1. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

George Bush vetoes stem cell bill

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by steveox, Jun 20, 2007.

  1. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,624
    Likes Received:
    153
    It has become increasingly clear over the years that embryonic stem cell research is not about treating disease, but bolstering the dwindling support for abortion.
     
  2. 9sublime

    9sublime Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,620
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    Bristol
    Once again I agree with you Palerider, and not grudgingly. You have a go at people for handouts, but you want to sue McDonalds for your own gluttony and lack of self control?
     
  3. steveox

    steveox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,499
    Likes Received:
    179
    Location:
    Way Down South
    Thats why i want the Goverment start regalating rules on resteraunts cooking foods right.I want the goverment start passing laws that you cant cook burgers or Steaks on grease grills.You cant cook fries or chicken by using vegtable oil. You cant have a grease grill or a fryer in the kitchen You must cook burgers,chicken and steak on a flame grill You must cook fries in the oven baked! Or Pay a $1,000 fine and the manager speands 2 days in jail.
     
  4. 9sublime

    9sublime Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,620
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    Bristol
    AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH.

    If you dont like restaurants that cook burgers, steaks, fries or chicken in a certain way... DON'T EAT THERE. EAT SOMEWHERE THAT DOESN'T COOK THEM LIKE THAT.

    IF I WANT TO EAT BURGERS COOKED IN VEGATABLE OIL ON A GREASY GRILL, I SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO.

    Why do you have to tell people what to do about their food? Its you who needs to change something in your lifestyle, not the restaurant, because its you who cant stop stuffing your face at McDonalds.

    The restaurants are under no obligation to change their ways, YOU ARE A RESPONSIBLE ADULT. Children I can understand, they do not fully understand the consequences of their actions and cannot have the same self control.

    You are the only person you can blame for your ill health. If you don't like burgers cooked unhealithy, go somewhere and buy a proper burger then.
     
  5. steveox

    steveox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,499
    Likes Received:
    179
    Location:
    Way Down South
    COOK FOOD THE WAY YOU WANT TO AT YOUR OWN HOME!!! Just like Smoking!!! If you wanna light up a cigarette DO IT AT YOUR OWN HOME!! NOT OUT IN PUBLIC!!!
     
  6. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,624
    Likes Received:
    153
    Cooking over a flame creates known carcinogens and the problem with carcinogens is that you don't know exactly how much is too much. I know how much fat is too much because my belt will tell me when I am eating too much, but with carcinogens, one day you have cancer and you may never know exactly what gave it to you.

    Personally, I would rather take the chance of getting fat if I eat too many mickey dee's cheesburgers than get cancer from food cooked over an open flame. And exactly who are you to tell the government how to cook my burger for me anyway?
     
  7. steveox

    steveox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,499
    Likes Received:
    179
    Location:
    Way Down South
    Samething here,, who are you to tell the government why i should wear a seat belt in my car which i paid for and own it?
     
  8. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,624
    Likes Received:
    153
    I don't think that the government should make you wear a seat belt but by the same token, I don't think that a single penny of government money should be used for fixing you up, or careing for you after you put your head through a windshield because you didn't wear it.

    So explain why you would want the government to tell restaurants how to cook food if you don't want them telling you to wear a seatbelt. Your whole philosophy seems to be hopelessly riddled with inconsistencies.
     
  9. steveox

    steveox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,499
    Likes Received:
    179
    Location:
    Way Down South
    WHY? So i wouldnt develop diabetes and other dieases. I rather risk death in a car then wake up and found out i have diabetes after i woke up from a coma.
     
  10. rmbarron

    rmbarron Active Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2007
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    0
    That would be true, assuming that an embryo is actually a human being. Which is arguable at best. A ball of rapidly dividing cells does not a human make. It's hardly any more human than my liver. I'd be interested to understand the rationale behind endowing a cytoplast with human qualities, aside from the grasping-at-straws potential human argument. Then again, I guess that's why they don't like masturbation either. Damn the Pope.
     
  11. rmbarron

    rmbarron Active Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2007
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    0
    What's this have to do with anything?
     
  12. steveox

    steveox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,499
    Likes Received:
    179
    Location:
    Way Down South
    Cause i Rather pay my taxes towards curing people instead bums who are on WELFARE collecting free money,Free Public Housing and food stamps.Bush doesnt think taxes should be used for reserach on finding cures.
     
  13. rmbarron

    rmbarron Active Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2007
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are there any legal or historical precedants that you might be able to cite for your interpretation? It seems rather broad and convenient to limit "welfare" to the conservative pets of economy and national security. I often feel the "Framers" (whom I feel are not nearly as far-sighted and ingenius as they are made out to be) didn't really know themselves what they inteneded by such wording. The Constitution is riddled with such vague wording that seems more intended to prevent power than bestow it.
     
  14. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,624
    Likes Received:
    153
    Tell you what. Provide me a single piece of credible science that argues that the offspring of two human beings is ever anything but a human being.

    Your liver is your liver and will never be anything else. Even if you die and it is transplanted to someone else, it will always be your liver and any capable laboratory student could identify it as yours with a DNA test. An unborn is undeniably a human being. Immature yes, but a human being none the less.

    As for the tired old "potential" argument. It isn't even worth the effort it took you to type it out. Sperm and eggs represent "potential" life. Once fertilization is complete, however, that potenital has been realized. From the time fertilization is complete, you have a potential doctor, or a potential, baseball player, or a potential arsonist but you do not have a potential human being because the offspring of two human beings can be nothing but a human being.

    The whole "masturbation" argument is pointless as well. It only illustrates that you don't have a very good grasp of basic biology. Alone, both sperm and eggs are of no more consequence than your toenail clippings. They are just cells from your body. Unique in that they only have a half set of chromosomes, but still just cells from your body that will be sluffed off after a given amount of time if they aren't used. Once fertilization is complete, however, neither sperm nor egg continues to exist as such but instead, a brand new human exists in their place.

    Your argument fails on every biological level but don't feel bad, all pro choice arguments fail on every level. You could be honest and simply state clearly that you favor killing human beings for the purpose of medical experimentation or that you favor abortion because ou feel that women have the right to kill their children for whatever reason they may care to make up. My bet though, is that the truth of your position is too repulsive for you to articulate.
     
  15. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,624
    Likes Received:
    153

    If you wake up with diabetes because you are obese because you couldn't regulate the food you eat, exactly how is that worse than waking up from a coma that was the result of you not wearing your seat belt. Either way, it is your own fault. Your personal philosophy is so riddled with inconsistencies and hypocricies it surprises me that you wouild even voice them in public.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice