Response to Michael J. Fox Ad

2

Comments

  • the problem is...is that you, and most people in the media, etc...focus on this one quote from rush. you like to focus on emotional crap like this, instead of substantive issues, particularly what fox was actually saying was complete crap, and had his head up his ass. he implied republicans are against stem cell research, which is not true. he implied that a vote for a republican will kill people with parkinsans. this is the real world, only a minority live in the great bubble (see the harold ford thread)
    Gee, this is funny, because I just watched Michael J. Fox in a commercial in 2004 for Arlen Specter, who is . . . ummm, let's see . . . a REPUBLICAN!!!

    The current commercial that has your panties in a wad is for a particular Democrat, McCaskill, against a particular Republican, Talent, who is in fact against stem cell research.

    And Fox's commercial says nothing like Republicans want to kill Parkinson's patients. It says that McCaskill supports stem cell research and that Talent wanted to criminalize embryonic stem cell research -- all of which is true. But hey, why should you bother yourself with something so tedious as the facts and people's legislative records and actually watching the commercial.
    "Things will just get better and better even though it
    doesn't feel that way right now. That's the hopeful
    idea . . . Hope didn't get much applause . . .
    Hope! Hope is the underdog!"

    -- EV, Live at the Showbox
  • Purple HawkPurple Hawk Posts: 1,300
    Hope&Anger wrote:
    Gee, this is funny, because I just watched Michael J. Fox in a commercial in 2004 for Arlen Specter, who is . . . ummm, let's see . . . a REPUBLICAN!!!

    The current commercial that has your panties in a wad is for a particular Democrat, McCaskill, against a particular Republican, Talent, who is in fact against stem cell research.

    And Fox's commercial says nothing like Republicans want to kill Parkinson's patients. It says that McCaskill supports stem cell research and that Talent wanted to criminalize embryonic stem cell research -- all of which is true. But hey, why should you bother yourself with something so tedious as the facts and people's legislative records and actually watching the commercial.

    if the ad said what you said it did, i don't think anyone would have a problem...but please, highlight the point where fox says the world embryonic, and that he opposes stem cell research?
    And you ask me what I want this year
    And I try to make this kind and clear
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
    Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
    And desire and love and empty things
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
  • dkst0426dkst0426 Posts: 523
    Ah yes, call me a douchebag and assume my head is doing something physically impossible. How original, and such a credible argument as well.
  • dkst0426 wrote:
    Ah yes, call me a douchebag and assume my head is doing something physically impossible. How original, and such a credible argument as well.
    How clever of you to skip all over the substantive arguments. But please, just nurse your hurt feelings.

    Really, you can dish it out but can't take it.
    "Things will just get better and better even though it
    doesn't feel that way right now. That's the hopeful
    idea . . . Hope didn't get much applause . . .
    Hope! Hope is the underdog!"

    -- EV, Live at the Showbox
  • Purple HawkPurple Hawk Posts: 1,300
    Hope&Anger wrote:
    How clever of you to skip all over the substantive arguments. But please, just nurse your hurt feelings.

    Really, you can dish it out but can't take it.

    bizzaro world alert. actually, you haven't addressed anything of substance.
    And you ask me what I want this year
    And I try to make this kind and clear
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
    Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
    And desire and love and empty things
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
  • Okay, apart from the information about Fox's medications and the effect that it has on his body, and apart from my pointing out that Fox has made commercials on behalf of both Republicans and Democrats -- neither of which is substantive in your own corner of bizarro world, how about some substatnive information about (a) the ad and (b) Senator Talent?
    if the ad said what you said it did, i don't think anyone would have a problem...but please, highlight the point where fox says the world embryonic, and that he opposes stem cell research?
    Seriously, I don't know what you mean. I don't know if you actually want to take time out from your very busy schedule of posting in threads on topics you know nothing about, but here's Fox's commercial:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9WB_PXjTBo

    In it, he says that McCaskill supports the research for cures. He points out that Senator Talent "opposes extending stem cell research. Senator Talent even wanted to criminalize the science that gives us a chance for hope."

    He's referring to the fact that Talent recently sponsored an anti-cloning bill that was so broad, it included a form of embryonic stem cell research on developmentally disabled embryos. When things looked bad for him politically, though, he removed his name as co-sponsor. Because he's a coward.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11410626/site/newsweek/
    "Things will just get better and better even though it
    doesn't feel that way right now. That's the hopeful
    idea . . . Hope didn't get much applause . . .
    Hope! Hope is the underdog!"

    -- EV, Live at the Showbox
  • dkst0426dkst0426 Posts: 523
    Hope&Anger wrote:
    How clever of you to skip all over the substantive arguments. But please, just nurse your hurt feelings.

    Really, you can dish it out but can't take it.
    Like I said--when it degenerates to namecalling, the "substance" really loses its flavor.
  • Adult stem cells are being used in medicine, embryonic cells are not because they are far more limited in versatility, and there are rejection issues. MJF didn't take his meds for the commercial, that is a bit twisted. How come we can't have doctors discussing these issues instead of suffering entertainers.

    In defense of Rush, he is correct in being suspicious since the statements in the ads are typically untrue about the opponet. You can support the research that is ongoing without supporting the creation of human clones for future research....but the ads leave you to believe that big bad republicans are afraid of the research, wo clarifying the issue is the production of new human embryos.

    Original point is that your own stem cells are far superior anyway, and if you ever need stem cells you will likely benefit from your own, not an embryos.

    I think this is just a way for Dems to create another divide in our country, I say fuck em. Even if I didn't want to vote Republican, the dems make it hard not too.
    HOB 10.05.2005, E Rutherford 06.03.2006, The Gorge 07.22.2006, Lolla 08.05.2007, West Palm 06.11.2008, Tampa 06.12.2008, Columbia 06.16.2008, EV Memphis 06.20.2009, New Orleans 05.01.2010, Kansas City 05.03.2010
  • TarrouTarrou Posts: 16
    Oo you actually know anything about this disease? It is the medication that causes the shakes.


    why would you want to cover up the disease you've been stricken with when trying to gain support to fix it?

    And hippiemom's right, the meds don't fix a damn thing it just hides the shakes.
  • enharmonicenharmonic Posts: 1,917
    I hope Rush gets Parkinsons so someone can claim that he's faking for ratings...just like he faked being deaf...which of course I thought would have been the greatest blessing for him of all. How sweet it would be to be Rush "Hillbilly Heroin" Limbaugh, and not have to hear the sound of your own voice.
  • Purple HawkPurple Hawk Posts: 1,300
    Hope&Anger wrote:
    Okay, apart from the information about Fox's medications and the effect that it has on his body, and apart from my pointing out that Fox has made commercials on behalf of both Republicans and Democrats -- neither of which is substantive in your own corner of bizarro world, how about some substatnive information about (a) the ad and (b) Senator Talent?


    Seriously, I don't know what you mean. I don't know if you actually want to take time out from your very busy schedule of posting in threads on topics you know nothing about, but here's Fox's commercial:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9WB_PXjTBo

    In it, he says that McCaskill supports the research for cures. He points out that Senator Talent "opposes extending stem cell research. Senator Talent even wanted to criminalize the science that gives us a chance for hope."

    He's referring to the fact that Talent recently sponsored an anti-cloning bill that was so broad, it included a form of embryonic stem cell research on developmentally disabled embryos. When things looked bad for him politically, though, he removed his name as co-sponsor. Because he's a coward.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11410626/site/newsweek/

    yes, i've watched the ad, and i really don't need you to tell me how informed i am of the issue when you are so easily duped by the misleading language that talent is somehow impeding progress when there is absolutely NO evidence that embryonic research offers more hope than the stem cell research talent does support...you would agree, that talent supports stem cell research, right? if not, we can end the conversation so you can take some time to understand his argument.
    And you ask me what I want this year
    And I try to make this kind and clear
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
    Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
    And desire and love and empty things
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
  • RainDogRainDog Posts: 1,824
    Has anyone seen the video of Rush making these statements? Oh, it's good. He bounces around in his chair, waves his hands around, and shakes his head all while saying Fox is acting. Man, I was laughin'. That Rush is fuckin' funny, doods. It's all good natured ribbing, right?

    I mean, "heh heh heh, looka me! I'm Michael J. Fox with parkinsons. Dur. I'm all shaky and stoopid and hate Republicans an' stuff. I'm off my meds, people. Back up - I'm cwazy!"

    The truth is, people with parkinsons have bad days and worse days. They shot Fox's ad on one of his worse days. And why not?

    And so what if he was off his meds? Aside from the fact it was already established here that if he was off his meds, he'd hardly be able to move at all, so what if it was the way Rush stated? Do you think the Christian Children's Fund finds kids for their ads that garner the most sympathy, or the least?

    Even if Fox was "off his meds"; even if they filmed him on one of his worse days; even if Rush is right about the whole thing and Fox filmed the ad for political purposes (which, by the way, no one is denying why he filmed it - it was a political ad - has the candidate endorsing it and everything), it doesn't matter. He's an ass for saying - and doing - what he did.

    But let's all feel sorry for Rush, now. People are being mean to him.
  • Purple HawkPurple Hawk Posts: 1,300
    RainDog wrote:
    Has anyone seen the video of Rush making these statements? Oh, it's good. He bounces around in his chair, waves his hands around, and shakes his head all while saying Fox is acting. Man, I was laughin'. That Rush is fuckin' funny, doods. It's all good natured ribbing, right?

    I mean, "heh heh heh, looka me! I'm Michael J. Fox with parkinsons. Dur. I'm all shaky and stoopid and hate Republicans an' stuff. I'm off my meds, people. Back up - I'm cwazy!"

    The truth is, people with parkinsons have bad days and worse days. They shot Fox's ad on one of his worse days. And why not?

    And so what if he was off his meds? Aside from the fact it was already established here that if he was off his meds, he'd hardly be able to move at all, so what if it was the way Rush stated? Do you think the Christian Children's Fund finds kids for their ads that garner the most sympathy, or the least?

    Even if Fox was "off his meds"; even if they filmed him on one of his worse days; even if Rush is right about the whole thing and Fox filmed the ad for political purposes (which, by the way, no one is denying why he filmed it - it was a political ad - has the candidate endorsing it and everything), it doesn't matter. He's an ass for saying - and doing - what he did.

    But let's all feel sorry for Rush, now. People are being mean to him.

    nobody is asking you to feel sorry for him, but how about addressing his point. rush said fox either was acting or off his meds. fox, in his own book, says he stopped taking meds before testifying in Congress to dramatize his disease. why is putting this information out in the public arena so offensive?
    And you ask me what I want this year
    And I try to make this kind and clear
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
    Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
    And desire and love and empty things
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
  • RainDogRainDog Posts: 1,824
    yes, i've watched the ad, and i really don't need you to tell me how informed i am of the issue when you are so easily duped by the misleading language that talent is somehow impeding progress when there is absolutely NO evidence that embryonic research offers more hope than the stem cell research talent does support...you would agree, that talent supports stem cell research, right? if not, we can end the conversation so you can take some time to understand his argument.
    Talent supports "limited stem cell research" if you want to be nice. If not, you say Talen supports "limiting stem cell research." Both statements are true.

    And, while scientists may not have any evidence yet regarding embryonic stem cell therapy, that doesn't mean there's no future in it. That's why it's research. When you have evidence that it could help (and they do), then it logically follows that even if it can't right now, it's still something worth pursueing.
  • Purple HawkPurple Hawk Posts: 1,300
    RainDog wrote:
    Talent supports "limited stem cell research" if you want to be nice. If not, you say Talen supports "limiting stem cell research." Both statements are true.

    And, while scientists may not have any evidence yet regarding embryonic stem cell therapy, that doesn't mean there's no future in it. That's why it's research. When you have evidence that it could help (and they do), then it logically follows that even if it can't right now, it's still something worth pursueing.

    the ad insinuates that talent doesn't support stem cell research, using semantic language like you pointed out. those of us who recognize this, are just putting forth the facts, so people can make a decision with full information.

    the ad paints this picture that a vote for the democrat gives a better chance for a cure than does a vote for talent. and that is pretty ridiculous.
    And you ask me what I want this year
    And I try to make this kind and clear
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
    Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
    And desire and love and empty things
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
  • RainDogRainDog Posts: 1,824
    nobody is asking you to feel sorry for him, but how about addressing his point. rush said fox either was acting or off his meds. fox, in his own book, says he stopped taking meds before testifying in Congress to dramatize his disease. why is putting this information out in the public arena so offensive?
    So what if he was off his meds? It isn't likely that he was - if anything, the ad makers intentionally filmed him on one of his bad days - but, still, so what?

    Apparently that information was already in the public arena. Seems Fox said it himself. What's offensive is that Rush, with his infinite wit, made fun of a serious condition. He didn't "put this information out" - he made fun of a man with a serious medical condition.

    Which is his right - just like it's Fox's right to be filmed on one of his worse days. Now, let's sit back and see which the public thinks is more tasteless.
  • Purple HawkPurple Hawk Posts: 1,300
    RainDog wrote:
    So what if he was off his meds? It isn't likely that he was - if anything, the ad makers intentionally filmed him on one of his bad days - but, still, so what?

    Apparently that information was already in the public arena. Seems Fox said it himself. What's offensive is that Rush, with his infinite wit, made fun of a serious condition. He didn't "put this information out" - he made fun of a man with a serious medical condition.

    Which is his right - just like it's Fox's right to be filmed on one of his worse days. Now, let's sit back and see which the public thinks is more tasteless.

    if you listened to the show, in it's entirety, it is clear he wasn't making fun of him. he was in disbelief of what fox was saying. i don't think anyone listening to the show live, after hearing what he was saying before those short snippets show, or after, took it as him mocking fox.
    And you ask me what I want this year
    And I try to make this kind and clear
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
    Cuz I don't need boxes wrapped in strings
    And desire and love and empty things
    Just a chance that maybe we'll find better days
  • RainDogRainDog Posts: 1,824
    the ad paints this picture that a vote for the democrat gives a better chance for a cure than does a vote for talent. and that is pretty ridiculous.
    Actually, you've got some symantics going on here yourself. No, the truth is a vote for McCaskill - who happens to be a Democrat - gives a better chance for a cure than does a vote for Talent. It's just simply true. Michael J. Fox supports expanded research, Talent does not. Castkill does. So, Michael J. Fox endorses McCaskill.

    And remember, Fox has endorsed Republicans before.
  • RainDogRainDog Posts: 1,824
    if you listened to the show, in it's entirety, it is clear he wasn't making fun of him. he was in disbelief of what fox was saying. i don't think anyone listening to the show live, after hearing what he was saying before those short snippets show, or after, took it as him mocking fox.
    Of course most of them didn't. They call themselves dittoheads for a reason.

    And not making fun of Fox? And all the bobbing, waving, and arm flailing was because what? - Rush Limbaugh has parkinsons?
  • El_KabongEl_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    if you listened to the show, in it's entirety, it is clear he wasn't making fun of him. he was in disbelief of what fox was saying. i don't think anyone listening to the show live, after hearing what he was saying before those short snippets show, or after, took it as him mocking fox.


    he wasn't just in disbelief of what he was saying, he outright said he was acting when he was shaking. i thought walter was a dick for pulling the big lebowksi out of his wheelchair, too, same thing
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • If any one of us were in MJF's situation, I'm sure we would get behind the person/politician who we thought could make the most difference in finding a cure. I'd like to see Ali punch Limbaugh in the head. Set up a celebrity boxing match between them to raise funds for this disease. Down goes Limbaugh...down goes Limbaugh...rings true.
  • uncomfortable laughter.
  • RainDog wrote:
    Actually, you've got some symantics going on here yourself. No, the truth is a vote for McCaskill - who happens to be a Democrat - gives a better chance for a cure than does a vote for Talent. It's just simply true. Michael J. Fox supports expanded research, Talent does not. Castkill does. So, Michael J. Fox endorses McCaskill.

