News Service .

    Ruse said the amendment's definition of cloning, which will not be included in the summary of the amendment on ballots Nov. 7, "gives biotech firms the right to do somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), which is the scientific term for cloning."
     
  19. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    But it's not to reproduce a new being, is it carpro? It's simply to make tissue without destroying an embryo.

    The CELL is cloned, not the person.

    Scare tactic.
     
  20. Not_hard_to_find

    Not_hard_to_find
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    713
    Likes Received:
    0
    Red herring tactic. Too vague, too.
     

Share This Page

Loading...