*@$%*^!!! Judge stops federal funding of embryonic stem cell research

[Locutus]

Updated at 5:25 p.m.)

Washington (CNN) - A U.S. district judge granted a preliminary injunction Monday to stop federal funding of embryonic stem cell research that he said destroys embryos, ruling it went against the will of Congress.

The ruling by Judge Royce C. Lamberth was a blow to the Obama administration, which last year issued guidelines to allow federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

Lamberth's ruling said all embryonic stem cell research involves destroying embryos, which violates the Dickey-Wicker Amendment included in federal spending bills.

"The Dickey-Wicker Amendment unambiguously prohibits the use of federal funds for all research in which a human embryo is destroyed," Lamberth's ruling said. "It is not limited to prohibit federal funding of only the 'piece of research' in which an embryo is destroyed. Thus, if ESC [embryonic stem cell] research is research in which an embryo is destroyed, the guidelines, by funding ESC research, violate the Dickey-Wicker Amendment."

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/23/stem.cell.funding/index.html

[Locutus]

Now a good question is, does this judge now get labeled as an "activist judge" or is it okay because of the ruling?

[Palehorse]

He's a friggin' jackass, living in the past, and afraid of the dark. I wonder how much the holy roller industry duked him for his ruling? 

Once again religion stands in the way of science. . . Friggin' cave dwellers! 

[The Troll]

He's a friggin' jackass, living in the past, and afraid of the dark. I wonder how much the holy roller industry duked him for his ruling? 

Once again religion stands in the way of science. . . Friggin' cave dwellers! 

  My wish for him is, for him to come down AID's and Parkinsons Disease and live a long time.  I don't want him to get Alzheimers, because I want he to remember and feel every pain the these other disease can give a person.

  He doesn't want a cure, then let the son of a bitch suffer with them.

[me]

  My wish for him is, for him to come down AID's and Parkinsons Disease and live a long time.  I don't want him to get Alzheimers, because I want he to remember and feel every pain the these other disease can give a person.

  He doesn't want a cure, then let the son of a bitch suffer with them.

But there is still stem cell research with harvested stem cells which could be just as or even more of a help or cure.  The ruling does make one wonder why research can't be done on the outdated ones that are going to be pitched anyway if that was included in the ban.  I'm sure they would still be useful in some way because IIRC that was one of the things they wanted to be able to do and was one of the arguments used before, that they should be able to use those. 

[followsthewolf]

He's a friggin' jackass, living in the past, and afraid of the dark. I wonder how much the holy roller industry duked him for his ruling? 

Once again religion stands in the way of science. . . Friggin' cave dwellers! 

This is exactly where religion can kiss my a$$.

Religion is dictating governmental rulings. Let people die.

The judge can kiss my a$$, too.

RIP, bro.

[The Troll]

But there is still stem cell research with harvested stem cells which could be just as or even more of a help or cure.  The ruling does make one wonder why research can't be done on the outdated ones that are going to be pitched anyway if that was included in the ban.  I'm sure they would still be useful in some way because IIRC that was one of the things they wanted to be able to do and was one of the arguments used before, that they should be able to use those.

  Why should a religious asshole in a black robe stick his damn nose into it.  He had no medical training and he trying trying to shove his religion down our throats.  These are the religious bastards I hate so much.

  If they came up with a cure for a disease using the very stem cells he considers illegal and he had the disease, he would be one of the first to jump in the line to get it.

[Anne]

Then maybe they should amend the Dickey-Wicker Amendment. Isn't it his job to interpet the laws of the land. If the Dickey Wicker Amendment says that federal monies can't be spend on research that destroys human embryos it is his job to prevent that. The fault is in the law. You can't have it both ways, either the laws are enforced or they need to be changed.

For the record, I am not against all stem cell research.

[The Troll]

Then maybe they should amend the Dickey-Wicker Amendment. Isn't it his job to interpet the laws of the land. If the Dickey Wicker Amendment says that federal monies can't be spend on research that destroys human embryos it is his job to prevent that. The fault is in the law. You can't have it both ways, either the laws are enforced or they need to be changed.

For the record, I am not against all stem cell research.

  But you are against some, even those embryos that will be destroyed.  Right?

[Anne]

No, I would be against producing embryos to be used solely for research. If an embryo is to be destroyed I don't have a problem with using it for research.

[me]

Then maybe they should amend the Dickey-Wicker Amendment. Isn't it his job to interpet the laws of the land. If the Dickey Wicker Amendment says that federal monies can't be spend on research that destroys human embryos it is his job to prevent that. The fault is in the law. You can't have it both ways, either the laws are enforced or they need to be changed.

For the record, I am not against all stem cell research.

Ann has a good point here.  He went with the law of the land rather than what his feelings may have been and that is exactly the way it should be.  When it goes in your favor it doesn't seem to matter if the judge goes with their feelings rather than the law though does it?  This didn't happen to so you're all ready to jump in his sh*t for doing his job.

[Palehorse]

Ann has a good point here.  He went with the law of the land rather than what his feelings may have been and that is exactly the way it should be.  When it goes in your favor it doesn't seem to matter if the judge goes with their feelings rather than the law though does it?  This didn't happen to so you're all ready to jump in his sh*t for doing his job.