    And remember, Fox has endorsed Republicans before.


    lmao prove that!
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
  • decides2dreamdecides2dream Posts: 14,977
    this post is the most irrelevent post i've ever seen. what does this have to do with anything? not a personal attack, sorry. but rush says the guy stopped taking his meds for effect. people are outraged. then it comes out, that it's probably the case that rush was right. so now it's like..ok, so that's his right. Rush never said the guy couldn't do what he did, he just pointed out the lies in what fox asserted.



    huh?
    did you read my post? i AGREED with hope&anger...which clearly states he TOOK HIS MEDS. and then sure, i further elaborated my own, personally held beliefs that sure...he or anyone can make that choice, take or not take their meds, whenever they see fit, just as an aside. i never even mentioned limbaugh or his comments. excuse me for participating in the discussion in general, and not the specifics you evidently think i should be focusing on. :rolleyes:

    c'est la vie.
    Stay with me...
    Let's just breathe...


    I am myself like you somehow


  • lmao prove that!
    Prove what? That Fox has endorsed Republicans?

    Here:

    "At Capitol Hill, Michael is the big shot. Or you might say "King of the Hill." Back in 2001, the National Institutes of Health estimated it would cost one billion dollars to find a cure for Parkinson's disease. The only person Michael knows with that kind of capital is Uncle Sam. So he's testified twice before Congress for increased federal funding. And he's rallied support from both sides of the aisle, namely Democratic Senator Tom Harkin, and Republican senator (and cancer survivor) Arlen Specter.

    Couric: You, Tom Harkin, and Arlen Specter. You're like tight.

    Michael J. Fox: Yeah. Strange bedfellows. But he's been an amazing champion of medical science."

    Read the whole thing here:

    http://www.michaeljfox.org/news/article.php?id=196&sec=2

    He's all about the stem cells, regardless of party line. It's just that one party is more interested in funding stem cell research than the other.
    "Things will just get better and better even though it
    doesn't feel that way right now. That's the hopeful
    idea . . . Hope didn't get much applause . . .
    Hope! Hope is the underdog!"

    -- EV, Live at the Showbox
  • decides2dreamdecides2dream Posts: 14,977
    Hope&Anger wrote:
    Prove what? That Fox has endorsed Republicans?

    Here:

    "At Capitol Hill, Michael is the big shot. Or you might say "King of the Hill." Back in 2001, the National Institutes of Health estimated it would cost one billion dollars to find a cure for Parkinson's disease. The only person Michael knows with that kind of capital is Uncle Sam. So he's testified twice before Congress for increased federal funding. And he's rallied support from both sides of the aisle, namely Democratic Senator Tom Harkin, and Republican senator (and cancer survivor) Arlen Specter.

    Couric: You, Tom Harkin, and Arlen Specter. You're like tight.

    Michael J. Fox: Yeah. Strange bedfellows. But he's been an amazing champion of medical science."

    Read the whole thing here:

    http://www.michaeljfox.org/news/article.php?id=196&sec=2

    He's all about the stem cells, regardless of party line. It's just that one party is more interested in funding stem cell research than the other.


    amazing huh? someone can be about an issue, and not a political party. crazy talk eh? :p
    Stay with me...
    Let's just breathe...


    I am myself like you somehow


  • Hope&Anger wrote:
    Prove what? That Fox has endorsed Republicans?

    Here:

    "At Capitol Hill, Michael is the big shot. Or you might say "King of the Hill." Back in 2001, the National Institutes of Health estimated it would cost one billion dollars to find a cure for Parkinson's disease. The only person Michael knows with that kind of capital is Uncle Sam. So he's testified twice before Congress for increased federal funding. And he's rallied support from both sides of the aisle, namely Democratic Senator Tom Harkin, and Republican senator (and cancer survivor) Arlen Specter.

    Couric: You, Tom Harkin, and Arlen Specter. You're like tight.

    Michael J. Fox: Yeah. Strange bedfellows. But he's been an amazing champion of medical science."

    Read the whole thing here:

    http://www.michaeljfox.org/news/article.php?id=196&sec=2

    He's all about the stem cells, regardless of party line. It's just that one party is more interested in funding stem cell research than the other.


    lol no libby, thats the obvious. prove that electing her provides a better chance at finding a cure. a better chance of mold randomly landing on a staphylococcus plate culture?

    besides, this is just silly. the damn amendment is about human cloning.
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
  • hippiemomhippiemom Posts: 3,326
    Please explain to me how this amendment is about cloning.

