1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Shocking Michael J. Fox Ad in MO Senate Race

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by Deeper_Background, Oct 24, 2006.

  1. jgmacg

    jgmacg Guest

    Problem is - and this relates to Hondo's position on the state vs. self-reliance - if you were to donate, the subsequent research would not be allowed to take place in any lab receiving any government funding. That's the corrosive effect of the government's position. Duplication of effort, duplication of spending.

    Any lab working on stem-cell research can use only facilities and equipment procured through private funding. Terrifically wasteful. It's a de facto - but not de jure - ban on stem cell research.
  2. JR

    JR Well-Known Member

    The issue here is simple: by cutting off government funding you are effectively underminding stem cell research.

    You have to do something to appease the right wing evangelical nutbars but you can't make it appear that you're caving in to their idiocy. So you cut off funding.

    More right wing cowardice.
  3. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    That's specious reasoning at its finest. Because Fox said he did something in the past, he did so in this case.

    Rush Limbaugh only said that because he was high on Oxycontin.

    After all, he's admitted to doing so in the past.
  4. Kaylee

    Kaylee Member

    I was driving through Missouri last week, and I was shocked at how tense this whole debate had gotten.

    Seriously, I would drive past a huge billboard that would be touting stem cell research, then another would come up not half a mile later urging voters to vote against the whole thing. This went on for miles. I was waiting for a mile-by-mile display of billboards that simply read FUCK YOU...NO, FUCK YOU...NO, FUCK YOU.

    Though I'm not as invested as some of you folks on the issue, I do have to wonder...what's the wrong in using a fetus for medical advancement. Granted, I know born and unborn children are a hot topic, but it's not like it's any worse than the people who DO have kids, only to become unbearably shitty and inattentive parents.
  5. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    So you're allowed to comment all over the place on this thread, but if Lyman dares express his opinion, it's "Like fuckin' clockwork." Thanks for showing us your true belief that only you get to have an opinion.
  6. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    Here's what's even better, Kaylee.

    We're talking about unwanted embryos. They will be thrown away whenever the institution housing them needs space.

    We're not talking about embryos that someone is begging to implant and bring to term. If they're going to be destroyed anyway -- and they will -- why not use them for medical research, and pass a law forbidding government funding for any group that creates embryos expressly to destroy them?

    No one has been able to answer that question.
  7. JR

    JR Well-Known Member

    Hit the road, Jack

    It's quite clear that if U of T hadn't provided the money and the space--whatever the level--the discovery of insulin would probably not have happened.

    Furthermore, we're talking over 80 years ago so to compare the facilities in the 20's to those of today, is well, dishonest.

    The FACT is: U of T, a government funded institution, was the venue that allowed them to discover insulin.

    But you continue to quibble.
  8. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    Well, life is just a game, too. It's not that I don't care "about" government. It's that I don't care "for" government. The less the best, no matter who's in charge. But the reason I do generally vote republican is that they actually do care about the few things government should be doing, such as national defense. We already know if the Democrat party had its way, spending on defense would be relatively almost nil.
  9. ALL of his life's work was government-financed. Remember that the Papal States actually were a country, and the work he didn't do for the pope he did for various dukes and doges.
  10. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    Can someone who took more math than me diagram "realtively almost nil."
  11. Pringle

    Pringle Active Member

    Sentences like your last one is why I don't listen to people like you, on either side.

    As soon as someone starts using hyperbole to distort the other side's policy platforms, I tune it out because I know it's only a game to them, like a college debate team or something.
  12. JackS

    JackS Member

    You're the one who's dishonest around here, comparing lab space and 10 dogs to billions of dollars in taxpayer funding.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page