Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Vote.com:Do You Support Loosening Restrictions On Federal Funding For Human ESC Research?

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Boston, Mass
    Posts
    388
    Joseph,
    I too am a father whose son has suffered an SCI.
    Let me ask you this. When ESCs and or SCNT theraphies are used in the cure process are you going to deny your son that theraphy?

    If so are you, are you ready to take a pledge that you will deny medical care that these sciences will offer to any of your loved ones?

  2. #12
    Senior Member chastev8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    valdosta ga usa
    Posts
    1,175
    They have had the results for a week now

    "No mother on either side could say that whatever was won was worth my son"--Steve Mason

  3. #13
    just to interject for a moment, on a point made by Joeseph:
    "if you did some studies you will find they get better results from Gov funded programs because they are run by folks who have invested their lives in helping others for next to nothing."

    Joeseph, if YOU did some research, you will find that faith-based organizations are among the BIGGEST recipients of GOVERNMENT funds - ie TAXDOLLARS : Salvation Army, Volunteers of America, Cstholic Charaties, and many more.

    There are few non-profits that are not government funded in some way -thru tax exemption, grants etc.
    Faith-based orgs have NEVER been restrictd from competing for funds.
    The PRWORA of 1996 also includes incentives to encourage MORE faith-based orgs to participate in efforts to get welfare recipients of the rolls.

    Churches have done great service to many in need, but much is in the form of temporary relief, with many parishioners not being equipped with the knowlege base or skills/training necessary to deal with much more severe/chronic social/medical issues afflicting many in need - ie mentally ill; drug addiction; homeless , esp if dually diagnosed -mentally ill/drug abuse; etc.

    Much funds would need to increase capacity for these churches to deal with complex, long-term, chronic issues. Tax dollars would need to be directed towards capacity building, training of staff, hiring of skilled workers, admistrative staffing, time dedicated to increased paperwork - applying for grants, obligation to adhere to gov't regulations/paperwork, research/data collection- necessary in grant application and accountability, etc.- RATHER THAN directly to those in need.... an issue being argued for in favor of faith-based orgs, that MORE of the funds are directed to serving those in need and less on the buraecracy.

    Anyway, lots been discussed on this topic in previous threads, so no need to rehash further what I've repeated many times about gov't waste and redundant, unnecessary programs.

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Manassas,Va. USA
    Posts
    353
    My mistake. I meant to say non gov funded programs.Im not totally against the idea of funding Faith based ministys and I dont disagree with you chick.I just like the idea of folks helping 1 another without having to be funded and backed by Government. I ran programs myself from my own church and we worked closely with social services as not to duplicate so yes there is alot to be discussed so folks know what were committing ourselves to as far as Faith based Gov. funded programs.My wife worked for the county gov. mental health dept. for a bout 4 years and said that most of the therapists were useless and helping hardly anyone and yet tons of our tax dollars were going into that program, it was so bad that they brought in a new head to assess the program and when he gave his recomendation to pare it down, they released him to find someone who would keep the program.And no I would not deny my son the breakthru research if it came thru esc,because it is not my decision to make. Its his. My question to some of you folks is; should there be ethics guiding research and if so where do you draw the line?

  5. #15
    joseph, yes, I understood you meant non-govt funded programs, being more effective than gov't funded. My point was that they are most all gov't funded to some degree, in particular the large faith-based. Think we are on same page as far as needing to improve/streamline sytems, not getting rid of social service orgs recieving govt funds simply because there are some that are poorly implemented and wasteful.

    What type of ethics are you meaning,in regard to guiding research? I think there already exists ethical standards guiding research in general, but not sure what they may be specifc to ESC research. It may be process still being fleshed out as ESC is still relatively new.

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Manassas,Va. USA
    Posts
    353
    I think to put it simply chick, for many folks esc falls into the ethics in research dept.Cloning is right behind. Thats why we have such a hard time with it, its not because we lack compassion or dont give a damn but because we do and we are looking down the road for future generations.What will our world look like in 50 years if the ehtical bounderies are torn down in science.When religion and moral belief systems are thrown out then all man has are his own survival mentallity that says "whatever it takes".That to me is a sad conclusion to the human journey.You know the funny thing is,there is so much concentration of arguing and fussing about gov. funded esc research money and yet most of us agree with every other form of research we've seen thus far.

  7. #17
    Senior Member Leo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Yankton, South Dakota
    Posts
    4,005
    Joseph, What you just said is it and that's what bothers me. They fear what scientist may do. So to appease that fear they're drawing the line in the sand here. I don't get where the 99 some persent of scientist/researchers get labeled with this fear of being evil doers. Yes there is a wacko out there that will do what they fear. however they will do that wether ESC ban exists or not. it is totally not cool to bunch them together or stop their desire to do good by this fear.

    also to envoke the name of hitler in this debate blows me away. it bothers me to see the people that have taken the low road of truth in this debate. I know you didn't but many have.

    yet most of us agree on other forms of research, well fund it and pass the CRPA that has nothing to do with ESC.

    it may sound it but nothing personal to you. eh

    "All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given you."
    Gandolf the Gray

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Manassas,Va. USA
    Posts
    353
    Honestly Leo, It was hard to follow what you were trying to say.I got some of it I think but i dont want to repond to much because i may have misunderstood.I wouldnt compare esc research to hitler but i might if cloning is the subject because he was totally there about his weird ideas of perfecting the human race.In korea esc is talked about and researched right there with cloning.You can separate them but its also easy to connect them because those who would clone would use the same research.

  9. #19
    Joseph, every scientist that I know has strongly condemned reproductive cloning. There has been a bill in Congress for each of the last four years banning reproductive cloning, i.e. cloning an embryo and transplanting the embryo into a woman's uterus. New Jersey has already criminalized this possibility so that any doctor who does this would be put in jail and have severe fines.

    There are two versions of anti-cloning bills that are being considered by Congress. One is the the Human Cloning Ban and Stem Cell Research Protection act of 2005, H.R.1822.IH) which human cloning defined as cloning an embryo and implanting that embryo into a woman's uterus. The other is the Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2005 introduced in the Senate by Senator Sam Brownback (S.658.IS) and in the Congress by Representative David Weldon (H.R.1357) which essentially prohibits the transfer of nuclear material into an egg. To see the bills, please go to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and do a search for the keyword "cloning". In addition, Representative Weldon tried several days ago to introduce an amendment to the NIH appropriation bill in the House that would have prevent NIH funding of any institution that carried out somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT, another name for cloning) but this was defeated 34-29 in Committee.

    Wise.

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Manassas,Va. USA
    Posts
    353
    I was of the understanding that the work in Korea involved some cloning along with the esc.I believe it was called theputic cloning. Am I in correct?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •