Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
But, to make the statements that you made without even acknowledging the basis for their anti-stem-cell position is sort of simplistic, I think, and pretty much guarantees that there will never be productive discussion.
|
Not to speak for Wonk, but "acknowledging the basis for their anti-stem-cell position" is not so easy to do, at least coherently. Earlier posters (from a few days ago, I think) have pointed to the locigal inconsistencies in the anti-abortion rationale, coupled with the limited use of some stem cells who are presumably doomed to their apocalyptic fate, coupled with the Administration's chest thumping that they're the "first to fund" research in this area.
Critics charge, not without reason, that this policy (such as it is) is really an electoral formula, grounded neither in science nor in theology. It's the kind of manuvering that used to bring GOPers to red-faced rage half a dozen years ago. Weird, dat.
ETA: STP. Dammit, Burger!
