Comments on: More Reasons For Missouri To Vote No On Amendment 2 http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/11/04/more-reasons-for-missouri-to-vote-no-on-amendment-2/ Beating Them With Their Own Sickle And Hammer Sun, 22 Nov 2009 18:50:16 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2 hourly 1 By: Embryonic Stem Cell Research - Volconvo Debate Forums http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/11/04/more-reasons-for-missouri-to-vote-no-on-amendment-2/comment-page-1/#comment-58214 Embryonic Stem Cell Research - Volconvo Debate Forums Tue, 07 Nov 2006 20:36:58 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/11/04/more-reasons-for-missouri-to-vote-no-on-amendment-2/#comment-58214 [...] Neither of the Senate candidates opposes stem cell research. What they do oppose is the use of unborn human embryos to supply those cells for research. And, more specifically, they oppose the use of federal money to purchase those embryos. The proponents of embryonic stem cell research do not want you to know the following information. Contrary to what they say, embryonic stem cell research is not illegal. They're angry that President Bush refuses to pick up the tab for the purchase of the research cells. He believes that your money should not be used for something that he ? and many Americans ? considers to be immoral, that is, the use of unborn fetuses for patently dubious research. Recently, a leading stem cell researcher from MIT, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, revealed that researchers have not been able to stop embryonic stem cells from causing tumors when injected into patients. Professor James Sherley said that the "tumor formation property is an inherent feature of the cells." He cautioned that the prospect of overcoming it is very far into the future. He explained that "although some might say we can solve the tumor problem down the road, that's equivalent to saying we can solve the cancer problem, and we may, but that's a long time coming." Professor Sherley's assertions have recently been confirmed by researchers at the University of Rochester and Harvard. So the bottom line is, contrary to what the media tell you, embryonic stem cell research is not illegal, but it's also not that promising. At best, it could only yield results after many years, perhaps even decades. It could not have helped Christopher Reeve or Michael J. Fox. And because it's not illegal, any number of left-leaning foundations or individuals could put up the money to purchase the embryos so that research can continue. But apparently, they don't want to foot the bill themselves; they want you to do that. And they refuse to tell you about the fabulous results that have been achieved through the use of adult stem cells or umbilical cord blood stem cells. But then, those forms of stem cell research don't further the ultimate objective of human cloning for organ harvesting. If you get your information from the mainstream media as you prepare to vote, here are a couple of other things you haven't heard. Here is another take on funding. Stop The ACLU ? Blog Archive ? More Reasons For Missouri To Vote No On Amendment 2 Quote: [...] [...] Neither of the Senate candidates opposes stem cell research. What they do oppose is the use of unborn human embryos to supply those cells for research. And, more specifically, they oppose the use of federal money to purchase those embryos. The proponents of embryonic stem cell research do not want you to know the following information. Contrary to what they say, embryonic stem cell research is not illegal. They’re angry that President Bush refuses to pick up the tab for the purchase of the research cells. He believes that your money should not be used for something that he ? and many Americans ? considers to be immoral, that is, the use of unborn fetuses for patently dubious research. Recently, a leading stem cell researcher from MIT, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, revealed that researchers have not been able to stop embryonic stem cells from causing tumors when injected into patients. Professor James Sherley said that the "tumor formation property is an inherent feature of the cells." He cautioned that the prospect of overcoming it is very far into the future. He explained that "although some might say we can solve the tumor problem down the road, that’s equivalent to saying we can solve the cancer problem, and we may, but that’s a long time coming." Professor Sherley’s assertions have recently been confirmed by researchers at the University of Rochester and Harvard. So the bottom line is, contrary to what the media tell you, embryonic stem cell research is not illegal, but it’s also not that promising. At best, it could only yield results after many years, perhaps even decades. It could not have helped Christopher Reeve or Michael J. Fox. And because it’s not illegal, any number of left-leaning foundations or individuals could put up the money to purchase the embryos so that research can continue. But apparently, they don’t want to foot the bill themselves; they want you to do that. And they refuse to tell you about the fabulous results that have been achieved through the use of adult stem cells or umbilical cord blood stem cells. But then, those forms of stem cell research don’t further the ultimate objective of human cloning for organ harvesting. If you get your information from the mainstream media as you prepare to vote, here are a couple of other things you haven’t heard. Here is another take on funding. Stop The ACLU ? Blog Archive ? More Reasons For Missouri To Vote No On Amendment 2 Quote: [...]

]]> By: kerwin_brown http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/11/04/more-reasons-for-missouri-to-vote-no-on-amendment-2/comment-page-1/#comment-58212 kerwin_brown Sun, 05 Nov 2006 14:11:51 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/11/04/more-reasons-for-missouri-to-vote-no-on-amendment-2/#comment-58212 "At issue was research by Roberts and three others at Missouri indicating that immediately after the first division of a mouse embryo, the two cells take different paths. One cell was bound for creation of a placenta while the other began forming the fetus." That discovery would actually favor the pro life position as it throws a wrench into the argument that any cell in the early living human being can become any other cell in the living human body. This would mean cutting up a human being is not different than harvesting the cells from a more mature human being. From what I heard a liver was created from part of a human being that was chopped up. If that claim is true then it contradicts Roberts findings “At issue was research by Roberts and three others at Missouri indicating that immediately after the first division of a mouse embryo, the two cells take different paths. One cell was bound for creation of a placenta while the other began forming the fetus.”

That discovery would actually favor the pro life position as it throws a wrench into the argument that any cell in the early living human being can become any other cell in the living human body. This would mean cutting up a human being is not different than harvesting the cells from a more mature human being.

From what I heard a liver was created from part of a human being that was chopped up. If that claim is true then it contradicts Roberts findings

]]> By: das heize (info4beer) http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/11/04/more-reasons-for-missouri-to-vote-no-on-amendment-2/comment-page-1/#comment-58213 das heize (info4beer) Sun, 05 Nov 2006 13:18:15 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/11/04/more-reasons-for-missouri-to-vote-no-on-amendment-2/#comment-58213 Realize there are literaly $Billions of dollars to be made with this craftily worded ammendment. $Billions of dollars and an ammendment that voids governance once immplemented spells bad news for the right thinker. The common uninformed voter will love this ammendment...sad. Realize there are literaly $Billions of dollars to be made with this craftily worded ammendment.

$Billions of dollars and an ammendment that voids governance once immplemented spells bad news for the right thinker.

The common uninformed voter will love this ammendment…sad.

]]>