Re: Politics

[Simply Gern <enigma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 00:45:41 GMT, G. Morgan <alarmpro@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 18:09:14 -0500, "Robert L Bass"
><robertbass1@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>> The most exciting and fascinating thing about this election to me to
>>> Missouri's decision on Amendment 2.
>>>
>>> http://www.missouricures.com/
>>>
>>> Thank God cool heads prevailed there,  paving the way for curing
>>> disease.
>>
>>That was one of the few amendment votes in the country that did anything good.  It's also a direct slap in the face to the Shrub's
>>anti-life ban on support for stem cell research.
>>
>>What really amazes me is that right-wing idiots want to ban stem cell research on the theory that it "kills babies."  Yet they make
>>no effort to preserve the ganglia (not-yet-fetuses from which stem cells are harvested).  They completely ignore the fact that even
>>though no stem cells are harvested, they are all destroyed.  These are eggs that have been fertilized in a laboratory but are not
>>needed because the mother has already a received fertilized egg back from the lab.  Whether stem cells are harvested or not, the
>>tissue is destroyed.
>>
>>So which lives are being "saved" by the National Moron's ban on support for stem cell research?
>
>
>
>What irritates me about Bush's announcement that he will "always side
>on the side of life", is that he's forcing HIS opinion on when human
>life begins, on the rest of us.  This was already settled with R vs.
>W.

Actually no - that was a court decision made by humans. By no means
does that make it moral or correct.
That same court body (no, not the people sitting on it now) ruled 150
years ago that white men could OWN 2/3 humans better known as Africian
Americans.
Did that make it right?