Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The President, The State of the Union, and Genetics

CmdrTaco posted more than 8 years ago | from the god-schmod-i-want-my-monkey-man dept.

Biotech 921

At last night's State of the Union, the president said "Tonight I ask you to pass legislation to prohibit the most egregious abuses of medical research, human cloning in all its forms, creating or implanting embryos for experiments, creating human-animal hybrids, and buying, selling or patenting human embryos." Jamie happened onto a link today which humorously and insightfully addresses this bit from the speech. It's worth your time. Relatedly segphault writes "Ars Technica has an interesting look at scientific research and technology proposals included in Bush's State of the Union address."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

huh? (5, Funny)

grub (11606) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619686)


Tonight I ask you to pass legislation to prohibit the most egregious abuses of medical research [...] creating human-animal hybrids

Bush wants to be the last of his species?

Re:huh? (3, Funny)

hkgroove (791170) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619814)

No, Bush wants to make sure Spender and his scientists stay focused on alien-human hybrids.

But we need to know (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14619877)

A human embryo does not have a brain. Nor does it have a functional nervous system. Therefore it can neither think nor feel. Therefore, experimentation on them involves no suffering or loss of freedom (for the embryo).

An embryo is not a person, and only qualifies as 'human' by virtue of the DNA it contains. So, please tell me, why is this morally wrong?

If it is because this aspect of science should remain under God's jurisdiction, then I must insist that God has harmed us by not disclosing this information. We need it to fight the diseases which God allows to plague us, and to heal injuries that God allows to happen to us. This information qualifies as critical, need-to-know information, and if God won't give it to us, then we have no choice but to figure it out for ourselves.

Besides, "Thou shalt not use embryos in scientific experiments" isn't in the Bible anywhere. I read it cover to cover. It's not there.

So, again I ask, why is this *morally* wrong?

Re:But we need to know (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14619983)

Nice attempt at thread highjacking.

Re:But we need to know (4, Insightful)

PFI_Optix (936301) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620036)

An embryo is not a person...

Yes it is.

That's the problem with opinions. Everyone's got one, and yours is no better than anyone else's. "Person" is a subjective term, and it would seem Bush believes that an embryo qualifies as a person and has rights.

The real issue is the definition of "person". (2, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620051)

And when/if the rights of one person supercede the rights of another person.

no, no, no (5, Funny)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620136)

Tonight I ask you to pass legislation to prohibit the most egregious abuses of medical research [...] creating human-animal hybrids

he's only worried about EGREGIOUS abuses of human-animal hybrids, and i believe an egregious is half egret, half religious person (egre-gious)

so i support the president's narrow, case-specifc take on this issue, it makes sense, because we don't want a bible-thumping skinny bird strutting around now do we?

As Cartman would say... (5, Funny)

Kesch (943326) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619692)

Mr. Bush, you're breaking my balls here. You're breaking my balls...

Slashdot = Terrorism (-1, Troll)

dada21 (163177) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619694)

Maybe the Union of the State should look the slashdot effect and how it may be considered terrorism.

Bush Promoting Science? Come On! (5, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619699)

Ok, here's one from kindergarten: Actions speak louder than words.

Ok, I'm fairly certain that I can find a lot of evidence revealing how many leaders of academia actually feel about George W. Bush. And there's a lot of documentation on his actual actions regarding science and research in the nation.

Harvard's Howard Gardner [csicop.org] calls Bush's science adviser a "prostitute." And we all remember the Scientists and Engineers for Change [commondreams.org] organization compromised of sixty Nobel scientists and Tech Leaders. I'll let you guess out their stance on bush. Don't forget their open letter [scientists...change.org] to the American people stating, " President Bush and his administration are compromising our future."

Remember, he only said he supports it. Let's see some actual actions to follow that up.

And if you have time to read up on Bush's actions in the science community, take a look at the Politics and Science in the Bush Administration [house.gov] . I find it hilarious that anyone could expect me to swallow Bush's "scientific research and technology proposals" when his actions are no more proposals than death knells.

Indeed, it seems the hardest issue regarding science that Bush is struggling with is how to silence it [usatoday.com] .

Re:Bush Promoting Science? Come On! (-1, Troll)

SilverspurG (844751) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619748)

Do not dare to question the actions nor the motives of the current government administration, or indeed any government administration.

The AC trolls will employ all tactics of ridicule to jump all over you. Lest you become a target, do not pursue your course of action.

For a classic demonstration, see my comments on the the EFF's latest action [slashdot.org] . This is not just a special case. This is the kind of resistance which I have received for years.

Thank people like D-side, CryptoCat (aka TenBaseT), and siglite on the Undernet IRC network. These people are self-important, self-secure, and they will stop at nothing to attack their opposition using any means possible.

Enjoy.

