Best Evidence of ESC's validity.

A new breakthrough reported in the October 7, 2005 issue of The Week provides the strongest evidence that stem cells may have the potential to produce powerful treatment for spinal cords. It's a brief article but a very inspiring bit of news.

It should be noted, however, the cells used in the study were fetal stem cells, and not embryonic ones.

BUSH CHOOSES SUPERSTITION OVER SCIENCE.

1. STEM CELLS: PRESIDENT BUSH CHOOSES SUPERSTITION OVER SCIENCE.
On Wednesday, Mr. Bush vetoed the "Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act." The first veto of his presidency was exercised to protect surplus embryonic stem cells in fertility clinics from research, thus preserving their "dignity" so they can be put out with the garbage. He did so on the grounds that using them in research would be "murder." This is based on the ancient belief in a "vital life force," or "soul," which is said by some Christians to be assigned at conception. The first sign of differentiation in embryonic cells occurs in about 8 weeks. Jews, however, say that infants don't get a soul until they draw their first breath. They cite Genesis: "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." On the other hand, superstition may not be the best guide. Why not turn to science?

Disclaimer: I disagreed with the President's veto.

I don't think the decision, however, warrants this rather harsh mockery of all religion.

Where is there "mockery of all religion"?

Where is there "mockery of all religion"?

Well, within the context of the whole paragraph, the use of the quote marks in the sentence sentence <<This is based on the ancient belief in a "vital life force," or "soul," which is said by some Christians to be assigned at conception.>> can be construed to imply a degree of contempt for the concept behind the words inside those quotes.

Also there is the repeated use of the word superstition instead of religion.

Yeah, that's what I meant, Tom. As there are Christians that were in favor of embryonic stem cell research, I don't see it as a battle between superstition and science but more of as a battle in how to apply one's faith.

I don't know if it's the belief in a soul, necessarily, but the manner in which people like Bush want to use those beliefs as a guideline to writing law that Park finds contention with. And what exactly is wrong with calling it a "superstition"? If that's what he thinks it is, what's wrong with that? Doesn't he have a right to his opinion? I don't see why expressing one's opinion requires "contempt", any more than I'm showing contempt towards someone who believes in Santa Claus by telling them that he doesn't exist as an actual living being.

The contempt is more in the percieved tone than in the actual words. And the author chose the word superstition and placed the quote marks around the word soul in order to ensure that the correct tone -- sarcasm -- would be percieved.

Schwarzenegger gives $150M stem cell loan.

No doubt he's at least partially doing it for re-election votes but even so he's still doing the right thing, and it's kinda surprising that he's snubbing the faux prez, too.

I don't see why quotes necessarily denote sarcasm in the passage as written. Is possible that you just don't like the words?

Actually, Mark, it isn't. He's been pretty much distancing himself from Bush from day 1. Remember, he is the governor of CALIFORNIA.

I don't like the words, yes. There's definitely a satirical if not sarcastic edge to the writing, though.

As evidenced by what passage or wording?

And even if there is......so what? Non-believers don't have a right to express their irritation at believers making laws based on their beliefs?

No, they have the right, and I have the right to take umbrage, I suppose.

I found the putting of "soul" in quotation marks and dubbing it an "ancient belief" to be satirical, as is the usage of the word superstitiotn, which is a negative term, suggesting that very few people believe in the concept of the soul and those that do are ignorant types.

But belief in a soul is an ancient belief. And while belivers may claim that the word "superstition" is negative, the definition from the American Heritage Dictionary fits.

It is an ancient belief, but it is also a modern belief. I believe the writer chose the term ancient belief for satirical purposes. Ancient people had calendars too. If I said the company used the ancient tool of the calendar, clearly there's a bit of sarcasm/satire in my language.

I am not questioning the specific definition of superstition, just the connotation.

"Ancient belief" and "modern belief" are not mutually exclusive. In the context used, it refers merely to its age. Not the notion that it died out and is no longer adhered to.

In context, any satire, even if it were there (I still don't see) would hardly be unjustified, since Park's expressing his ire at the most powerful man on the planet basing a law on his personal religious beliefs.

And that's fine for Park to do so (remember, I disagreed with Bush's decision). But I don't think he has to do it in a way that makes people who believe in things like souls sound like superstitious twats.

But that's just my take. Your mileage obviously differs.

Maybe we should get our Belief Odometers retuned.

(Or did you crack yours open and wind it down manually? Why I oughta...)

Karl Rove made a momentous annoucement last week. He stated that adult stem cells hold much more promise for research. Since virtually no scientist holds this view, a Bush administration official did quite a bit of verbal dancing when asked about Rove's statement on "Meet the Press". Typical Bush administration tactic; when wrong, lie some more.

"Virtually no"...

I'm sure is this why the PBS Newshour, a right-wing bastion, did a feature exploring scientists' research into adult stem cells.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/july-dec04/stemcell_7-14.html

Michael J. Fox on the Missouri race.

Wow, I had no idea that his Parkinson's Disease had progressed as far as his movements in this ad show.

Yeah, me neither.

An end to the controversy?

Wow. That's just amazing. Let's cross our fingers and hope this leads to a non-controversial cure for lots of diseases and injuries.

But of course that's not stopping Obama from making his idiological law on Monday.

And Bush's ruling on it wasn't ideological either?

I feel that it's nice to have an adult back in charge who not making all of his decisions based on superstition.

Intresting piece on this subject on BBC News yesterday, about President Obama's decision to re-instate federal funding with regard to stem cell research...
They had a British scientist, wondering if this reversal will lead to a new "Brain drain", from the U.K to the U.S, with regards to biotechnology, while a spokesman for a U.S Catholic pressure group, strongly protested the president's decision on moral grounds...

"Superstition"--nice low blow there. The issue wasn't an objection to stem cell research, it was an objection to embryonic stem cell research, of which I see many legitimate opinions.

I don't make my moral decision on embri . . . cell study based on morals basically, but on RESULTS!! Adult stem cells to my knowledge have produce such and all embri . . . stem cell is offering is expensive "possibles and probabilities . . . "

Well said!

It is?

My thoughts exactly. "Well said" if you by that you mean "incomprehensible".

Otherwise, this is some strange new use of "well said" that I am unfamiliar with.

Well... well sentimented, then. :-) Maybe I'm seeing something in the grammatical structure that isn't there? I was under the impression that he's saying that based on results, embryonic stem cell research has never given us anything but expensive promises that remain unfulfilled, whereas adult stem cell research (specifically from the umbilical cords, I believe?) have actually yielded measurable results- making the whole embryonic stem cell research issue a bit of a red herring- a debate raging without any real point.


Or so I interpreted it. :-)