Nancy Reagan urges Bush to reconsider
Find a Conversation
| Mon, 05-10-2004 - 7:20am |
She wants him to reverse his stand against stem cell research and is pictured with Michael J. Fox. Is this what it is going to take to convince Bush that his ideological stance against this research is wrong?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3700015.stm
Mrs Reagan said too much time had been wasted already discussing the issue.
She is said to believe the research could lead to a cure for Alzheimer's disease, which has afflicted her husband, Ronald Reagan.
The Bush administration has blocked public funding of this type of research because of his party's ethical reservations about embryo research.
At a fundraising dinner for the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation in Hollywood, Mrs Reagan said her husband was now in "a distant place where I can no longer reach him".
"I just don't see how we can turn our backs on this... We have lost so much time already. I just really can't bear to lose any more."
She said she believed stem cell research "may provide our scientists with many answers that for so long have been beyond our grasp".
It is thought to be the first time that Mrs Reagan has made a public speech on the issue, although her views have long been known.
Political debate
Mrs Reagan is the latest high-profile figure to criticise the Bush administration for its decision to limit funding for stem cell research.

Currently federal funds are not available for this type of work.
Mr Bush has told scientists he will not release US taxpayers' money for the production or investigation of new lines because it involves the destruction of human embryos.
Correspondents say that with the Bush administration and anti-abortion groups strongly opposed to stem cell research, Mrs Reagan's comments add a powerful conservative Republican voice to the debate.

Elaine
Pages
I couldn't imagine not having children. If we would have had problems we would have researched everything possible too. In fact I don't know how I would deal with those methods if they were our only alternative. But it isn't a personal view that I have...life is life...oh and I don't have the perfect answer...just lamenting about the problem...
I think more about the sons and daughters running around seemingly invisible to their parents who didn't want them, and then about the people out there who die to have that chance and can't....that gets me lamenting about life...
I agree but you think about them because they are right in front of you. The frozen ones are out of sight out of mind.
Ah, yes, and they are the ones that are alive, living and breathing now...in need of help. Let us think of them before we worry about frozen embryos not even physically ready to face the world as of yet.
Agreed...I just dont' want the frozen ones forgotten about or worse used as raw materials for experiments.
I respect that view, though I don't share the concern. Much of that part of the debate would boil down to deciding the exact moment when life begins which I think we (being our society) will be hard pressed to ever have an agreement on.
I agree if we could definitively define legally, morally, and naturally when life begins the issue would be easy to solve. Of course getting those three view points to agree on anything would be dang near impossible.
Isn't THAT the truth! ;)
Pages