Libby Guilty

mysteryman wrote:

CI said...

Quote:
stunts stem cell research based on their "religious" belief,

You continue to misrepresent the facts about that,dont you.

Bush NEVER "stunted" or stopped or banned stem cell research of any kind.

What he did was say that the govt wouldnt pay for it.
If you want to do the research,find yourself a lab and go to it.
But dont ask the govt for money.

That is vastly different then what you are saying.

Cool.

Just so we're clear, when a Dem gets in office, and cuts the Military budget, they aren't holding back or stunting our national defense at all.

They're just saying 'don't ask the gov't for money to do it.'

You are free to take your rifle to Iraq or wherever and defend us all you like.

Right?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

mysteryman wrote:
CI said...

Quote:
stunts stem cell research based on their "religious" belief,

You continue to misrepresent the facts about that,dont you.

Bush NEVER "stunted" or stopped or banned stem cell research of any kind.

What he did was say that the govt wouldnt pay for it.
If you want to do the research,find yourself a lab and go to it.
But dont ask the govt for money.

That is vastly different then what you are saying.

Cool.

Just so we're clear, when a Dem gets in office, and cuts the Military budget, they aren't holding back or stunting our national defense at all.

They're just saying 'don't ask the gov't for money to do it.'

You are free to take your rifle to Iraq or wherever and defend us all you like.

Right?

Cycloptichorn

So you admit that the dems are planning to cut the budget for national defense and the military?

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

So you admit that the dems are planning to cut the budget for national defense and the military?

The dems are reigning in a runaway horse.

Your national defense force is in another country on a faux nation-building excercise.

Your national guard is on a rotating roster in Iraq, among other places.

Hurricane Katrina highlighted this fact. Remember?

What's so wrong with rationalising actual national defense for America?

Rather than dicking around in other countries, pretending to be doing good and spreading democracy for the rest of the world?

0 Replies

We should cut the defense budget, which is draining the country dry. The last time I looked, we were spending more on defense than the next 26 countries combined. Now, apparently for no other reason than to honor Jerry Ford, we are building a new and unneeded aircraft carrier. (Aircraft carriers are essentially obsolete in this day of missiles.)

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
CI said...

Quote:
stunts stem cell research based on their "religious" belief,

You continue to misrepresent the facts about that,dont you.

Bush NEVER "stunted" or stopped or banned stem cell research of any kind.

What he did was say that the govt wouldnt pay for it.
If you want to do the research,find yourself a lab and go to it.
But dont ask the govt for money.

That is vastly different then what you are saying.

Cool.

Just so we're clear, when a Dem gets in office, and cuts the Military budget, they aren't holding back or stunting our national defense at all.

They're just saying 'don't ask the gov't for money to do it.'

You are free to take your rifle to Iraq or wherever and defend us all you like.

Right?

Cycloptichorn

So you admit that the dems are planning to cut the budget for national defense and the military?

<smacks>

Um, yes, I'll admit that, because it's a solid Dem platform and has been forever. But that wasn't the point of what I wrote at all, which I would like you to address:

We pool money in order to do a lot of things collectively. Scientific research is one, defense is another. For you to say that we can't do certain scientific research but you are free to 'do it yourself' is the moral and ethical equivalent of saying 'defend the country yourself.' Which I doubt you would be for.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

paying for the defense of the nation is hardly comparable to paying for a small subsection of stem cell research. It's a retarded comparison.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

paying for the defense of the nation is hardly comparable to paying for a small subsection of stem cell research. It's a retarded comparison.

No, it isn't. The Dems could as easily say, 'we won't pay for a small subsection of Defense - cluster bombs. We don't consider them to be important, neccessary, or moral.'

Stop being dense, it's not flattering.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
paying for the defense of the nation is hardly comparable to paying for a small subsection of stem cell research. It's a retarded comparison.

No, it isn't. The Dems could as easily say, 'we won't pay for a small subsection of Defense - cluster bombs. We don't consider them to be important, neccessary, or moral.'

Stop being dense, it's not flattering.

Cycloptichorn

That's not what you said so why change what you said? In what way is stem cell research comparable to national defense?

It remains a retarded comparison and you should be embarrassed for trying to.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
paying for the defense of the nation is hardly comparable to paying for a small subsection of stem cell research. It's a retarded comparison.

No, it isn't. The Dems could as easily say, 'we won't pay for a small subsection of Defense - cluster bombs. We don't consider them to be important, neccessary, or moral.'

Stop being dense, it's not flattering.

Cycloptichorn

That's not what you said so why change what you said? In what way is stem cell research comparable to national defense?