    2006 Ballot Measure
    Constitutional Amendment 2
    Stem Cell Initiative

    Submitted October 11, 2005

    NOTICE: You are advised that the proposed constitutional amendment may change, repeal, or modify by implication or may be construed by some persons to change, repeal or modify by implication, the following provisions of the Constitution of Missouri – Sections 2, 10, 14, and 32 of Article I; Section 1 of Article II; Sections 1, 21, 22, 23, 28, 36, 39, 40, 41, and 42 of Article III; Sections 1, 14, 36(a), 37, 37(a), 39, and 52 of Article IV; Sections 5, 14, 17, 18, and 23, and subsection 17 of Section 27 of Article V; Sections 18(b), 18(c), 18(d), 18(k), 18(m), 19(a), 20, 31, 32(a), and 32(b) of Article VI; Section 9(a) of Article IX; Sections 1, 6, 11(a), 11(d), and 11(f) of Article X; and Section 3 or Article XI.
    THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT

    Be it resolved by the people of the state of Missouri that the Constitution be amended:

    One new section is adopted by adding one new section to be known as section 38(d) of Article III to read as follows:

    Section 38(d). 1. This section shall be known as the “ Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative.”

    2. To ensure that Missouri patients have access to stem cell therapies and cures, that Missouri researchers can conduct stem cell research in the state, and that all such research is conducted safely and ethically, any stem cell research permitted under federal law may be conducted in Missouri, and any stem cell therapies and cures permitted under federal law may be provided to patients in Missouri, subject to the requirements of federal law and only the following additional limitations and requirements:

    (1) No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being.

    (2) No human blastocyst may be produced by fertilization solely for the purpose of stem cell research.

    (3) No stem cells may be taken from a human blastocyst more than fourteen days after cell division begins; provided, however, that time during which a blastocyst is frozen does not count against the fourteen-day limit.

    (4) No person may, for valuable consideration, purchase or sell human blastocysts or eggs for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures.


    (5) Human blastocysts and eggs obtained for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures must have been donated with voluntary and informed consent, documented in writing.

    (6) Human embryonic stem cell research may be conducted only by persons that, within 180 days of the effective date of this section or otherwise prior to commencement of such research, whichever is later, have

    (a) provided oversight responsibility and approval authority for such research to an embryonic stem cell research oversight committee whose membership includes representatives of the public and medical and scientific experts;

    (b) adopted ethical standards for such research that comply with the requirements of this section; and

    (c) obtained a determination from an Institutional Review Board that the research complies with all applicable federal statutes and regulations that the Institutional Review Board is responsible for administering.

    (7) All stem cell research and all stem cell therapies and cures must be conducted and provided in accordance with state and local laws of general applicability, including but not limited to laws concerning scientific and medical practices and patient safety and privacy, to the extent that any such laws do not (i) prevent, restrict, obstruct, or discourage any stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures that are permitted by the provisions of this section other than this subdivision (7) to be conducted or provided, or (ii) create disincentives for any person to engage in or otherwise associate with such research or therapies and cures.

    3. Any person who knowingly and willfully violates in this state subdivision (1) of subsection 2 of this section commits a crime and shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of up to fifteen years or by the imposition of a fine of up to two hundred fifty thousand dollars, or by both. Any person who knowingly and willfully violates in this state subdivisions (2) or (3) of subsection 2 of this section commits a crime and shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of up to ten years or by the imposition of a fine of up to one hundred thousand dollars, or by both. A civil action may be brought against any person who knowingly and willfully violates in this state any of subdivisions (1) through (6) of subsection 2 of this section, and the state in such action shall be entitled to a judgment recovering a civil penalty of up to fifty thousand dollars per violation, requiring disgorgement of any financial profit derived from such violation, and/or enjoining any further such violation. The attorney general shall have the exclusive right to bring a civil action for such violation. Venue for such action shall be the county in which the alleged violation occurred.

    4. Each institution, hospital, other entity, or other person conducting human embryonic stem cell research in the state shall (i) prepare an annual report stating the nature of the human embryonic stem cells used in, and the purpose of, the research conducted during the prior calendar year, and certifying compliance with subdivision (6) of subsection 2 of this section; and (ii) no later than June 30 of the subsequent year, make such report available to the public and inform the Secretary of State how the public may obtain copies of or otherwise gain access to the report. The report shall not contain private or confidential medical, scientific, or other information. Individuals conducting research at an institution, hospital, or other entity that prepares and makes available a report pursuant to this subsection 4 concerning such research are not required to prepare and make available a separate report concerning that same research. A civil action may be brought against any institution, hospital, other entity, or other person that fails to prepare or make available the report or inform the Secretary of State how the public may obtain copies of or otherwise gain access to the report, and the state in such action shall be entitled as its sole remedy to an affirmative injunction requiring such institution, hospital, other entity, or other person to prepare and make available the report or inform the Secretary of State how the public may obtain or otherwise gain access to the report. The attorney general shall have the exclusive right to bring a civil action for such violation.

    5. To ensure that no governmental body or official arbitrarily restricts funds designated for purposes other than stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures as a means of inhibiting lawful stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures, no state or local governmental body or official shall eliminate, reduce, deny, or withhold any public funds provided or eligible to be provided to a person that (i) lawfully conducts stem cell research or provides stem cell therapies and cures, allows for such research or therapies and cures to be conducted or provided on its premises, or is otherwise associated with such research or therapies and cures, but (ii) receives or is eligible to receive such public funds for purposes other than such stem cell-related activities, on account of, or otherwise for the purpose of creating disincentives for any person to engage in or otherwise associate with, or preventing, restricting, obstructing, or discouraging, such stem cell-related activities.

    6. As used in this section, the following terms have the following meanings:

    (1) “Blastocyst” means a small mass of cells that results from cell division, caused either by fertilization or somatic cell nuclear transfer, that has not been implanted in a uterus.

    (2) “Clone or attempt to clone a human being” means to implant in a uterus or attempt to implant in a uterus anything other than the product of fertilization of an egg of a human female by a sperm of a human male for the purpose of initiating a pregnancy that could result in the creation of a human fetus, or the birth of a human being.

    (3) “Donated” means donated for use in connection either with scientific or medical research or with medical treatment.

    (4) “Fertilization” means the process whereby an egg of a human female and the sperm of a human male form a zygote (i.e., fertilized egg).

    (5) “Human embryonic stem cell research,” also referred to as “early stem cell research,” means any scientific or medical research involving human stem cells derived from in vitro fertilization blastocysts or from somatic cell nuclear transfer. For purposes of this section, human embryonic stem cell research does not include stem cell clinical trials.

    (6) “In vitro fertilization” means fertilization of an egg with a sperm outside the body.

    (7) “Institutional Review Board” means a specially constituted review board established and operating in accordance with federal law as set forth in 42 U.S.C. 289, 45 C.F.R. Part 46, and any other applicable federal statutes and regulations, as amended from time to time.

    (8) “Permitted under federal law” means, as it relates to stem cell research and stem cell therapies and cures, any such research, therapies, and cures that are not prohibited under federal law from being conducted or provided, regardless of whether federal funds are made available for such activities.

    (9) “Person” means any natural person, corporation, association, partnership, public or private institution, or other legal entity.

    (10) “Private or confidential medical, scientific, or other information” means any private or confidential patient, medical, or personnel records or matters, intellectual property or work product, whether patentable or not and including but not limited to any scientific or technological innovations in which an entity or person involved in the research has a proprietary interest, prepublication scientific working papers, research, or data, and any other matter excepted from disclosure under Chapter 610, RSMo, as amended from time to time.

    (11) “Solely for the purpose of stem cell research” means producing human blastocysts using in vitro fertilization exclusively for stem cell research, but does not include producing any number of human blastocysts for the purpose of treating human infertility.

    (12) “Sperm” means mature spermatozoa or precursor cells such as spermatids and spermatocytes.

    (13) “Stem cell” means a cell that can divide multiple times and give rise to specialized cells in the body, and includes but is not limited to the stem cells generally referred to as (i) adult stem cells that are found in some body tissues (including but not limited to adult stem cells derived from adult body tissues and from discarded umbilical cords and placentas), and (ii) embryonic stem cells (including but not limited to stem cells derived from in vitro fertilization blastocysts and from cell reprogramming techniques such as somatic cell nuclear transfer).

    (14) “Stem cell clinical trials” means federally regulated clinical trials involving stem cells and human subjects designed to develop, or assess or test the efficacy or safety of, medical treatments.

    (15) “Stem cell research” means any scientific or medical research involving stem cells. For purposes of this section, stem cell research does not include stem cell clinical trials.

    (16) “Stem cell therapies and cures” means any medical treatment that involves or otherwise derives from the use of stem cells, and that is used to treat or cure any disease or injury. For purposes of this section, stem cell therapies and cures does include stem cell clinical trials.

    (17) “Valuable consideration” means financial gain or advantage, but does not include reimbursement for reasonable costs incurred in connection with the removal, processing, disposal, preservation, quality control, storage, transfer, or donation of human eggs, sperm, or blastocysts, including lost wages of the donor. Valuable consideration also does not include the consideration paid to a donor of human eggs or sperm by a fertilization clinic or sperm bank, as well as any other consideration expressly allowed by federal law.

    7. The provisions of this section and of all state and local laws, regulations, rules, charters, ordinances, and other governmental actions shall be construed in favor of the conduct of stem cell research and the provision of stem cell therapies and cures. No state or local law, regulation, rule, charter, ordinance, or other governmental action shall (i) prevent, restrict, obstruct, or discourage any stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures that are permitted by this section to be conducted or provided, or (ii) create disincentives for any person to engage in or otherwise associate with such research or therapies and cures.

    8. The provisions of this section are self-executing. All of the provisions of this section are severable. If any provision of this section is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or unconstitutionally enacted, the remaining provisions of this section shall be and remain valid.

    http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2006petitions/ppStemCell.asp
    "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
  • hippiemom wrote:
    Please explain to me how this amendment is about cloning.

    2006 Ballot Measure
    Constitutional Amendment 2
    Stem Cell Initiative

    Submitted October 11, 2005

    NOTICE: You are advised that the proposed constitutional amendment may change, repeal, or modify by implication or may be construed by some persons to change, repeal or modify by implication, the following provisions of the Constitution of Missouri – Sections 2, 10, 14, and 32 of Article I; Section 1 of Article II; Sections 1, 21, 22, 23, 28, 36, 39, 40, 41, and 42 of Article III; Sections 1, 14, 36(a), 37, 37(a), 39, and 52 of Article IV; Sections 5, 14, 17, 18, and 23, and subsection 17 of Section 27 of Article V; Sections 18(b), 18(c), 18(d), 18(k), 18(m), 19(a), 20, 31, 32(a), and 32(b) of Article VI; Section 9(a) of Article IX; Sections 1, 6, 11(a), 11(d), and 11(f) of Article X; and Section 3 or Article XI.
    THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT

    Be it resolved by the people of the state of Missouri that the Constitution be amended:

    One new section is adopted by adding one new section to be known as section 38(d) of Article III to read as follows:

    Section 38(d). 1. This section shall be known as the “ Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative.”