Zuh?! (0, Offtopic)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619808)

Do not dare to question the actions nor the motives of the current government administration, or indeed any government administration.
Oh, I can and I will. I don't care how much I'm flamed. Flame me all you want ... anyone who can't listen to criticisms from the American people doesn't deserve to serve the American people.
For a classic demonstration, see my comments on the the EFF's latest action. This is not just a special case. This is the kind of resistance which I have received for years.
I'm confused, was I just asked to join an underground movement to overthrow the U.S. government?

Re:Zuh?! (-1, Offtopic)

SilverspurG (844751) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619897)

There is no underground movement to overthrow them. There is only an above-ground movement to continually keep them in their place by asking them upon what authority or justification they continue to exercise their abuse of power.

I can't expect you to understand. With only 227 comments to your name you are a new-comer to this line of thought. Better for you to give up now than endure the targeted harassment which will come your way.

Hahaha, you underestimate me! (5, Funny)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620009)

My friend, I was in the food service industry for over four years of my young adult life. It has been ingrained into me to be able to tolerate some of the worst forms of human communication.

To those who think they break me through mere text, I welcome their assault. To those who have a glass of merlot and a full plate of prime rib to throw into my chest ... well, I'd rather not go through with that again ...

Oh, Democrats (4, Insightful)

Zilverfire (819134) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619700)

I think my favorite part of the entire speech was when Bush was discussing social security and mentioned how legislation for it had not been passed in congress last year, and the entire side of Democrats stood up and applauded.

Re:Oh, Democrats, oh the humanity... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14619831)

I heard the applause too! It felt like a great disturbance in my retirement plan, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

Re:Oh, Democrats (2, Insightful)

operagost (62405) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619872)

They applauded because congressmen have their own retirement plans, and do not contribute to nor receive entitlements from Social Security. The rest of us, however, will have to contend with its demise.

Re:Oh, Democrats (5, Insightful)

lilmouse (310335) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620142)

<sigh>

They applauded because Bush's proposals to "fix" social security were terrible and no one wanted them except the investement firms and big business who would get to play with all the money. They applauded because they actually managed to stop some small part of the Bush agenda (albiet a small part). I'm surprised they didn't all get arrested for Disturbing the Peace (or whatever it is they use these days to remove disruptive elements).

--LWM

Re:Oh, Democrats (1)

Ironsides (739422) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619902)

That put a smile on everyones face. Democrat and Republican alike. It looked to me like Bush even started to laugh at that.

They want amateur investors, so they can steal. (3, Insightful)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620047)

Most people don't realize that those who back Bush have exactly zero interest in Social Security.

The "Social Security" plans are designed to get amateur stock investors into the stock market, where the professionals, who back the plan, can take the amateur's money.

Newsflash - The US is pulling out of Iraq! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14619701)

See the official press release here .

This guy just makes me cringe. (1, Insightful)

FatSean (18753) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619705)

I usually watch the Address, but I skipped last night. Did he invent any new words?

I think that last bit was just pandering to the far-right religious wack-jobs. They got him into office, and he's been neglecting their hot issues:
- preventing gays from mayying and ruining the institution of marriage (now >50% divorce rate!)
- Keeping Freedom safe from Terrorists

Re:This guy just makes me cringe. (2, Insightful)

Soporific (595477) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619788)

Yeah, you'd think if they were so pro marriage that they would ban divorces...

~S

Re:This guy just makes me cringe. (1)

dclydew (14163) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619913)

Don't give them any more ideas!!

Anything I want is law; what you want is terrorism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14620110)

Don't talk about ideas! He might ban them.

Why not just do like he originally proposed ... (1, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619706)

Why not just do like Bush's original science proposal, and send him to Mars. Maybe the WMDs are hidden there - there's no sign of them on this planet ...

Bush against hybrids (4, Funny)

Lev13than (581686) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619721)

Tonight I ask you to pass legislation to prohibit... creating human-animal hybrids

I suspect that Bush is pissed because this all hits just a little too close to home [boomersfunnies.com] .

Thank you Mr. President. (5, Funny)

dr_dank (472072) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619722)

creating human-animal hybrids

Wiretaps, schwiretaps, HE'S GOING TO BAN FURRIES.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Re:Thank you Mr. President. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14620002)

Wiretaps, schwiretaps, HE'S GOING TO BAN FURRIES.


Chewbacca will be very unhappy...

Re:Thank you Mr. President. (1)

butterwise (862336) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620129)

Think how this poor mouse [kidzworld.com] must feel...

intelligent design? (1)

tuxette (731067) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619729)

creating human-animal hybrids

Or maybe not...?

Now there is a troll... (4, Insightful)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619732)

Its not an article about the state of the union... its straight out poking fun of it. Granted, I know that slashdot is biased (far from), but don't be surprised to see pudge (editor and slashdot code guy) come in and start fighting back.

Me? I won't claim a side, just put on my asbestos suit and enjoy my charred marshmallow.

