Break from stimulus bill - some good things Obama has done

[badaxemoo]

I applaud him for the stem cell research! I cannot beleive that you listed his stoppage of oil and gas leases as a good thing! Our own energy and important jobs halted by Political favors to the radical enviromentalists that helped elect him! And i hope that his closing Gitmo doesn't come back to bite all of us in the butt. As for restoring what others think of America, i respectfully disagree. We are a great nation and always will be! I quit worrying about what folks think of me sometime around highschool! If you are upset because North Korea and Iran hate us you can if ya want. I just thinks it's impossible to please everybody all the time. And instead of worrying about a popularity poll why don't we take care of us and this country! Should we poll the Europeans and China before implementing policy? Should we just throw out our constitution and let the U.N. govern us? Or should we make decisions based on OUR sovernty and what helps America? Sure we need trade pardners and allies. Sure we should look out for little guys and face evil as needed. But at the days end WE NEED TO STOP CARING WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE THINKS AND DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR US!

I would argue we can no longer act in a unilateral fashion, not just because it is the wrong thing morally to do, but because in the end it IS in our best interest to listen to other countries.

No, I'm not particularly concerned if North Korea doesn't like our actions.

I am concerned when the citizens of Great Britain, Germany, France, Norway, Sweden, and just about every other developed nation overwhelmingly take a dim view of our nation as a result of Bush's war.

With the exception of Bush's funding for HIV/AIDS work in Africa, when was the last time in the last 8 years that we have really shown leadership on the global stage?

 

[badaxemoo]

You forgot the reversal of the Mexico City Policy, so now US taxpayers are paying for abortions all over the world.

Hold your heads high.

Actually I didn't.

I said he lifted the gag-rule - I was referring to the Mexico City Policy.

We're just going to have to disagree on this one. There isn't a whole lot of middle ground on this one.

 

[Triangle Bar]

Don't most of those unused embryos end up in the trash eventually?

Especially when considering what just happened with those octuplets, I think bio-ethicists need to come up with some coherent policy on fertility treatments. In a country of 300+ million people do we really need more fertility?

But if they are likely going to be thrown away, isn't it better to get some benefit from them?

Yes, fertility doctors should have ethical protocols in place to guide them. This octuplet woman is the extreme example of why ethical protocols should be in place. It's my understanding that she is a single mother who already has six children. I'm unsure why any doctor would think carrying eight babies could possibly be in the best interest of the mother or these unborn individuals.

These unused embryos can be adopted for implantation by another woman with fertility issues. Is it ethical or moral to view embryos (regardless their stage of development) as raw material for scientific experiment?

Stem cell research is advancing in; adult stem cells, placenta, placental blood, and embryonic stem cells derived from unfertilized eggs.

I think the abortion clinics say, 'why throw this goo in the trash', when we could market it for research purposes and profit from not just the procedure but the aborted human embryo as well.

Just to stir the pot. Where do you draw the line, once you have started down this path? There are lots of orphanages around the world, arguably full with the unwanted, elderly and those afflicted with horrible injuries; they're not doing themselves any good, they're going to die anyway someday. Why not use the unwanted, or those with no voice, for experimentation? It would be a waste of raw material not to.

 

[badaxemoo]

I think the abortion clinics say, 'why throw this goo in the trash', when we could market it for research purposes and profit from not just the procedure but the aborted human embryo as well.

Just to stir the pot. Where do you draw the line, once you have started down this path? There are lots of orphanages around the world, arguably full with the unwanted, elderly and those afflicted with horrible injuries; they're not doing themselves any good, they're going to die anyway someday. Why not use the unwanted, or those with no voice, for experimentation? It would be a waste of raw material not to.

I don't think the embryos come from clinics that provide abortion services. I think they come from fertility clinics and are the unused "extras".

Do you think fertility treatments that create embryos should be legal? Myself, I'm not sure. But if they are legal, and the unused embryos are going to be destroyed anyway, I would rather see some good come out of it.

Your second example is too ludicrous for me to address.[/quote]

 

[Triangle Bar]

Yeah, I meant to type fetus instead of embryo there, in regard to stem cell collection from an aborted fetus.

What's so ludicrous about it? Some stages of life, have more rights than others?

 

[badaxemoo]

Yeah, I meant to type fetus instead of embryo there, in regard to stem cell collection from an aborted fetus.

You typed embryos, but you are correct about the fetus issue.

I wasn't aware that they used stem cells from aborted fetuses. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.

I'll have to think about that one before I respond.

 

[TexasBred]

He allowed stem cell research again.

Thank God!!!!!

Whoa, this'll get a reaction...and I don't care.

Alice

Alice....that's embryonic stem cell research as in "Abortions". Oh well, guess you're probably for those as well. Yet you call yourself a caregiver. Guess that only applies to those that made it to birth. Maybe his next move will be to discard all babies born prematurely in order to use their stem cells as well.

