Obama Signs Law Banning Federal Embryo Research Days After Signing Executive Order

Ever wanted to say...

"IN YOUR FACE SATAN!!!"

????

(Not calling anyone here Satan)

 

My question is why did the Republican's vote against this legislation if it contained this amendment?

 

No one ever reads the bills! It is part of the corruption in DC.. and both parties are corrupt!

 

Okay, how would you vote?

The primary purpose of this bill was to fund the budget so government would run through the fall of this year, not to address embryonic stem cells.

Have you heard of ammendments?
That's what this was. Some how the ammendment was voted on and got passed. Can we say...... so many 'ammendments' are brought to the floor...... often by title ..... and people vote: Some know what they are voting on....others may follow a collegues vote.....but seldom is there much discussion IF the urgency of the bill seems important enough and noone has acted to stop a particular point for discussion.

The Republicans who voted against the omnious bill saw items in it which either did not agree with their constituency.... or which they disagreed with. They were voting for or against the budget. As for the ammendment.... they probably voted for it even though they voted against the bill. Their vote doesn't pass ammendments into law, it only attaches the ammendment to a bill, which must then be passed.

If an ammendment fails a vote or the bill isn't passed..... its not the end: A member of the Congress may sponsor it or a similar ammendment and attach it to a bill..... provided the floor allows the vote and enough pass it.

Essentially the Executive Order from Obama not only states his desire for embryonic stem cell research to be continued and funded with tax dollars...... but it acts as a signal to any involved or with potential to be involved with tax funded research which may venture into embryonic stem cells, that it is not the intention of the executive branch to push for enforcement of any law standing in the way. Of course he covers himself with legal wording indicating as permitted by law, but he is in effect notifying any who may push the boundaries of law.... that his administration will not act in an agressive manner to investigate or expose complaints or suspicion. IOW, such research might proceed by those willing to take the risk of breaking the law by their use or siphoning off tax dollars from other projects..... provided they don't get caught red-handed.

This is not the way to govern. The transparency is to those who think...... and understand really what is being said..... but not to the majority of people..... who, like the person who posted this question about Republicans against a bill which contains ammendments....... are not acquainted with the processes of their own government and are dependant on the comments of others..... often based on similar unfamiliarity.

 

I don't believe this snuck by him at all. It's an ammendment that'd been attached annually to similar bills ever since 1996 and the long standing members of the House had been through this vote to attach the ammendment before.

When President Bush addressed this issue by executive order...... he helped to deflect the burden or pressure on the Congress for passage of this ammendment by sharing in his concurrence and insuring the public knew the mind of the executive branch and would place the target on him. IOW, he not only backed the spirit of this ammendment but also put the shoulder of the executive branch behind it to enforce.

Obama could have rescinded the previous executive orders without adding anything...but he didn't. Essentially he wrote an executive order which, while it purports to allow only that which is allowed by law (which BTW, all executive orders are supposed to get their power from law already written and passed) it is essentially telling 'the people' without obviously informing them...... that it is the intention of this administration not to enforce (executive= excute lawful authority via enforcement) any law restricting the research or use of stem cells. His executive order is essentially a permission to researchers using federal funds and grants to 'do what you want....just don't get caught'.

 

The protection of life is all that matters according to many on this board? How many times have those of us who voted for Obama had to endure how God will pass judgment on us for voting with the economy in mind and not pro-life? Are you now saying it is ok to vote against protecting life if we can save a buck or two or a few thousand earmarks? Isn't that a double standard?

Are you sure your legislators share your same views about life? Steele, the party leader says each person should have a choice... Don't worry, they'll bust out the pro-life bumper stickers during the next election hoping you'll forget how they voted against life when they had a chance... :thumbs:

Heck, if Obama keeps this up, he just might win some of you over... We can use a good baritone in the Obama choir... :thumbsup:

 

By the Numbers!

Number of Federal elected officials -

A. - Executive Branch

1 - President of the United States.

1 - Vice-President of the United States.

2 - Total number of elected officials in the Executive Branch.

