Missouri Prop 2

[Wayne SW/MO]

If the legislature can ban it, they can restore the ability to permit the research in the future if and when the political arena changes and the science is determined to be vital.

I would think that many would consider curing the handicapped and saving lives vital. There can be no doubt that if large sums of money are going to be made available for research, then there has to be some guarantees of completion to be present. The legislature can't be depended upon for that.

Much of the debate centers on when life begins, and that seems arbitrary.

Americas great achievements haven't come from government controlled research, but from the private sector. We should be thankful that the transistor was invented before the government broke up the evil At&T.

[Terry Beeson]

I've purposly stayed out of this debate for several reasons:

1. Not registered to vote in MO - yet...

2. Not educted enough on the initiative.

3. Very mixed emotions about stem-cell research.

I have an 11 year old step-daughter who was diagnosed in February with Type I diabetes. It would be wonderful if stem-cell research could produce a pancreas to replace the one not working now. Aleviate daily insulin shots, trips to the Dr., hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia scares, fear of going to her room to find her in a coma, and the fear that her life will be shortened a great deal due to this affliction.

However, I also am one who believes life begins at conception.

The question could be asked, if these embryos are going to be thrown out anyway, why not put them to use in a positive way instead of just "throwing them in the garbage?"

I'm not sure where I stand on Prop 2, but I know I am for stem-cell research.

One other comment... does anyone remember all the research on "super conductive material" a few years ago that would revolutionize electricity, electronics, etc.? Where did that money go and what did we gain from it?

[Phil Lilley]

I would think that many would consider curing the handicapped and saving lives vital.

Not at any cost.

[Terrapin Station]

Sweet fancy Moses. We are talking about using cells that are going to be discarded anyway. Why not use them to help save the pain and suffering of millions of people worldwide? Like others, I personally know people who are suffering from diseases that quite possibly could be saved from this research. Watching a close friend's wife die over the course of several years from a degenerative disease SUCKS. A disease that could be helped from this research. And two young men I know who cannot walk without the aid of a walker and cannot read a computer screen because they were afflicted by MS in their 20s. It doesn't seem right to deny them of HOPE.

I understand the ethical dilemma. Being raised Catholic, all my life it was drilled into my head that sex for any reason other than procreation is illicit. Well guess what? We are now in an age where in vitro conception is as common as Powerbait and sex is sometimes performed for reasons other than wanting to change diapers in 9 months. The fact is, unused blastocysts are discarded by the thousands every day. Why are the opponents of Prop 2 not fighting for their rights? Should we plant those puppies in available wombs instead of trash cans? What about the rights of those that are already alive and could benefit so much from this research?

And this pish posh about cloning.... c'mon people get real. Scientists will remove the stem cells from blastocysts and allow them to duplicate. No embryos are being cloned. You will not pass by your likeness on the sidewalk. Like Al mentioned, the stem cells at stake are the ones that provide the most hope. Adult stem cells have a predetermined function and are extremely limited. I'm all for their use, as is everyone else, but there is so much more to consider here. Cells that can be focused on one specific function offers hope to the 3 year old child with diabetes, the 18 year old burn victim, the 35 year old with spinal injury, the 52 year old with cancer, and the 80 year old with Alzheimer's.

Jesus performed many miraculous healings over the course of his short ministry. The technology we are talking about is nothing short of a modern-day miracle. Please consider both sides of this issue carefully before casting your ballot. And please don't get caught up in the hype of politicians and their scare tactics.

[Kicknbass]

As I understand the issue. The issue is about funding and taking the decision away from the MO State elected officials.

The embryonic research is currently legal and this won’t change unless the lawmakers elected by the citizens of Missouri agree to change the law to meet the demands of the citizenship.

The supporters of the prop are using all kinds of scare tactic statements about the research that may never happen with or without the research. The people behind this constitutional amendment have been unable to gain control of the state legislature for several elections, and are afraid the people that have been elected by the citizens of the State of Missouri are going to make the decision to change the law in a way that the supporters don't prefer.

If this prop passes, the lawmakers in Jeff City will be stuck living with what how the federal law reads unable to react to the desires of the citizens of Missouri. This may not be a bad thing for this issue, but giving away the rights of Missourians can't be best for Missourians. This sets a bad precedent. Lets leave the decision in Jeff City, not in Washington D.C.

[Al Agnew]

?? Stem cells can be taken from an umbilical cord after birth. I don't think adult stems cells are in short supply. Never heard that before. Embryonic stem cells may be because the only legal ESC's are the ones already in cryonic storage (frozen).