    2. To ensure that Missouri patients have access to stem cell therapies and cures, that Missouri researchers can conduct stem cell research in the state, and that all such research is conducted safely and ethically, any stem cell research permitted under federal law may be conducted in Missouri, and any stem cell therapies and cures permitted under federal law may be provided to patients in Missouri, subject to the requirements of federal law and only the following additional limitations and requirements:

    (1) No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being.

    (2) No human blastocyst may be produced by fertilization solely for the purpose of stem cell research.

    (3) No stem cells may be taken from a human blastocyst more than fourteen days after cell division begins; provided, however, that time during which a blastocyst is frozen does not count against the fourteen-day limit.

    (4) No person may, for valuable consideration, purchase or sell human blastocysts or eggs for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures.


    (5) Human blastocysts and eggs obtained for stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures must have been donated with voluntary and informed consent, documented in writing.

    (6) Human embryonic stem cell research may be conducted only by persons that, within 180 days of the effective date of this section or otherwise prior to commencement of such research, whichever is later, have

    (a) provided oversight responsibility and approval authority for such research to an embryonic stem cell research oversight committee whose membership includes representatives of the public and medical and scientific experts;

    (b) adopted ethical standards for such research that comply with the requirements of this section; and

    (c) obtained a determination from an Institutional Review Board that the research complies with all applicable federal statutes and regulations that the Institutional Review Board is responsible for administering.

    (7) All stem cell research and all stem cell therapies and cures must be conducted and provided in accordance with state and local laws of general applicability, including but not limited to laws concerning scientific and medical practices and patient safety and privacy, to the extent that any such laws do not (i) prevent, restrict, obstruct, or discourage any stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures that are permitted by the provisions of this section other than this subdivision (7) to be conducted or provided, or (ii) create disincentives for any person to engage in or otherwise associate with such research or therapies and cures.

    3. Any person who knowingly and willfully violates in this state subdivision (1) of subsection 2 of this section commits a crime and shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of up to fifteen years or by the imposition of a fine of up to two hundred fifty thousand dollars, or by both. Any person who knowingly and willfully violates in this state subdivisions (2) or (3) of subsection 2 of this section commits a crime and shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of up to ten years or by the imposition of a fine of up to one hundred thousand dollars, or by both. A civil action may be brought against any person who knowingly and willfully violates in this state any of subdivisions (1) through (6) of subsection 2 of this section, and the state in such action shall be entitled to a judgment recovering a civil penalty of up to fifty thousand dollars per violation, requiring disgorgement of any financial profit derived from such violation, and/or enjoining any further such violation. The attorney general shall have the exclusive right to bring a civil action for such violation. Venue for such action shall be the county in which the alleged violation occurred.

    4. Each institution, hospital, other entity, or other person conducting human embryonic stem cell research in the state shall (i) prepare an annual report stating the nature of the human embryonic stem cells used in, and the purpose of, the research conducted during the prior calendar year, and certifying compliance with subdivision (6) of subsection 2 of this section; and (ii) no later than June 30 of the subsequent year, make such report available to the public and inform the Secretary of State how the public may obtain copies of or otherwise gain access to the report. The report shall not contain private or confidential medical, scientific, or other information. Individuals conducting research at an institution, hospital, or other entity that prepares and makes available a report pursuant to this subsection 4 concerning such research are not required to prepare and make available a separate report concerning that same research. A civil action may be brought against any institution, hospital, other entity, or other person that fails to prepare or make available the report or inform the Secretary of State how the public may obtain copies of or otherwise gain access to the report, and the state in such action shall be entitled as its sole remedy to an affirmative injunction requiring such institution, hospital, other entity, or other person to prepare and make available the report or inform the Secretary of State how the public may obtain or otherwise gain access to the report. The attorney general shall have the exclusive right to bring a civil action for such violation.

    5. To ensure that no governmental body or official arbitrarily restricts funds designated for purposes other than stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures as a means of inhibiting lawful stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures, no state or local governmental body or official shall eliminate, reduce, deny, or withhold any public funds provided or eligible to be provided to a person that (i) lawfully conducts stem cell research or provides stem cell therapies and cures, allows for such research or therapies and cures to be conducted or provided on its premises, or is otherwise associated with such research or therapies and cures, but (ii) receives or is eligible to receive such public funds for purposes other than such stem cell-related activities, on account of, or otherwise for the purpose of creating disincentives for any person to engage in or otherwise associate with, or preventing, restricting, obstructing, or discouraging, such stem cell-related activities.

    6. As used in this section, the following terms have the following meanings:

    (1) “Blastocyst” means a small mass of cells that results from cell division, caused either by fertilization or somatic cell nuclear transfer, that has not been implanted in a uterus.

    (2) “Clone or attempt to clone a human being” means to implant in a uterus or attempt to implant in a uterus anything other than the product of fertilization of an egg of a human female by a sperm of a human male for the purpose of initiating a pregnancy that could result in the creation of a human fetus, or the birth of a human being.

    (3) “Donated” means donated for use in connection either with scientific or medical research or with medical treatment.

