I believe, somewhat tongue in cheek but half seriously too that Bush and the Christian Right feel that stem cell research is immoral along with abortion not because of a sanctity for life as they exhibit little in practice but because they fear that the second coming of Jesus would be prevented by the red and behorned guy holding a pitchfork zeroing out the blessed one in vitro. I think they really fear that the devil would abort the savior.

I think that a fundamentalist Christian viewpoint of reality also determines some of the foreign policy decisions. They want Jesus to come which means Jews must be in Israel, the Muslims are infidels, etc, etc. The pandemonium in the Middle East feeds right into their worldview, no differently than the ATF fed into David Koresh's world view in Waco and look where that ended up.

I think there is a question in the stem cell research debate that is overlooked in the pro-life muddle.

It is not that the destruction of these stem cell lines would be murder, especially for those lines that are currently extra utero and scheduled for disposal anyway.

The question is whether or not human life should ever be considered disposable.

Now before you get up into a stew, and think I am proposing that these lines have souls, or are fully human in the same way you and I are, I am not. They are however, unique human genomes, and thusly individual incarnations of humanity.

Those of course, are difficult words to use, but I can think of no better ones. It is not that the stem cell lines being discussed are sentient, but that they are human that is at issue.

Now, at this time, fetal stem cell research is at its first fumbling beginnings, and the unlimited potential described by its supporters has yet to show real progress. There is fetal stem cell research being done through out the world, much of it funded by governments, but as yet the philosopher's stone of unlimited healing potential has not been unearthed. That is not to say that such a thing is impossible, only to state that as of our current understanding, fetal stem cells have not proven to be the universal curative that was promised.

As with any research, we are asked to weigh the costs and benefits of said research. The cost for pursuing fetal stem cell research is a cheapening of human cell lines. The notion that individual lines might be created for the express purpose of research is disturbing. Once the current supply of frozen embryos is exhausted, there will be a demand placed on the new ones created, and with that new demand comes value, and that value can easily lead to human cell lines being created solely for profit, and a further cheapening of the notion of humanity. If we are creating disposable human lines, is it so impossible to believe that the notion of human disposability might spread beyond those lines? Is it so inconceivable that people might legitimately fear that disposability?

But what about the benefits you say, if we can cure people, living breathing people of horrendous diseases, isn't that worth the slim possibility of cheapening human life? Of course it is. But there is no guarantee that fetal stem cell research will do that. Adult stem cell research has shown amazing progress, but the differnces between adult stem cells and fetal stem cells is as great as the differnces between an adult and a fetus. If a scientist could show me a mouse cured by mouse fetal stem cells, or a monkey, or an ape, then I would say this research must go forward, but as no proof has been shown in lower animals, why do we rush into this for humans?

Is it such a horrible thing to ask for proof of concept before rushing off and destroying human cell lines for profit?

I don't think so, but perhaps I am wrong as well.

I agree with this veto. Not because I'm against embryonic research but because,as a capitalist, I'm against government spending on this type of thing. This is not it's proper function.

There is a difference between moral certainty & pigheaded stubbornness.

Stem cell research is the scientific equivalent of hope – the 21st century’s penicillin.

This was clearly a moment to win one for The Gipper’s wife.

A time comes when you have to let go of your gut instinct & admit the world is not flat.

On the other side of stem cell research, there are no dragons.

Maybe we need a new captain to take us over that horizon.

We are fortunate, from a strategic point of view, that from the late thirties until well into the 50's and beyond that the soviet biologic sciences were held in control by the "Lysenkoists" who had full support of Stalin and got their academic appointments (read: power and money) more on the basis of their loyal politics than scientific merit. They decried western teachings on evolution as reactionary and if fact didn't fit in with the party line, it was ignored or actively discredited (reminds me of the current global warming "debate"). Perhaps its time to remind these bozos who control policy and research funding that Lysenko and his people ultimately lost.

This is an oxymoron if there ever was one. You need a brain to think. If Geory Porgy Pudding and Pie would have one, why is Irak ooccupied? And talking about killing : Who proudly signed death warrants in Texas, who started a war instead of wiping out terrorists creating thousands more. No thinking intelligent being would do such idiotic thing. But killing embrioa for stemcell research, never. My born again friends would hang ME.

Why do we keep kidding ourselves into thinking that George Bush believes in ANYTHING? The hardest part of Tony Snow's job is the need to create an image that the man has a brain! (And while we're at it, how many readers are getting tired of that phrase "slippery slope"?)