I'm speaking off the top of my head again- dangerous sounding I know. I have to run to the college and pay some school bills and can't research anything for a while.

Phil, I think he was speaking of embryonic stem cells. The lines of stem cells obtained and still usable from those President Bush okayed for entities receiving public funding number something like 17. The wider the range of genetic diversity, the better hope there is for scientific breakthroughs. Like I and Terrapin pointed out, adult stem cells just plain don't have anywhere near the potential that embryonic cells have. So far, no stem cells with anything like that potential have been found in umbilicals, either.

And gonefishin', I guess you and I will have to agree to disagree. To discard a whole line of research, with so much hope for the future, simply because public funds might be put into it and somebody might make money from it, seems to me to be...well, I'm going to attempt to stay civil. Of course somebody will profit from it when it is perfected. But a whole lot of somebodys will benefit from it in ways we can barely imagine.

I think I've said all I can on this subject.

[Phil Lilley]

Thanks, Al. I appreciate the discussion. When I have more time, I'll do some more research. We have a few weeks.

[Wayne SW/MO]

does anyone remember all the research on "super conductive material" a few years ago that would revolutionize electricity, electronics, etc.? Where did that money go and what did we gain from it?

Terry, if my memory serves me right the material exist in an element. The problem is that its very rare, so at this time it only serves to confirm the possibility.

Kicknbass, the amendment has exceptions to the federal standards. It basically means that instead of the law being decided by law makers under lobbyist influence, it will be decided by all the eligible voters who care to participate. Democracy in action.

[Kicknbass]

Kicknbass, the amendment has exceptions to the federal standards. It basically means that instead of the law being decided by law makers under lobbyist influence, it will be decided by all the eligible voters who care to participate. Democracy in action.

All law makers are get information from lobbyist. There are good lobbist (the ones that you agree with) and bad lobbist ( the ones that you disagree with). Thats why you send your donations the groups like DU, NRA, TU, AGC, HBA, and all of the other alphabet soup groups that avocate for their issues. Even the eligible voters are effected by lobbyist buying advertisment to avocate a position. That is good.

It seems that if you disagree with a position, the folks avocating for that position is a lobbyist and if you agree then their an avocate.

The last time I checked, we live in a Representive Republic and elect Representives to go to J-City and or Washington to represent our state. They have the time, resources and staff to become informed of the issues to make decisions that we the people have sent them there to make. We need to allow them the rules to represent the rights of the people that put them in office, and not give away the rights of the state.

This state and country has never been a Democracy and hopefully never will be a Democracy requiring the people to vote on every law change.

[gonefishin]

And gonefishin', I guess you and I will have to agree to disagree. To discard a whole line of research, with so much hope for the future, simply because public funds might be put into it and somebody might make money from it, seems to me to be...well, I'm going to attempt to stay civil. Of course somebody will profit from it when it is perfected. But a whole lot of somebodys will benefit from it in ways we can barely imagine.

I think I've said all I can on this subject.

Al: I have no problem with agreeing to disagree. Just for the record, I am not against capitalisim but I do believe that if public funds pay for the research then any and all resulting knowledge from the research should be patented by the public, not the researchers.

You know I have a degenerative disease. I suffer from Rheumatoid Arthritis. One of the drugs that would help me costs almost $2000 for a one month supply. A one month supply is 80 MG. Calculate that out sometime. Gold isnt expensive and cocain is dirt cheap in comparison. No the insurance companies will not pay for it. So we have tons of money the puplic poured into the research, a drug was produced that would help people like me but very few of us can afford it. Doesnt make a lot of sence to put the money into the research if the end product is so expensive the people who need it cant afford it. The last time I looked up the meaning of capitalisim it didnt say anything about capitalisim being a practice of leaching off the sick.

On the ethical side of this issue I am not worried about potential cloning and I am not really worried about when life begins. The problem I see is baby farms or whatever a person wants to call it. Women being paid to get pregnant and abort the fetus so it can be sold to the medical industry. Of course these women won't get paid much for a fetus in relation to what the medical industry will get for the cells and tissues. Think it wont happen? Heres an example, plasma. The average doner gets about $30 bucks for donating plasma. The resulting plasma is sold by the plasma center for about $1500 I have no idea what an accident victim pays for it but I am sure it is in the thousands.

Yeah, I think we have to agree to disagree.

Been fishin latley?