It remains a retarded comparison and you should be embarrassed for trying to.

I've never once, nor ever will be, embarrassed by any judgment of my work made by you, McG. You've been wrong on more issues than there are starts in the sky, and what more, displayed an unpleasant and asssholish demeanor the entire time.

Stem cell research is analogous to national defense in that it is something that the average citizen cannot do for themselves. Therefore we have endeavored in both instances to create a method for doing so out of the general tax fund provided by taxpayers.

There is no difference between saying 'go research this potentially life-saving stem cell issue yourself, if you care about it' and saying 'go develop potentially life-saving weapons yourself, if you care about it.'

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

You confuse your disagreeing with what I present to my being wrong.

Stem cell research is not hurting for lack of federal funding. Only a small subset of stem cell research, that which uses fertilized eggs is being denied federal funding. There is a moral value there that the present administration has decided to make. Future administrations may reverse that decision.

To compare that with cutting the military budget, for which there is no moral value associated with, merely a political value, is asinine at best. But, typical for your belief set.

0 Replies

The thing is rumors have it that Mcg came from a pretty normal family, had a decent education and seemed to be mentally functional, so what happened?

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

You confuse your disagreeing with what I present to my being wrong.

Stem cell research is not hurting for lack of federal funding. Only a small subset of stem cell research, that which uses fertilized eggs is being denied federal funding. There is a moral value there that the present administration has decided to make. Future administrations may reverse that decision.

To compare that with cutting the military budget, for which there is no moral value associated with, merely a political value, is asinine at best. But, typical for your belief set.

I find your distinction to be ridiculous, for two reasons.

First, there is a moral value associated with weapons of war; Some weapons are right to use and some are wrong to use.

Second, stem cell research IS being hurt by the lack of Federal funds. You really show your ignorance into the research process in America when you say things like this, because there is a critical difference between Applied research (like private companies do, in order to get a viable product or technique) and Theoretical research (like universities do, looking for new theories or disproving old ones). Theoretical research relies heavily upon government funding, and to say that it isn't impacted by the ban is stupid. Just plain stupid.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
paying for the defense of the nation is hardly comparable to paying for a small subsection of stem cell research. It's a retarded comparison.

No, it isn't. The Dems could as easily say, 'we won't pay for a small subsection of Defense - cluster bombs. We don't consider them to be important, neccessary, or moral.'

Stop being dense, it's not flattering.

Cycloptichorn

Agreed, McGentrix, defense is a legitimate government function, that only the government can legitimately do. Stem cell research is most definitely not in the same category.

How did this discussion happen from talking about Libby?

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
paying for the defense of the nation is hardly comparable to paying for a small subsection of stem cell research. It's a retarded comparison.

No, it isn't. The Dems could as easily say, 'we won't pay for a small subsection of Defense - cluster bombs. We don't consider them to be important, neccessary, or moral.'

Stop being dense, it's not flattering.

Cycloptichorn

Agreed, McGentrix, defense is a legitimate government function, that only the government can legitimately do. Stem cell research is most definitely not in the same category.

How did this discussion happen from talking about Libby?

You also apparently are another one who doesn't understand the difference between theoretical and applied research.

You can no more undertake programs of theoretical research relating to stem cells then you could legitimately protect the country on your own, Okie.

Cylcoptichorn

0 Replies

Can I field an NFL football team on my own? Obviously not. Is that also another government function, cyclops? Get serious, cyclops.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Can I field an NFL football team on my own? Obviously not. Is that also another government function, cyclops? Get serious, cyclops.

YOU get serious.

Scientific research IS the govt's job. It is a vital part of our nations' future and has benefited every American tremendously.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

The government is not the only entity doing scientific research, thankfully.

0 Replies

The big problem is that certain stem cell research can't use any Federal funds. That means if any of the building or any of the equipment was paid for with federal funds then no research outside the allowed part can be done there. All nonfederal funded research has to get its equipment and space from an area that has nothing to do with federal funding. Most research facilities have had federal funds in one form or another. It requires duplicating existing equipment and space.

Now imagine if we decreed that no federal funds could go toward supporting an NFL football team. What if that meant that the football team and its fans couldn't use any roads maintained with Federal funds?

0 Replies

The major problem here is that Bush's opposition to federal funding for stem cell research is religiously based. This violates the doctrine of separation of church and state. But what can one expect of the likes of Bush and his ilk.

0 Replies

Advoate has it in a nutshell. Bush's stance on stem cell research religiously based; and that's against our constitution. It's bad enough Bush is a freak'n liar, he has to impose his religious belief on all Americans whether we are non=christian or atheist.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know