EL the Famous

Science should help everyone. I have every right to question why some research is taxpayer funded and other research isn't- ESPECIALLY when it can save someone's life. Perhaps mine. Perhaps yours. Perhaps a childs.

I respect that, but again I ask where is it said that the possibility of science helping both those looking to create life and those looking to save it can't co-exist? Do we really have to choose one over the other and by saying that, don't you actually kind of think one life is more important than another?

Just like the request for the actual bill to be posted, if someone can both:

1. PLEASE comment on the adult cell research and why it wasn't passed if the goal is to help those in need of a cure find one.

2. Post figures that show that the amount of couple who would adopt said cells outweighs the amount of cells required to cure all those people w/ the diseases/conditions this research is the answer for.

I'll shut up. Promise.

My comment is about policy, Kev, which is what this discussion is about. Embryos that aren't being used for ANY specific purpose at this point - do we make more babies or save lives? And your personal struggles having a kid are nice and all - but they do not compare to the struggles of cancer patients, spinal chord injury patients, alzheimers patients, and so on.

 

Couples who can't conceive through any other method can adopt. What "alternate" option to cancer patients have who have tried every available therapy? If you could explain to me why it's so important for couples to give birth to their kids versus adopting and why that particular need outweighs the needs of millions of people suffering from terminal illnesses and lifelong paralyzing conditions, I'd love to hear it.

Are you fucking kidding me? When did I EVER say that any of our fertility issues compared to the struggles of cancer patients, spinal chord injury patients, alzheimers patients, and so on. Truth be told I don't have to explain to you why it's so important for couples to give birth to their kids versus adopting and why that particular need outweighs the needs of millions of people suffering from terminal illnesses and lifelong paralyzing conditions, because, my guess is, both can co-exist.

If you have figures to tell me that this 'surplus' of cells couldn't be adopted AND used for research and if you want to comment policy-wise on the the defeat of the bill for ADULT cell research that the same evil empire that vetoed the first is actually embracing (still, nobody wants to comment), another viable option to to cancer patients have who have tried every available therapy, i'd love to hear that as well. I'm not saying that these cells, should they not be candidates for adoption, be used for research.

But back to you original question, even though I don't feel that I HAVE to answer it, but will...first off, if we would have been faced w/ adoption we wouldn't have financially been able to have a family for many years to come, between my insurance for the procedures leading up to and the actual cost of IVF we paid for out-of-pocket (w/ financing)...while a gamble of sorts, it was what we could afford and it was the quickest path to doing so.

Bigger and less explainable than that, my wife wanted to be a mother in every sense of the word...not just raising a child from birth, but conceving it as well. Are you for the reproductive rights of women in relation to abortion? That men shouldn't be allowed to tell a woman what she should do with her body? That embryo implanted in her came from HER eggs and MY sperm...and, more relevant to this discussion, the one on ice did as well and it's nobody's decision but OURS what the right or wrong thing to do with it is. So, for you to tell me in any way shape or form that we're placing ourselves over anybody else by preferring that somebody else be given the same opportunity we were to have a child is utter bullshit and contrary to what E. Sue said, you said exactly what I thought.

No, it was a response to you saying that post was meant to offer "another legitimate source for medical research versus something else," which it clearly wasn't.

 

P.S. There's no 'K' in tact.

sat

sat

Lammy, I asked my boss just today if the library could please put a moratorium in place against

buying these ridiculous politically partisan name-calling books. He said no, because they all wind up on the bestsellers' list. I told him we should take a stand. yeah right.

Regardless, good for you. Seriously. I know it's borderline censorship for me to agree w/ that, but it's those books and point/counterpoint shows that are completely driving us away from the actual issues...and why the Daily Show and Colbert Report are, hands down, the smartest shows on television.

Trying to pick through all of the "reputable" media outlets (and yeah, some are "right-wing conservative, dammit!" and some are " lefty-biased bastards!") is difficult enough these days to glean a fair and realistic take on what is actually going down in this country and abroad. The fact-based news that trickles down to our collective commoner ears through the media is often so watered down it's hard to accept a lot of it at face value.

 

Go to a library or book store and the "Politics/Social Issues" sections are crammed with books on how the Right is wrong and is screwing the country over and how the Left have fucked things up beyond repair. I'm all for reasonable political debate, but the general rule the last 15-20 years seems to be to attack the opposing political party's stance, not the issues at hand.

 

It's a daunting task, for myself at least, trying to settle on what and who to believe and trust. Global Warming is an issue that continues to be debated voraciously both by the "Right" and "Left" in the press, as well as in reputable Science labs across across the globe. Scientists cannot agree on the extent or long-term impact of GW. From what I've read/discussed/etc. on the matter, I personally feel a lot of the concern over global warming is unnecessary hype.

 

But that's not the point. Ultimately, my decision was made based on who I choose to listen to/trust media and scientific-wise. It doesn't make me right and you wrong. I very well could be wrong, but it's hard for me to tell.

You just summed up exactly how I feel and why I feel wary of anything be relayed as an absolute by either side of the divide, even though i'm card-carrying-bleed blue state blood-democrat. Plain and simple.

You know, every time a woman has a miscarriage I think we ought to suck up all the DNA of out of the miscarried baby's cells, implant that DNA into a fertilized egg and give that baby a chance to fucking LIVE, dammit.

BTW, that was a post offering another legitimate source for medical research versus something else. Sure.

what the fuck does that mean? if there was an easy and not incredibly painful way to donate my eggs to folks who needed them i'd be at the egg donation place every month! What the hell jibe was i throwing out? jesus christ, go to fucking lunch, daddy.

I sincerely apologize then. My mistake, I was an asshole for jumping to conclusions and good for you for feeling like that. Seriously. You're right, I obviously need to go to lunch...a long one.

Why do you internalize everything? I haven't seen anybody on here saying that YOUR kids "don't deserve to be here."

No more assholish than taking some cells that could save and improve millions of lives and using 'em to put more babies on an already overpopulated planet. Kev.

Isn't that exactly what he said? We took some cells that could save and improve millions of lives and used 'em to put two more babies on an already overpopulated planet. Plus, as a couple who dealt w/ miscarriage, and the way that comment was posted...yes, I internailzed it and the one above. Why wouldn't I?!

If that's NOT what he meant...let him post up as such and i'll retract my statement.

The way it looks to me, the next century is going to bring:

 

- a shift in geopolitical power (China, anyone?)

- continued worldwide exponential population growth

- depleted natural resources, (including oil, without sufficient alternatives to replace it)

- continued aggression as the fight for resources (including water and arable land) becomes more a matter of survival than greed

- growing disparities between the richest and poorest

- continued growth of technology placing greater demands on resources

- more "rogue" nuke states

- political movements tending more towards the right than left

- uh, global warming, anyone?

- Im not one to think that technological innovation is going to save our asses. Quite the contrary.

Maybe to a lesser degree, but a large part of those things have been happening in one way or another for centuries prior. I understand where you're coming from and i'm not angry at you for feeling like that...I am, however, angry that you and countless others do feel like that. I'm not discounting that any of these things needs to be addressed, but running from them won't make them go away...not moving forward and living your life, won't make them go away...not having kids, won't make them go away...soldiering on and trying to make them go away, that may have a chance.

First and foremost, I hold myself accountable for my life and how it's going. Sure, i'm a white hetero male from a middle class upbringing and have had everything handed to me on a silver platter (tounge firmly planted in cheek) to bring about my problem-free existence where everything is sunny everyday and everything I need from money to food to insurance is air-dropped into my backyard by magical helicopters piloted by angels, but I still try to chart my own destiny when I can. If something pops up via whatever administration is in power that challenges how I want to live my life, I do whatever is in my power to overcome it versus waiting for somebody to remove it for me. Do I need help sometimes? Hell yes. We all do at some point in our life, but to sit back and wait for it and rely on it brings the entitlement word thrown around yesterday to mind and, IMHO, that is what will be our undoing, not any of the items listed above.

you can have my eggs. i'm not usin' 'em.

you want to throw out jibes? well then...thank god for that.

No more assholish than taking some cells that could save and improve millions of lives and using 'em to put more babies on an already overpopulated planet. Kev.

You really think that? With all due respect, i've seen your myspace pics with your niece/nephew (forgive me, I forget which it is) and, obviously, how proud it makes you to be an Uncle. Same goes for pics/comments posted of the beautiful baby by the justifiably proud, beaming Grandmother that is our own Miss Viatroy...the wonderful pics/posts from Aunt Go-Go...etc. Did the planet become overpopulated before or after they were born? They may not have been born via ART, but my kids are in no way any less deserving to be here than they are.

If me and my wife wanting to be parents and using available science to do so WHILE both being for embryonic stem cell research for cells that cannot be adopted, puts me on the same level w/ somebody who thinks it's okay to use a tasteless joke about miscarriage to make a point on their political stance...that I should tell my kids that as much as I love them, that really there are too many people here and they don't deserve to be here...then this really is a fucked up world and I do fear for everybody on it (or at least one fucked message board and a place I obviously need to reconsider frequenting).

Relative to Finna's comment, by your rationale should somebody who was faced w/ dying from failure of an organ just take it as sign from God that they weren't mean to live and just donate all their other organs to others? It seems to be selective science based on your personal view...science to do something is okay as long as it's what I think is right. Is someone who's already lived X amount of years more important then somebody who potentialy has their whole life ahead of them? Obviously, that answer is going to depend solely on whether you are, at that point and time, looking have a child or save an ailing family member...personally, I want to be able to do both. Which, comes back to the fact that the third bill for another viable option for adult cell research being overturned makes no sense to me and makes me think that this is just another political issue to garner votes by BOTH sides and has little to do w/ actually saving lives pro-research or not. I'm still the only person to bring that up here.

If a couple with frozen embryos doesn't think of them in the same way you think of yours, and if there aren't people clamoring to adopt these embryos (again, I don't know), then we come back to the more basic issue, of whether or not it's moral to use those embryos for research purposes. And I'd be in the "yes" camp on that one.

Me too. Said that all along. Also, had Yvette not have been able to carry a child, we would have chosen to adopt one already born. Said that all along too. I can only speak for myself.

You know, every time a woman has a miscarriage I think we ought to suck up all the DNA of out of the miscarried baby's cells, implant that DNA into a fertilized egg and give that baby a chance to fucking LIVE, dammit.

That isn't even anywhere close to being funny and a completely asshole thing to post. Regardless, hope you never have to deal with that, Kev.

Thanks for that. I'm done here as it seems I have personally offended El Kevin, whom I love deply.

The only thing that truly offends me about you is the Riviera promotional juggernaut that bombs my email weekly.

I love you (and your band) too, man and always will. I just wanted to fully understand the whole thing as this does hit very close to home for me. We had a pre-baptism meeting w/ our pastor and we got into a lengthy discussion about IVF and then, the fact we had an embryo on ice. Obviously, he's been to a bazillion conferences where this has come up, but had never actually met somebody that (or at least somebody that was open about) had gone through it. He was completely non-judgemental and more excited that we ended up being so blessed, but the discussion over the frozen embryo did make me think. I hate to say I had kind of forgotten about it and that, at some point, we have to decide what to do with it. Currently, we've chosen for it to go to somebody that is unable to produce one themselves and (hopefully) become parents. I know this isn't as hard as putting a full-fledged child up for adoption, but it's still hard.

As is the case most of the time, it's not the stance I disagree with...it's how it comes off in how it's articulated. That's my interpretation though and you have every right to say what you think and how you want to say it...i'm just exercising my right to do the same.

I don't have any facts and figures in front of me, I'm just wondering, for couples with infertility problems, how many would choose to adopt a frozen embryo? It seems to me that there are so many options and avenues for couples to explore, including adoption of babies carried by other women, would adoption of an embryo (with the benefit to the couple, over traditional adoption, being that the woman could carry and deliver her own child), be something that a lot of couples would be interested in? Again, I don't know, I'm just wondering.

I don't have any facts and figures either. There are plenty of avenues and options, but all of them have the potential to be extremely difficult and insanely emotionally draining. I will say that knowing the cost of adoption of someone else's child and even more so, the years it can take to actually find a match...implantation of someone else's embryo would have been our next choice would we not have been able to make our own. I know you don't like the 'if you haven't been through X you don't understand' argument, but in this case, it does offer some perspective. We would have gone to adopting someone else's child, eventually...but really wanted to explore every option to give birth to ours oursleves first.

Im a godless immoral heathen.

I don't see anybody saying that other than you and I still don't see your point? If it's just 'Bush Sucks'...I gleaned that from your other thread. It still reads like some sort of dig on the whole adoption thing and if that's the case...just say that.

I'm sure you could find plenty of those examples -- I'm an imperfect being like anyone. That is my personal philosophy, though, despite occasional lapses in practicing it. I'm a heck of a lot better at it now than I used to be.

I hear you. Nobody is more imperfect than me, except maybe Anne Coulter and Hitler...who, both, I think actually ate full grown babies for breakfast.

Enough has changed in the last twenty years, for the worse, that were I considering parenthood today, I would opt out. I fear for my children and grandchildren's future.