    (4) “Fertilization” means the process whereby an egg of a human female and the sperm of a human male form a zygote (i.e., fertilized egg).

    (5) “Human embryonic stem cell research,” also referred to as “early stem cell research,” means any scientific or medical research involving human stem cells derived from in vitro fertilization blastocysts or from somatic cell nuclear transfer. For purposes of this section, human embryonic stem cell research does not include stem cell clinical trials.

    (6) “In vitro fertilization” means fertilization of an egg with a sperm outside the body.

    (7) “Institutional Review Board” means a specially constituted review board established and operating in accordance with federal law as set forth in 42 U.S.C. 289, 45 C.F.R. Part 46, and any other applicable federal statutes and regulations, as amended from time to time.

    (8) “Permitted under federal law” means, as it relates to stem cell research and stem cell therapies and cures, any such research, therapies, and cures that are not prohibited under federal law from being conducted or provided, regardless of whether federal funds are made available for such activities.

    (9) “Person” means any natural person, corporation, association, partnership, public or private institution, or other legal entity.

    (10) “Private or confidential medical, scientific, or other information” means any private or confidential patient, medical, or personnel records or matters, intellectual property or work product, whether patentable or not and including but not limited to any scientific or technological innovations in which an entity or person involved in the research has a proprietary interest, prepublication scientific working papers, research, or data, and any other matter excepted from disclosure under Chapter 610, RSMo, as amended from time to time.

    (11) “Solely for the purpose of stem cell research” means producing human blastocysts using in vitro fertilization exclusively for stem cell research, but does not include producing any number of human blastocysts for the purpose of treating human infertility.

    (12) “Sperm” means mature spermatozoa or precursor cells such as spermatids and spermatocytes.

    (13) “Stem cell” means a cell that can divide multiple times and give rise to specialized cells in the body, and includes but is not limited to the stem cells generally referred to as (i) adult stem cells that are found in some body tissues (including but not limited to adult stem cells derived from adult body tissues and from discarded umbilical cords and placentas), and (ii) embryonic stem cells (including but not limited to stem cells derived from in vitro fertilization blastocysts and from cell reprogramming techniques such as somatic cell nuclear transfer).

    (14) “Stem cell clinical trials” means federally regulated clinical trials involving stem cells and human subjects designed to develop, or assess or test the efficacy or safety of, medical treatments.

    (15) “Stem cell research” means any scientific or medical research involving stem cells. For purposes of this section, stem cell research does not include stem cell clinical trials.

    (16) “Stem cell therapies and cures” means any medical treatment that involves or otherwise derives from the use of stem cells, and that is used to treat or cure any disease or injury. For purposes of this section, stem cell therapies and cures does include stem cell clinical trials.

    (17) “Valuable consideration” means financial gain or advantage, but does not include reimbursement for reasonable costs incurred in connection with the removal, processing, disposal, preservation, quality control, storage, transfer, or donation of human eggs, sperm, or blastocysts, including lost wages of the donor. Valuable consideration also does not include the consideration paid to a donor of human eggs or sperm by a fertilization clinic or sperm bank, as well as any other consideration expressly allowed by federal law.

    7. The provisions of this section and of all state and local laws, regulations, rules, charters, ordinances, and other governmental actions shall be construed in favor of the conduct of stem cell research and the provision of stem cell therapies and cures. No state or local law, regulation, rule, charter, ordinance, or other governmental action shall (i) prevent, restrict, obstruct, or discourage any stem cell research or stem cell therapies and cures that are permitted by this section to be conducted or provided, or (ii) create disincentives for any person to engage in or otherwise associate with such research or therapies and cures.

    8. The provisions of this section are self-executing. All of the provisions of this section are severable. If any provision of this section is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or unconstitutionally enacted, the remaining provisions of this section shall be and remain valid.

    http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/2006petitions/ppStemCell.asp


    Listen babe. Amendment 2 deceptively claims to ban "human cloning" but only bans a human clone from being implanted in a woman, not from being created and then killed for research purposes.

    He supports human embryonic stem-cell experimentation. Period. Basically telling us that some humans are subhuman and expendable for others' personal gain. I myself have serious issues with fertilizing womens eggs for the sole purpose of harvesting them and dissection. It's utterly absurd.

    Again... Show me the proof.

    Also, Ben Cardin voted against stem cell research. Any clever ideas on why Fox backs him as well and as to why the media is still claiming that Cardin supports stem cell research?
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
  • hippiemomhippiemom Posts: 3,326
    Listen babe. Amendment 2 deceptively claims to ban "human cloning" but only bans a human clone from being implanted in a woman, not from being created and then killed for research purposes.
    "(1) No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being," seems pretty unambiguous to me. How did you arrive at this interpretation?
    He supports human embryonic stem-cell experimentation. Period. Basically telling us that some humans are subhuman and expendable for others' personal gain. I myself have serious issues with fertilizing womens eggs for the sole purpose of harvesting them and dissection. It's utterly absurd.
    Again, this is pretty plain language: "(2) No human blastocyst may be produced by fertilization solely for the purpose of stem cell research."
    Again... Show me the proof.
    I just did. You appear to be reading things into the amendment that aren't there. If they're in there somewhere and I missed them (I didn't read every word), please point them out to me.
    "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
Sign In or Register to comment.