 

[Tam]

He is closing Guantanomo

So you think closing Gitmo is a good thing, shouldn't there be a plan in place for the detainees BEFORE he announced the closing. Do you want the terrorist detainees moved to a prison in your neighborhood? If they are moved to a prison within the US how long do you think they will be alive once the inmates find out who they are? :?

BTW will you still think it is a good move if Obama releases some of the detainees and they show up on the battlefield killing US soldiers or are found to be involved in a terrorist attack on US soil?

It isn't closing for a year.

There will be trials for some and some will be released.

That is the way a democracy should function.

We aren't the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. We don't use gulags or concentration camps.

In a democracy does minority out weight the majority? This was results of a Gallup poll :wink:

The public does not agree with everything Obama has done, for example, more Americans say they disapprove (50%) than approve (44%) of his decision to order the closing of the Guantanamo Bay prison for terrorist suspects in Cuba within a year.

Back in Nov. Rasmussen did a poll and the majority then was not in support of closing Gitmo. So why in a DEMOCRACY is Obama playing to the MINORITY?

And you didn't answer do you want the Gitmo detainees moved to a prison in your neighborhood? What do you think will happen to them once the inmates find out who they are? and are you still going to support Obama if he releases some of them and they go back to killing Americans like 62 of them have already?

 

[Mike]

We aren't the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. We don't use gulags or concentration camps.

You're right. We don't.

That's why those Gitmo prisoners have better food, healthcare, and facilities than some of our very own citizens do.

Too bad they can't be turned out in society like some German prisoners of war were here in Alabama during WWII. The old folks say those Germans were good help on the farm and had impeccable manners.

 

[badaxemoo]

So you think closing Gitmo is a good thing, shouldn't there be a plan in place for the detainees BEFORE he announced the closing. Do you want the terrorist detainees moved to a prison in your neighborhood? If they are moved to a prison within the US how long do you think they will be alive once the inmates find out who they are? :?

BTW will you still think it is a good move if Obama releases some of the detainees and they show up on the battlefield killing US soldiers or are found to be involved in a terrorist attack on US soil?

It isn't closing for a year.

There will be trials for some and some will be released.

That is the way a democracy should function.

We aren't the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. We don't use gulags or concentration camps.

In a democracy does minority out weight the majority? This was results of a Gallup poll :wink:

The public does not agree with everything Obama has done, for example, more Americans say they disapprove (50%) than approve (44%) of his decision to order the closing of the Guantanamo Bay prison for terrorist suspects in Cuba within a year.

Back in Nov. Rasmussen did a poll and the majority then was not in support of closing Gitmo. So why in a DEMOCRACY is Obama playing to the MINORITY?

And you didn't answer do you want the Gitmo detainees moved to a prison in your neighborhood? What do you think will happen to them once the inmates find out who they are? and are you still going to support Obama if he releases some of them and they go back to killing Americans like 62 of them have already?

If enough people feel strongly about Guantanomo and/or torture, then they need to elect representatives that will do away with habeus corpus requirements and amend the Constitution to do away with the 8th amendment, and maybe the 5th and 6th as well.

That's how democracy works.

 

[Tam]

It isn't closing for a year.

There will be trials for some and some will be released.

That is the way a democracy should function.

We aren't the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. We don't use gulags or concentration camps.

In a democracy does minority out weight the majority? This was results of a Gallup poll :wink:

The public does not agree with everything Obama has done, for example, more Americans say they disapprove (50%) than approve (44%) of his decision to order the closing of the Guantanamo Bay prison for terrorist suspects in Cuba within a year.

Back in Nov. Rasmussen did a poll and the majority then was not in support of closing Gitmo. So why in a DEMOCRACY is Obama playing to the MINORITY?

And you didn't answer do you want the Gitmo detainees moved to a prison in your neighborhood? What do you think will happen to them once the inmates find out who they are? and are you still going to support Obama if he releases some of them and they go back to killing Americans like 62 of them have already?

If enough people feel strongly about Guantanomo and/or torture, then they need to elect representatives that will do away with habeus corpus requirements and amend the Constitution to do away with the 8th amendment, and maybe the 5th and 6th as well.

That's how democracy works.

According to the polls Obama doesn't have a majority of citizen behind him closing Gitmo so shouldn't he hold off until he does have a majority?
You say Gitmo will close in a year and everyone should get a trial. BUT the Commander of the USS Cole that helped set up Gitmo was just on TV saying that what Obama did was hold up trials that have already taken 8 years to get to court and were finally schedules to start, for four to five years MORE . IS this giving the families of the dead soldiers justice? :???:

 

[backhoeboogie]

He's got 4 years. Eventually he will have to do something good just out of default or accidentally. So far there are no barn burners.

On the oil and gas drilling. It is a "pay me now, or pay me later" issue.