There it is. I guess I should consider myself an asshole then...but I won't. My guess is every year over that same 20 years somebody has said that same exact thing. However, i'm not a defeatist. Do I fear for my children and grandchildren's future? Sure, but we've gotten through some crazy horrible times by facing fears and not just whining about them. You can say that the state of our country is horrible right now and in some aspects you'd be absolutely right...but to say it's worse than it was during the great depression and vietnam and racial segregation, does injustice to those that actually stood up and did something about it. Plus, you're not fortifying yourself w/ what IS right about this country today to get you through what's not...you've let shit beat you down.

No matter what any administration does, it's still MY country and that flag still stands for legitimate battles to keep people safe and free that people like my Grandfather fought. Roll over and move to Canada? Fuck that (no offense Judy, you have wonderful strip clubs and bacon there and I love KITH), i'll stand my ground. Could things be better? Hell yes, much better. They're only going to get better if we start doing something about it versus bitching about it on a message board.

I've been carrying around a lifetime supply of potential humans, and DAMN ME! I've only allowed two of them to potentiate into human beings!!

I respectfully would like to ask what point does that make?

For others -- I wouldn't presume to tell someone else how something "should be" for them. We all have our ideas about how the world "should" work ... the difference is that some of us try to live within our own ideas, for ourselves, while others seek to impose their ideas on the rest of the world.

I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. However, if you want, I could re-post a handful of things that completely contradict that statement. We all do that...me, you, ikol, everybody...in one way or another and most of the time, based on opinion and not indisputable fact.

To qualify for federal funding under the bill, newer embryos could be used in studies only if they:

_Were created for the purposes of fertility treatment.

_Were donated by in vitro fertilization clinics with written, informed consent of those being being treated.

_Were "in excess of the clinical need of the individuals seeking such treatment" and would never be implanted in a woman.

_Would otherwise be discarded, as determined by those seeking treatment.

_Were not donated by patients induced to do so by financial or other incentives.

 

which is why parading those kids around as possible outcomes of the cells in question is disgusting and utter bullshit. as i said yesterday, the 2 choices are use them for research or throw them in the garbage and he chose the garbage.

then I completely agree and take personal insult in the posturing done by W during the press conference as well. it just seems a little crazy to me that so many couples are looking to become parents, having such a hard time and we have an "excess of the clinical need of the individuals seeking such treatment", but I obviously don't have the full details. fuck 'em.

Bush could seize absolute control of U.S. government

By DOUG THOMPSON

Publisher, Capitol Hill Blue

Jan 13, 2006, 07:42

but wait! there's more!

Don't fly the flag on this Independence Day

By DOUG THOMPSON

Jul 4, 2006, 06:02

 

The American flag does not fly outside our home today. It usually does on July 4 but not this Fourth of July because I just can't bring myself to celebrate an independence that isn't or recognize a country that no longer stands for freedom.

 

In fact, I may start a bonfire on our front yard and burn every American flag we own, an act I feel is far more patriotic than any faux patriot who adorns his car, pickup truck or motorcycle with flags and salutes a nation that today is nothing more than an international bully that wages war on innocents without provocation.

 

I don't take this action easily. I've served my country more than once, in war and peace. I've fought for her, killed for her, lied for her and committed acts in her name that were illegal and barbaric.

 

No more. The America that pauses to recognize Independence Day is not independent. It is not free. It is not worthy of honor nor respect. It is a rotting, putrid hulk of a nation long past its prime, devoid of honor and unworthy of respect.

 

America today is a hypocrite, a nation driven by lies, one that claims to spread democracy throughout the world when it has none to spread. America is a paranoid police state, a hoard of frightened citizens controlled by a fanatical government who feels the need to watch and monitor its populace 24/7. America is the most controlled and policed nation in the world. More Americans, per capita, work in law enforcement than the citizens of any other nation of the world. Even Russia, at the height of communism, did not need as many agents of the law to keep control of its population.

 

Our government does not respond either to the will or the need of the people. A cabal that answers only to big money, big business and a corrupt power structure exercise absolute power. George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have built the presidency into the most powerful executive branch in history, riding roughshod over a cowardly congress, an ineffective court system and the Constitution of the United States.

 

The dream of those men who gathered in Philadelphia in 1776 is long gone, destroyed by nothing less than a coup to take over our government. The Declaration of Independence they signed on that July 4th might as well join the Constitution in the bathroom of the President. It's only function now is toilet paper.

 

No, no American flag flies at the Thompson home today. It won't fly tomorrow either. Or the next day. Or the next.

 

It won't fly again until something is done to restore the America that once was and rid Washington of the crooks, con artists, thieves and despots who control of government.

 

Honor this America? No way. Salute the flag that flies over today's America? Not on your life. Work to save it? You betcha. To the death.

