Sunday, October 03, 2004

John Kerry Attacks President Bush on Stem Cell Research in Debate

Miami, FL (LifeNews.com) -- During Thursday night's presidential debate, John Kerry said he would avoid attacking President Bush's character when following up a question Bush received from moderator Jim Lehrer. That didn't stop Kerry from blasting the president on the issue of using human embryos in research. "He's not acknowledging the truth of the science of stem-cell research," Kerry said. Yet, Kerry may want to remain cautious when calling the president's truthfulness on the controversial issue into question. In an August interview with the Associated Press, a Kerry campaign staffer misrepresented his position on embryonic stem cell research. A staffer told AP that Kerry is "'absolutely not'' suggesting creating embryos for the sole purpose of research." However, in July, Kerry attached his name to a bill, the Human Cloning Ban and Stem Cell Research Protection Act (S. 303), that specifically allows scientists to create human embryos so their embryonic stem cells can be extracted. The process kills the days-old unborn child.

7 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, yer complainin' bout a few hundred or thousand embryos killed, when you's should be talking about many millions killed every year from chemical abortions? Why don't chemically aborted embryos count as much as ESCR embryos?

7:32 AM  
Blogger David said...

>>>Why don't chemically aborted embryos count as much as ESCR embryos?

Never wrote that they didn't. My focus has been on medical abortions. Since you ask, I would say that if the rights of the unborn are defended through legislation, federal court action, etc. then these chemical abortions would be outlawed as well.

3:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>Never wrote that they didn't. My focus has been on medical abortions. Since you ask, I would say that if the rights of the unborn are defended through legislation, federal court action, etc. then these chemical abortions would be outlawed as well.

Yer focus is laser sharp, buddy. If them folks in other countries find cures to major diseases using there ESCR, you and all them other christians that opposed ESCR would be the king of hypocrites if you accept treatment, right?

1:22 PM  
Blogger David said...

>>>Yer focus is laser sharp, buddy. If them folks in other countries find cures to major diseases using there ESCR, you and all them other christians that opposed ESCR would be the king of hypocrites if you accept treatment, right?

It's a big "IF" that any treatments from ESCR will ever materialize. But if they do, I will refuse them just like I now refuse vaccines developed with fetal stem-cells. Many Catholics do and will continue to do the same.

Besides, adult stem-cells not only show more promise the ESC but are already being used in treatments for many conditions and diseases.

2:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>It's a big "IF" that any treatments from ESCR will ever materialize. But if they do, I will refuse them just like I now refuse vaccines developed with fetal stem-cells. Many Catholics do and will continue to do the same.

That's cool- Would you refuse them for your sick kids too?

>>Besides, adult stem-cells not only show more promise the ESC but are already being used in treatments for many conditions and diseases.

Wrong. Are you a scientist? Do you know better than the Presidents Bioethics Committee just how promising ESCR is? They argued that those oppose ESCR do so on moral grounds. Why not stick to some semblance of truth to argue yours as well?

2:39 AM  
Blogger David said...

>>>Would you refuse them for your sick kids too?

Yes I would. Would you kill your neighbor to save your child? Would you kill one of your children to save another? Maybe you have no problem with all that killing, but I do. I trust in God and will answer to Him for my decisions, not you.

>>>They argued that those oppose ESCR do so on moral grounds. Why not stick to some semblance of truth to argue yours as well?

I am against ESCR on moral grounds yet, I always point out that there other reasons to question why we think we should do this research, such as, adult and alternative stem cells are already being used in treatments and ESC are not; that there are serious tissue rejection problems and tumor growth from ESCR; and that it is debatable, not a sure thing as you suggest, that ESCR will yield any fruitful treatments. It's always a good thing to present the full picture, but make no mistake, I oppose ESCR because it is involves the murder of a human life.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-smith042302.asp

http://www.nationalreview.com/smithw/smith200409090835.asp

http://www.cbhd.org/resources/stemcells/mcconchie_2004-06-16.htm

http://www.stemcellresearch.org/

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99993723

I wonder why I can't point out OTHER reasons to oppose ESCR? Because it makes my argument weaker if I don't? It seems when I make a point you cannot refute you tell me I cannot make that point. What kind of dialogue is that?

4:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>Yes I would. Would you kill your neighbor to save your child? Would you kill one of your children to save another? Maybe you have no problem with all that killing, but I do. I trust in God and will answer to Him for my decisions, not you.

Ok, but you don't give 2 squats about chemical abortions- which may cause more deaths than any physician assisted suicide will ever. I'm just tryin' to make sense of your logic here. Save a few here, but throw away tens of millions over there and don't even discuss it much. I just don't get it.


>>I am against ESCR on moral grounds yet, I always point out that there other reasons to question why we think we should do this research, such as, adult and alternative stem cells are already being used in treatments and ESC are not; that there are serious tissue rejection problems and tumor growth from ESCR; and that it is debatable, not a sure thing as you suggest, that ESCR will yield any fruitful treatments. It's always a good thing to present the full picture, but make no mistake, I oppose ESCR because it is involves the murder of a human life.
I wonder why I can't point out OTHER reasons to oppose ESCR? Because it makes my argument weaker if I don't? It seems when I make a point you cannot refute you tell me I cannot make that point. What kind of dialogue is that?

I'm sorry if I gave that impression- I was just going on what our government tells us about the value of ESCR. I figure they know a bit more about it than you do. The president's own appointed Bioethics Committee disagrees with yer original statement. I was just pointin' it out for ya. Yer just tryna paint a grossly unfound portrait of the potential of ESCR. Again, why dontcha care about embryos thrown away at fertility clinics and those killed by chemical abortions, but DO harp so harshly on ESCR? Do ya NOT see any hypocrisy this?

www.bioethics.gov

6:25 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home