This whole situation just validates the fact that the office of POTUS does not carry the power most of you automatically assume it does. . .

. . . President Barack Obama signed an executive order in March 2009 that repealed a Bush-era policy limiting federal dollars for human stem cell research. Obama's act permitted the National Institutes of Health to conduct and fund studies on embryonic stem cells. . .

And the holy roller effect is clearly evident. . .

. . .Monday's ruling involved a lawsuit against the National Health Institute filed by researchers opposed to use of embryonic stem cells, a group that seeks adoptive parents for human embryos created through in vitro fertilization, the non-profit Christian Medical Association and others.. . .

I've already stated my opinion on this whole line of "thinking" elsewhere within this forum, but all that is happening with this "Dickey-Wicker Amendment ", is the federal government is securing the future of this imperative scientific research for the private sector; which will make its eventual results the sole property of said private sector and enable them to rape the world in order to benefit from the science. And all of this simply because the holy rollers are afraid of science, just as they are afraid of the God they themselves created. . . .

You people make me sick. You bitch about the cost of medicine but enact legislation that assures its continual upward spiral!

[followsthewolf]

The amendment was years ago. He cherry-picks it.
These are the kinds of bastards that let my brother die.

HE CAN STILL KISS MY A$$.

[Palehorse]

The amendment was years ago. He cherry-picks it.
These are the kinds of bastards that let my brother die.

HE CAN STILL KISS MY A$$.

And I'll also add,( based upon FTW's first hand experience), that this legislation also unnecessarily prolongs the research process and delays it; resulting in the added suffering and premature deaths of those who stand to benefit the most from it and whose very lives depend upon it!

[me]

International Law Search
Email this page Print this page
Cloning
Dickey-Wicker Amendment [United States]

In the United States there is no federal legislation prohibiting cloning for either reproductive and therapeutic purposes. However, under the 1996 Dickey-Wicker Amendment it is illegal to use federal funds to support research "in which human embryos are created, destroyed, discarded, or knowingly be subjected to risk of injury or death greater than allowed for research on fetuses in utero under 45 CFR 46.204 and 46.207, and subsection 498(b) of the Public Health Service Act." Moreover, the Dickey-Wicker Amendment defines a human embryo as "any organism, not protected as a human subject under 45 CFR 46 as of the date of enactment of the governing appropriations act, that is derived by fertilization, parthenogenesis, cloning, or any other means from one or more human gametes or human diploid cells."

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has asserted jurisdiction over clinical research using cloning technology to create a human being. According to FDA, clinical research using cloning technology to create a human being is subject to FDA regulation under the Public Health Service Act and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. This authority is based on the agency's oversight authority over all products intended to treat or prevent disease. Furthermore, FDA has indirect oversight authority over research cloning, as data obtained from such research may be used to support an application for new therapy procedures. The agency has further indirect oversight authority over the laboratory procedures that would be used to create cloned embryos "as part of a determination of the safety and effectiveness of the end product" (Javitt G, Suthers K, and K Hudson. Cloning: A Policy Analysis. Washington, DC: Genetics and Public Policy Center, 2005). It is important to note that the FDA has explicitly stated that it would not permit the use of cloning technology to create a human being due to "major unresolved safety questions" pertaining to the use of such technology.

President Bush announced in August 2001 that for the first time federal funds would be used to support research on human embryonic stem cells, while stating his strong opposition to "human cloning." Although not mentioned specifically in his speech, a fact sheet on the White House Web site states that federal funds will not be used for "the cloning of human embryos for any purpose." However, it is important to note that there is no current federal legislation prohibitions or restrictions on the use of private funds for either reproductive and therapeutic cloning research.[/b]

Following the president's announcement, in July of 2002 the President's Council on Bioethics released its report Human Cloning and Human Dignity, in which the council unanimously recommended a ban on reproductive cloning, and, by a vote of 10 to 7, a four-year moratorium on cloning for medical research purposes.

The current U.S. administration supports a comprehensive cloning ban; however, its efforts to adopt federal legislation on the subject have yet to be successful. In the past years the U.S. Congress, which remains polarized on the issue of cloning, has considered numerous bills – including one supported by a bipartisan majority – also without success.

In the 2002 report Scientific and Medical Aspects of Human Reproductive Cloning, the National Academy of Sciences recommended that "human reproductive cloning should not now be practiced. It is dangerous and likely to fail." The NAS also recommended that an enforceable ban, subject to a sunset clause of five years, be adopted by the federal government. Regarding cloning for therapeutic or research purposes, the NAS recommended that cloning to produce stem cells should be permitted because of the potential for developing new therapies and advancing biomedical knowledge. While the NAS's 2005 Guidelines for Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research do not specifically address human reproductive cloning or apply to reproductive uses of nuclear transfer, the NAS continues to support the view that research aimed at human reproductive cloning should not be conducted at this time.

State human cloning laws

States with statutes specifically banning human reproductive and therapeutic cloning:

http://www.dnapolicy.org/policy.international.php?laws_id=36&action=detail



My cousin in Cal did have a stem cell transplant 2yrs ago and it did put his cancer in remission for a while but he lost the battle about 2months ago so it didn't cure it only gave him a little more time and allowed the family to do some things they had been wanting to do but would otherwise not have been able to had it not been for the transplant.