The U.S. Senate Must Support Lifesaving Research

Posted by Richard Martin, Campaign Manager  

11:30 AM Jul 18, 2006

I do not know about you but I have had about enough of this Administration and this Congress. For five years, Republicans in Congress have mismanaged the government to serve their campaign needs. From stem cell research to the Voting Rights Act, it is time to get to work for all Americans.

For Americans suffering from debilitating diseases and conditions, for the scientific community, and for the majority of Americans who support expanding stem cell research, there is no alternative to HR 810. Other bills give political support to Republicans, but only HR 810 gives medical support to Americans.

Thank God there are some Republicans, such as Senator Hatch and Senator Specter who are standing up to the President and are working with Democrats to give millions of Americans the hope of new cures and treatments that stem cell research provides.

The threat of a veto by this President though is real. And isn't it amazing that he has never vetoed a single bill, but he will do it on this issue? And of course Senator Talent is nowhere to be found. I assume he was afraid to even show up yesterday while the Senate debated this issue.

President Bush and Senate Republicans should put sound science over ideology, and America's future ahead of their own political futures.

Americans want a new direction, where their health and the health of their families are put first. In Missouri, we need a Senator on our side. We need Claire McCaskill.

 

Add a comment

I SUPPORT CLAIRE!!!

Jeff — 06:43 PM Jul 24, 2006

I will be supporting Ms. McCaskill in this upcoming election and as a moderate Republican voter in the past, I am the voter she is targeting in this election. Also as a quadriplegic using trach ventilation due to the effects of ALS, I have much more riding on this election than a passing interest because my life as well as many others may hinge on it's outcome. While I understand that even if this research goes forward with full support from today it might be to late to help me, I also know that my will and determination have helped me not only survive 12+ years with ALS but also I have been able to find a fulfilling and incredible life helping others with ALS and being a husband and father of 3 beautiful daughters (ages 11, 4 & 1) so I plan to benefit from this research to one day dance at my daughter's weddings. I mention all this to put a face on what this research truly could mean to those of us on the frontlines fighting the terrible diseases that might be cured with these potential advances. As the 2006 Missouri MDA Personal Achievement Award recipient, I volume to be the "posterboy" for what this election truly means! Below I am include what I wrote to the St. Louis Post Dispatch after last week's incredibly ignorant veto of legislation expand embryonic stem cell research.


I am a Christian, anti-abortion, ventilator dependant quadriplegic because of effects of ALS and now because of Bush's veto of the common sense stem cell legislation a FORMER Republican! The arguments given by Bush for his veto and those who support him have NO basis in fact or even ethics for that matter. First, his veto will NOT save one embryo since this legislation SPECIFICALLY stated that those embryos that will be destroyed anyway could be used. All this veto does is make these embryos GARBAGE instead of at least serving the higher purpose of helping mankind. No matter what you believe on this issue, that is a waste and a sin against God. Second, supporters of the President's position constantly bring up both adult stem cell successes and the POSSIBILITY of substitutes for embryonic stem cells which are red herring arguments at best. Adult stem cells have had only very limited and specific successes and most recent advances with them have resulted either directly or indirectly from embryonic stem cell research. Further, they fail to state that adult stem cells have been studied for OVER FORTY YEARS and that embryonic stem cells have only been limitedly studied the last eight years so I would hope there would be a significant difference between them! As for an alternative to embryonic stem cells, we all hope they can be found but the fact is there is no assurance that one will ever be found and it is only going to happen with the understanding gained from basic embryonic stem cell research which is not nearly complete. Third, the President was misleading when he stated that this bill will make taxpayers pay for the destruction of embryos when the fact is that the bill specifically states that the acquisition and stem cell extraction would have to be done with PRIVATE funds. Fourth, the same moral arguments being used today against using embryonic stem cells were also used against such horrific medical advances as open heart surgery, vaccienes, antibiotics and blood transfusions. How different would things be had they stopped those medical advances? Finally, for those of you arguing the moral, Biblical reasons for opposing embryonic stem cell research, there are NO Biblical references supporting your arguments and further there are not even Biblical references supporting the "life begins at conception" belief which only appeared in the 20th century during the abortion fight when the Catholic Church decided it was easier to have a definitive point when life begins than to explain to the masses the REAL Biblical definition for life. The overwhelming Biblical guidance on this issue points to life beginning "with the blood" which is around 2 weeks after conception in the most rudimentary form which is why I oppose abortion. I totally respect a person's right to their beliefs but do not try to impose them on the vast majority otherwise we will have to abolish things like the death penalty or even blood transfusions since some people think they are morally wrong! I leave those of you who believe embryos are equivalent to living, breathing humans with a parable. You are in a lab with a petri dish with several embryos and a newborn baby in a pumpkin seat when a fire breaks out you have to either save the embryos or the baby, who do you save? The God given logic we all process dictates that we save the newborn but using the beliefs of those opposing embryonic stem cell research we would have to save the embryos since we would be saving more lives!

Sincerely,
Jeff

Supporting Stem Cell Research

Retta — 12:39 AM Jul 19, 2006

Hi Richard
So wonderful to have such a truly concerned and dedicated Democrat step to the plate and fight for this major health issue. Having gone on disability myself under Sen.Talent and the Bush un-healthcare administration for degenerative arthritis and remembering his first election for Congress when he beat Joan Kelly-Horn and was late for a Health Care debate at DePaul Hospital by 45min. and his staff apologized because he was at a fundraiser the Time has come for him to go......Missouri deserves Better and We will get it with Claire.... Missouri's healthcare deserves the Best Senator.. our future depends on her...