Bush turns back on science to veto stem cell Bill

[OpenMind]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... w_20072006





Bush turns back on science to veto stem cell Bill

By Francis Harris in Washington

(Filed: 20/07/2006)

President George W Bush yesterday shunned public opinion and scientific appeals, vetoing legislation substantially increasing government-funded research using human embryo cells to fight serious illnesses.



The use of the veto, a presidential prerogative, was the first by Mr Bush during his five years in office. He has used the veto less than any president since Thomas Jefferson 200 years ago.

His decision on stem cells stoked still further an already emotional debate. Research using human embryos is one of the critical battlegrounds in the culture wars between American Christian campaigners and secularists.

Mr Bush said the legislation would have supported the use of human beings as scientific material: "It would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others," he said.

The President signed the veto in private, but later spoke to an audience of families invited to the White House to help to counter some of the negative publicity surrounding his stance. The families "adopted" unwanted frozen embryos which later became children. Constantly interrupted by the cries of small children and the applause of their parents, Mr Bush said he would not allow America to "cross this line".

Supporters of the Bill say it would allow research only on cells created in fertility clinics which would otherwise be thrown away.

The issue has left the President's Republican Party divided. Both houses of the Republican-controlled Congress passed the Bill and some of the most emotional appeals for its passage were made by one of the Right's heroines, Nancy Reagan.

Her husband, President Ronald Reagan, died of Alzheimer's disease, one of the illnesses that stem cell research could help to cure.

Scientists say the cells could also help to provide treatments for other conditions including cancers, heart disease and diabetes.

Mrs Reagan lobbied hard for a pro-vote in the hope of securing the two thirds vote required to overturn a presidential veto. That seemed beyond reach, although backing for the Bill was unusually strong.

"The pleas of so many suffering families have finally been heard," Mrs Reagan said after the vote. "Time is short, and life is precious, and I hope this promising research can now move forward."

California's Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger also backed the move, asking Mr Bush: "Not to make the first veto of your presidency one that turns America backward on the path of scientific progress and limits the promise of medical miracles for generations to come."

Even normally "pro-life" senators such as Orrin Hatch have offered support: "A critical part of being pro-life is to support measures that help the living," he said.

But Christian groups on the religious Right backed the President's stand.

Sam Casey of the Christian Legal Society said that the Bill: "Violates a wise and fair decades-long policy against forcing taxpayers to support the destruction of early human life whether by abortion or by lethal human experimentation."

© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006.

[chonsigirl]

Well, I support his veto-I will have to talk to my darling Governor about his stance. Please schedule me an appointment soon.

I do not see Bush's veto as turning his back on science, this is a hard decision to make. It is an ethical and moral one. There are pros and cons on either side. Bush's veto gives time for more thought on this subject, which most defiitely is needed.

It was very controversial here in Maryland, when the topic came up in the state assembly for a vote this year.

[OpenMind]

I would like to see stem cell technology used to save lives. But we always have to protect ourselves from scientists who are working for companies with large financial stakes in the research who would not care about human welfare. The same goes for cloning. I have seen an idea put forward where clones are grown for spare parts - the head and brain included. In my mind, a clone, once created, is a human being in all respects and should ahve the same rights as any other human being and contracts made prior to the clone's conception and creation should be void.