Stem Cell Legislation Is at Risk

WaPo reported Promising but still unproven new approaches

They are talking about Adult Stem Cells, which have surprised researchers by living a lot longer than they expected.

to creating human embryonic stem cells have suddenly jeopardized what once appeared to be certain Senate passage of a bill to loosen President Bush's four-year-old restrictions on human embryo research. The techniques are enticing to many conservative activists and scientists because they could yield medically valuable human embryonic stem cells without the creation or destruction embryos.

I.E. without killing embryos.

Embryonic stem cells are coveted because they have the capacity to become virtually every kind of body tissue and perhaps repair ailing organs, but they are controversial because days-old human embryos must be destroyed to retrieve them. "The new science that may involve embryo research but not require destruction of an embryo is tremendously exciting," Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) said recently. "It would get you outside of the boundaries of the ethical constraints." But because the value of these new scientific methods remains speculative, they have complicated the political calculus in the highly partisan Senate, which could take up the issue as early as next week.

Jo Fish blogged Yeah, "unethical research" on blobs of cells. As opposed to the extremely ethical position of allowing patients to suffer with diseases and failing organs that might be replaced with by the fruits of that "unethical research".

No it is about saving patients by using their own stem cells, rather than murdering embryos get stem cells.

So I guess it's the Christo-Fascist "Ethical Death of the Living" vs The "Unethical Research" on blobs of cellular material about to be discarded and destroyed. Ahhh, I get it now.

Yes the baby killing abortionists get such pleasure taking future life that they want to ignore the possibilities of Adult Stem Cell research

Orrin Judd: blogged Do supporters of the legislation really need to make the symbolic statement that the lives of others should be sacrificed for their own benefit, even if other methods that aren't immoral are available?