Reliable source, no bias here whatsoever. There's also another hard-hitting 'story' on 'why right-wingers can't get it up'. Whatever. G-Dub is a total idiot, but so is this guy. It's this type of unintelligent 'i'm a mad as hell liberal guy and i'm not going to take it anymore' junk that's so counterproductive to getting the republican regime out of office. It make me just as sick as the crap coming from Coulter or other 'pundits' to the far side of the other direction.

There are plenty of legitimate examples of how this administration sucks via how it's underperformed in issues like diplomacy and the economy...when people start focusing on how somebody talked w/ their mouth full or how a candidate missed a football tossed at him, both sides make me want to swear off the whole damn process.

No, but that has almost nothing to do with this legislation. Is it wrong for me to like cheese on my burger?

No need to be a dick, D. Reading this article again, i'm missing the part where you said these weren't embryos and it does say he vetoed a bill for embryonic stem cell research. Exactly why aren't these adoptable? If there are some additional articles that better articulate that the cells in question are unusable for anything other than medical research, please post up...like I said, if they're going to go to waste and absolutely cannot be used in the IVF process...i'm with w/ you all the way on this.

Rhetoric is a two-way street, brother and your

Ah, but let's be clear. These are not even embryoes, but cell clusters that may or may not one day becoem embryoes that may or may not become fetus that may or may not become born human beings. This is the problem with Bush's rhetoric. Besides, the cells pertaining to this legislation are left over and slated for destruction as medical waste. These are cells that are not being adopted and the parents do not want them.

I was more responding to the poster who made the whole 'snowflake' comment, but it's the may or may not that makes it no less of a clear cut political/science debate, D. If the parents have stated they don't want them, there is no way that they can be used in an adoption scenario and the last option is that they'll be destroyed...of course they should be used to maybe save or maybe not save a life.

Just so we're clear, am I wrong for wanting the adoption scenario over their donation to medical research?

also, i'm sure nobody will actually ever tell them they were a 'snowflake child' and that they'll be 'plagued' w/ that title any more than my kids will be called 'test tube babies' by anybody. they're children. period.

Actually, I do. (Unless it TOTALLY sucks, which is very rare).

 

In fact, just last weekend I threw away 2 burnt cd's that I finally bought real copies of (The Raconteurs and Band of Horses).

Fair enough. I do too...if it's really, really good. I wish getting stuff that sucked was as rare for me as it was for you though.

Dubbed "Snowflake Kids," the children were all conceived through in vitro fertilization (IVF) and frozen as embryos. They were adopted by new parents and implanted in the uterus of their adoptive mom, who gave birth to them. Like snowflakes, each is unique.

Ahh, got it. Never heard of that. Well, as a person that currently has a frozen embryo and going through the oft emotionally draining process of trying to find a way to conceive a child...I don't see the bad in preferring that said embryo be 'adopted' should we decide not to have another child and someone have the opportunity to give birth as well.

I see the benefit of stem cell research and i'm actually for it (thusly, not a huge fan of this veto)...however, some of you guys seem to be speaking in absolutes again w/out really knowing how hard it is to make that decision. You can say they become a 'real' person at X days/months/weeks, but still...we made that embryo, it comes from the both of us...it's not the 'oh yeah, we don't want it, just donate it to science' thing you think it is. Much like viatroy's moral stance against the war, this isn't just another clear cut political or scientific debate.

and back to the snowflake comment earlier, what is the matter w/ any of those kids being 'snowflake' kids? I think that's wonderful that two people who desperately wanted to be parents and share their love w/ someone get the opportunity to do so...and the child receiving the opportunity to be loved is pretty cool too.

It means Bush is bad and you should get with the program.

Well, that's a given...but, really, i'm interested to hear what that post was all about. Snowflake children?

So I don't see downloading ever replacing record stores for me.

What about the music you don't get from an iTunes? like the kind. unless you buy physical copies of everything you DL.

I actually am the same way, but it's becoming easier for me to part w/ the packaging when I can't find the album in any of the stores or the album isn't worth buying in it's entirety.

He has it all figured out the frozen embryos can be adopted and this children can be plagued with the name of being snowflake kids, whoopee

what does that even mean?

It is an interesting discussion...that I need to go support a business versus the other way around. If a retailer is following 'Business 101' and filling/supporting a consumers need, then they'll be successful. The level of success proportionate to amount of consumers that have said need to be supported.

Maybe the business model doesn't support a brick and mortar operation as much anymore and they should switch or at least augment w/ a web-based ordering system. It kind of sucks, but that's how businesses are run...otherwise, it's just a library.