RE: stem cell research support

[Guest guest]

I actually just got a reply from my representative, who says that it might increase the number of abortions. Hmmm. What to do.

waverley

>>> Jerry@... 06/29/01 08:39AM >>> Just reporting that I contacted my Republican Congressman in Indiana as suggested and urged him to read and consider signing the Dunn stem cell research letter to the President. Hope you will all consider contacting your representatives if you have not already. Jerry Cash If you do not wish to belong to shydrager, you may unsubscribe by sending a blank email to shydrager-unsubscribe

[Guest guest]

Waverley

Sorry, but that is a stupid answer. The argument that it is life

is at least somewhat valid (but so is blood) the in vitro blastocyst was

not removed from a womb, so it is not abortion.

Ask him how it increases abortion as the blastocysts were never in the

womb.

Bill

Waverley Beauchamp wrote:

I actually just got a reply from

my representative, who says that it might increase the number of abortions.

Hmmm. What to do. waverley

[Guest guest]

I thought you'd enjoy that answer! I will reply with this information. Thanx Bill

>>> b.werre@... 06/29/01 02:21PM >>>Waverley

Sorry, but that is a stupid answer. The argument that it is life is at least somewhat valid (but so is blood) the in vitro blastocyst was not removed from a womb, so it is not abortion. Ask him how it increases abortion as the blastocysts were never in the womb. Bill Waverley Beauchamp wrote: I actually just got a reply from my representative, who says that it might increase the number of abortions. Hmmm. What to do. waverley If you do not wish to belong to shydrager, you may unsubscribe by sending a blank email to shydrager-unsubscribe

[Guest guest]

Bill, I'd imagine the congressman meant that "increase abortion" statement in the context of concerns that the approval would be another erosion of the sanctity of fetal tissue and thereby increase the potential that the scientific community would eventually ask for fewer and fewer restrictions on use of fetal tissue, stem cell products, etc.

We know rationally that its not a valid argument, but who has ever observed much rationality about the abortion debate? Personally, I am against abortion but in favor of allowing an individual the right to make a choice in the matter based on her own moral values and religious beliefs.

Jerry Cash

-----Original Message-----From: Werre Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 1:22 PMTo: shydrager Subject: Re: stem cell research supportWaverley Sorry, but that is a stupid answer. The argument that it is life is at least somewhat valid (but so is blood) the in vitro blastocyst was not removed from a womb, so it is not abortion. Ask him how it increases abortion as the blastocysts were never in the womb. Bill Waverley Beauchamp wrote: I actually just got a reply from my representative, who says that it might increase the number of abortions. Hmmm. What to do. waverley If you do not wish to belong to shydrager, you may unsubscribe by sending a blank email to shydrager-unsubscribe

[Guest guest]

Jerry, I think that is what is meant by that. Whta type of retrictions could be drawn up that limits these things? - Waverley>>> Jerry@... 06/29/01 03:06PM >>>

Bill, I'd imagine the congressman meant that "increase abortion" statement in the context of concerns that the approval would be another erosion of the sanctity of fetal tissue and thereby increase the potential that the scientific community would eventually ask for fewer and fewer restrictions on use of fetal tissue, stem cell products, etc.

We know rationally that its not a valid argument, but who has ever observed much rationality about the abortion debate? Personally, I am against abortion but in favor of allowing an individual the right to make a choice in the matter based on her own moral values and religious beliefs.

Jerry Cash

-----Original Message-----From: Werre Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 1:22 PMTo: shydrager Subject: Re: stem cell research supportWaverley Sorry, but that is a stupid answer. The argument that it is life is at least somewhat valid (but so is blood) the in vitro blastocyst was not removed from a womb, so it is not abortion. Ask him how it increases abortion as the blastocysts were never in the womb. Bill Waverley Beauchamp wrote: I actually just got a reply from my representative, who says that it might increase the number of abortions. Hmmm. What to do. waverley If you do not wish to belong to shydrager, you may unsubscribe by sending a blank email to shydrager-unsubscribe

[Guest guest]

Waverly,

That's just the point. I don't you'll ever provide a response that extreme abortion opponents will be satisfied with. On the other hand, it looks as though (surprisingly) a number of moderate abortion opponents have been able to rationalize the debate and find a way to be in favor of stem cell research. That, to me, is amazing!

Jerry

-----Original Message-----From: Waverley Beauchamp Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 2:41 PMTo: shydrager Subject: RE: stem cell research supportJerry, I think that is what is meant by that. Whta type of retrictions could be drawn up that limits these things? - Waverley>>> Jerry@... 06/29/01 03:06PM >>>

Bill, I'd imagine the congressman meant that "increase abortion" statement in the context of concerns that the approval would be another erosion of the sanctity of fetal tissue and thereby increase the potential that the scientific community would eventually ask for fewer and fewer restrictions on use of fetal tissue, stem cell products, etc.

We know rationally that its not a valid argument, but who has ever observed much rationality about the abortion debate? Personally, I am against abortion but in favor of allowing an individual the right to make a choice in the matter based on her own moral values and religious beliefs.

Jerry Cash

-----Original Message-----From: Werre Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 1:22 PMTo: shydrager Subject: Re: stem cell research supportWaverley Sorry, but that is a stupid answer. The argument that it is life is at least somewhat valid (but so is blood) the in vitro blastocyst was not removed from a womb, so it is not abortion. Ask him how it increases abortion as the blastocysts were never in the womb. Bill Waverley Beauchamp wrote: I actually just got a reply from my representative, who says that it might increase the number of abortions. Hmmm. What to do. waverley If you do not wish to belong to shydrager, you may unsubscribe by sending a blank email to shydrager-unsubscribe

[Guest guest]

Jerry,

I agree- I am amazed by the bipartisan agreements!!! You see, amazing things do happen. Baby steps...

have a happy weekend!!!

Waverley

>>> Jerry@... 06/29/01 03:47PM >>>

Waverly,

That's just the point. I don't you'll ever provide a response that extreme abortion opponents will be satisfied with. On the other hand, it looks as though (surprisingly) a number of moderate abortion opponents have been able to rationalize the debate and find a way to be in favor of stem cell research. That, to me, is amazing!

Jerry

-----Original Message-----From: Waverley Beauchamp Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 2:41 PMTo: shydrager Subject: RE: stem cell research supportJerry, I think that is what is meant by that. Whta type of retrictions could be drawn up that limits these things? - Waverley>>> Jerry@... 06/29/01 03:06PM >>>

Bill, I'd imagine the congressman meant that "increase abortion" statement in the context of concerns that the approval would be another erosion of the sanctity of fetal tissue and thereby increase the potential that the scientific community would eventually ask for fewer and fewer restrictions on use of fetal tissue, stem cell products, etc.

We know rationally that its not a valid argument, but who has ever observed much rationality about the abortion debate? Personally, I am against abortion but in favor of allowing an individual the right to make a choice in the matter based on her own moral values and religious beliefs.

Jerry Cash

-----Original Message-----From: Werre Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 1:22 PMTo: shydrager Subject: Re: stem cell research supportWaverley Sorry, but that is a stupid answer. The argument that it is life is at least somewhat valid (but so is blood) the in vitro blastocyst was not removed from a womb, so it is not abortion. Ask him how it increases abortion as the blastocysts were never in the womb. Bill Waverley Beauchamp wrote: I actually just got a reply from my representative, who says that it might increase the number of abortions. Hmmm. What to do. waverley If you do not wish to belong to shydrager, you may unsubscribe by sending a blank email to shydrager-unsubscribe

[Guest guest]

Jerry,

Actually the present NIH rules are a compromise that took 3 years to

work out. Basically they cam only use the blastocysts that are already

here (about 100,000) and even then the users MUST get informed consent

which will probably limit it to about 65,000 blastocysts.

Actually some of the present supporters were HUGE Pro-Life supporters

- like Hatch. I certainly do not like abortion being used as a birth

control method.

An article today in the NY Times pinpointed the new support - Pro-Life

baby boomers who have aging parents and young children (PD and juvenile

diabetes concerns). Also the fact that patients and families are

bombarding their legislators - just as Pro-Lifers have been doing for years.

Maybe patients are just getting tired of being on the short end.

Warning - Medicare has new rules out for PT and ST - recertification

every 30 days AND you must bring an original (no copy) of the PT/ST evaluation

with you to the recertification exam by the doctor - more paperwork!!!!

Take care, Bill and Charlotte

Jerry Cash wrote:

That's

just the point. I don't you'll ever provide a response that extreme

abortion opponents will be satisfied with. On the other hand, it

looks as though (surprisingly) a number of moderate abortion opponents

have been able to rationalize the debate and find a way to be in favor

of stem cell research. That, to me, is amazing!Jerry