B. - Legislative Branch

100 - Members of the Senate. (The Vice-President it the President of the Senate, included above.)

435 - Members of the House of Representatives, with full voting rights.

Six - Delegates who are technically non-voting members of the House of Representatives.

541 - Total number of elected officials of the Legislative Branch.

C. - Judicial Branch

0 - All Justices and Judges are appointed, not elected, at the Federal level of Government.

543 - Total number of elected Federal officials.

0 - Number of elected Federal officials who have read all the Ominous - 'er I mean Omnibus Bill.

543 - Number of elected Federal officials who have NOT read all the Omnibus Bill.



539 - Number of these 543 officials who will be only too happy to tell you what the Bill that they haven't read contains, at a given 'photo-op'. (4 seats are currently vacant!)

Uh- any other real questions, here?

Ed

 

Well, are you finally admitting that you care more about money than babies being slaughtered?

I have said this before but I'll say it again...I would rather go back to the great depression and live without utilities, indoor plumbing, and eat watery beans every day, than to cast a vote that would aid in the slaughter of even one child.

AJ

 

Looking at the Politics section, this seems to be the case. I joined hoping to debate politics and see a diversity of opinions. Instead, this is a "criticize President Obama forum." And like you say, no matter what our president does, he is raked over the coals for it.

This is easy to say, since you didn't live through the Great Depression!

 

While this is off topic........

I didn't live through the great depression either..... but Mother and Daddy did and they're my neighbors and both still have their good minds. My mother was the 'baby' of nine living adult children and for several years of my life, I lived around these aunts and uncles.... not to metion their parents, my grandparents......... and I heard a lot of talk about the great depression.

What was so great about it. The fact is its been studied the most of any depression, yet nothing was learned; history repeats itself; and we're letting government get involved again in the economics of what should be a freely cycling and self-correcting economy.

What about the other depression........You know don't you? The one nobody talks about. The depression of the 1920's. It was sudden and severe, but the worst of it was over in about a year: Government stayed out of that one. When the great depression hit, government got involved in all aspects of it..... by this time the federal reserve was created and with it came the interference and the consort of banking, business and finance, and government and its taxation and programs...... which helped to extend the depression over a period of about 12 years.

I, myself, have lived in conditions where there was an out-house, a pot under the bed, a hand pump to prime before drawing water, pull string light bulbs on the ceiling, a grassless dirt yard for a playground (and a patch of poison ivy nearby :thumbs: ), wash done at grandmother's wringer washer and a clothes line to dry clothes, home made clothes, shoes worn only to school and in winter, a house where only one or two rooms were heated..... either by a wood fire or an oil stove, and five children living in a house with only four rooms..... one living, two interconnecting bedrooms, and a kitchen...... and we got along fine and were as healthy as ever. We didn't have government interferring with permits and license when we added our own plumbing, built our own partitions between rooms, did our own electrical wring for light switches and outlets, got someone to drill our own well and put down a pump, burned off a patch of stubble and new ground to plant a garden. Berries and fruit picked in season and canned for the winter..... and same for vegetables. Fresh meat served rarely but always plenty of smokehouse and salt pork for meals and seasoning. Never on the public dole for food stamps or commodities. I'm 60 now and slow in energy..... but I know people can survive with a lot less than we think we can...... if we just have the 'want to' and also have the right spirit within us to work hard where we need to, take care of what we have, share what we can, ask for no more than is needed, and be a help to neighbors. It does help to have a faith and trust in God which unites us in encouraging one another in spite of peculiar differences of denomination and whether it be cities or country, a feeling of community which is close enough and responsive enough to be neighborly and supportive of those within.

Now thanks to all recent and current administrations, we have the government telling us to trust them and they'll bail us out of the hole....... while the very problems of unsatisfied debts is what got us here in the first place...... so they've found ways of adding debt ontop of debt..... and they call it solutions.

Welcome to Baptist Board...... I would suggest if you don't like the heat then stay out of the fire. We have many folks with varied views who express them here. But some like to label folks and call names..... and that gets discussion no where. And some like to accuse others, often w/o really reading with comprehension their posts...... and they get called on it. And some try to start or side track discussions onto taboo topics....... which I'd suggest reading the posting rules both for the board, and then where posted, under each forum heading before proceeding.

This particular thread has to do with what our POTUS has signed into law in contrast with an executive order which he nailed earlier in the week regarding embryonic stem cells. The topic is of particular interest to Christians who view life as a precious gift from God with all life counted by God as having value....not deserved by our own doing but by the priceless ransom God gave while we were yet without any worth of our own. I hope you at least share in some of these views..... or will stick around with patience and an open heart to see if through these faulty words which we pen, there might be some blessing of the spirit for you.

I would suggest that if you open a thread already started, and the topic doesn't suit you.... then start your own thread with one of political interest or inquiry which does suit you. Others will open and read it and if they have opinions, ideas, or other facts to add, they'll post.

And please forgive my ramblings...... and ignore them in the future if my postings or verbosity offends you. They are, afterall, my opinions and/or my experiences...... grains of sand slowly ebbing out the hour glass.

Lastly and once again........ welcome to BaptistBoard.

 

I would love to comment on stem cell research, but it seems that the rules somewhat restrict different viewpoints. Therefore, I will allow this thread to continue without comment. Carry on.

 

Since a 'mod' isn't around to catch this one.... I'll try.

What your looking for is located here:
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=58114

As you see by the content of THIS thread and it's title, and OP or opening post by the thread starter.... This thread is not a debate about stem cells as much as it is a discussion about what seems to be a contradiction of purpose..... Obama's executive order freeing up stem cell research and funding with tax dollars vs his party's dominance and passage and his signing of the Omnibus Bill with ammendments protecting embryos. What some see as a contradiction to purpose, and some see as ignorance to content: I'm not pursuaded of either....... but think it is the politically calculating and expediant way that both Congress and the Executive Branch get what they want while fooling the people.

Chances are that without this ammendment in the Bill, some might have withheld their vote for it and kept the discussion going which would have delayed passage. By an almost calculated timing of the executive order preceeding the passage of this bill and creating a discussion of contrast between the Executive and Legislative Branch regarding intentions..... the discussion is brought to the forefront of public preoccupation, serving both the platform for 'professional and scientific' discussions and interviews vs. the pro-life view point, and a distraction of what is taking place between our government and the international scene and economic scene.

 

Hi, Robert. Welcome to the BB. You seem to have jumped in here with a few critical comments towards us accumulated in your very short posting history, but you agreed to the rules when you joined. Well, how about introducing yourself as a new member?

You are welcome to introduce yourself here:

http://www.baptistboard.com/forumdisplay.php?f=11

Thanks for your cooperation aand again, welcome to the Board!

Lady Eagle,
Moderator


Back to the topic at hand.......

 

Welcome to the Baptist Board. :wavey:

Incidentally and FTR, I really suspect that you will probably need either (a.) to purchase the Baptist Board and become the new owner or (b.) to expect to be here a while longer than a mere five days, and accumulate at least a few more than 8 total posts on the BB before you can possibly attain to any position to allow or not allow any thread to continue or not continue, however.

I have already accumulated more than 1000X the total number of posts you have, over a longer period of time than 3 years, and have no such sort of influence, at least as of yet, nor do I really expect to have that sort in the near future.

Patience can be a virtue on the BB, my friend.

Ed

 

Been there done much of that. :thumbsup:

 

The story has finally broke on National Media...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/fir...tem-cell-research-needs-congressional-action/

 

Nope, what I said was just the opposite, the right has finally admitted that babies being slaughtered can be trumped by other politics. That is why there is no outcry to their elected officials for not supporting this legislation...

 

What you are saying is not true.

If they don't pass the legislation, the country continues on the current budget, which already contains the language against abortion.

Not even a nice try for you.

peace to youraying:

 

You didn't read the OP, it was on page 465 of the bill they voted no to.