Re:Now there is a troll... (1)

Kesch (943326) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619805)

Damn, I forgot my marshmellows. Someone should have reminded me there would be politics on /. today.

Re:Now there is a troll... (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620084)

. . .its straight out poking fun of it.

Isn't that what a SOTU Address is for?

KFG

Re:Now there is a troll... (2, Insightful)

drgonzo59 (747139) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620149)

Good point. This is more of a "let's make fun of Bush" thread. Everyone likes to bash Bush even if they are contradicting among each other: "Like He's sooo stupid and stuff! He doesn't know what his is doing" but at the same time "He is really shrewd and evil and colluded with all these companies to enslave the American peole" etc...etc.

Why isn't anyone mentioning his call to research alternative forms of energy along the infamous "let's ban stem cell research". I thought that was a pretty good point. But of course it is easy to see everything in black and white, that is how the American society works -- everyone has to be in a certain category. "white male christian racist pro-life-but-also-for-capital-punishment republican", "white atheist pro-choice-but-also-for-peace liberal", "black angry racist criminal", or "immigrant stupid naive terrorist". Everyone is stereotyped into some category and no matter what they say or do, they will be judged first based on that category.

Same goes for heads of state. If he is a republican than no matter what he says the democarts will hate him. If he is a democrat all the republicans will hate his guts: "OMG Clinton got a blow-job in the office!!!" but they have no problem with Bush killing Iraqis for oil, like that's not immoral.

By now if you are still reading you are probably asking yourself, "Wtf? Who's side side is this guy on, he bashes Bush-haters but he also critisizes Bush...Huh?" If you ask yourself this question read the second paragraph again...

Eh? Is that criminal still working? (2, Insightful)

TheNoxx (412624) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619735)

You mean nobody's doing their job to prosecute him yet for the illegal wiretaps, let alone all the rampant corruption and cronyism? Fuck this, wake me up when someone does some real good work in DC...

Re:Eh? Is that criminal still working? (-1, Flamebait)

SilverspurG (844751) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619973)

I advise you strongly to abort your comments criticizing the government in any form, in any forum.

Ridicule is the psychological weapon of the supporters of unchecked authority. If they do not find you here on Slashdot they will identify you indirectly in society--in public, at pubs, at your job, in any social forum which you find.

Do yourself a favor. Give in to the unquestionable authority of those in power. They know what is best for you. You will only earn yourself a life of misery should you ever manage to make a real argument.

Re:Eh? Is that criminal still working? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14620131)

Okay, I really want to hear your opinion on these illegal wiretaps.

From what I understand, they are only monitoring phone calls that come in from overseas and are from KNOWN parties of interest. The governement CAN NOT tap calls made from the US to other countries (not totally clear on this) or calls that remain within the US without a court order.

Can you clarify any of these or are you trying to feed me the slippery slope argument? Thanks!

So? What about Mars? (4, Interesting)

Sebastopol (189276) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619738)

Yeah, and Bush also wants to go to Mars.

Just cause he says it, doesn't mean it'll happen.

Too many Republicans oppose is extremist views on science. And those that don't will someday get a disease that has a potential cure in hybrid/cloning studies, and will then oppose the agenda.

Not panicked, yet.

This won't be the first warning sign. Once RvW starts to bend, THEN it is time to panic.

Re:So? What about Mars? (1)

Cro Magnon (467622) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619895)

I wish Bush had said something about going to Mars in this speech. The applause on that would have been deafening!

I Don't Believe The Article At All (5, Funny)

Wandering Wombat (531833) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619762)

The President said "egregious"? I don't buy it...

The proper response is (1)

hkgroove (791170) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619864)

Inconceivable!

Re:The proper response is (3, Funny)

Wandering Wombat (531833) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619935)

You keep using that word... I do not think it means what you think it means.

Re:I Don't Believe The Article At All (0, Troll)

Surt (22457) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620041)

Well he did. But he pronounced it wrong.

I'm not passing judgement... (3, Insightful)

stubear (130454) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619769)

...but I find it rather hypocritical when many slashbots trash corporations for creating genetically modified foods yet they see absolutely no problem creating genetically modified people. Either genetic modification is OK or it isn't, do we really need decisions made on the basis of how much you hate someone?

Re:I'm not passing judgement... (1)

OwnedByTwoCats (124103) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619849)

What about creating genetically-modified animals, inserting human genes into them. So we can learn about and understand genetic diseases, and discover treatments for them.

Bush's proposed ban on human-animal hybrids would ban this research.

Re:I'm not passing judgement... (1)

zerus (108592) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620015)

Any diabetic should be in favor of human/animal hybrids, look where their insulin is made.

Re:I'm not passing judgement... (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620059)

Yep, like the human ear on a rat research that eventually might lead to a way to grow body parts for burn victims. Or the research that injects human insulin genes into pigs so they produce and urinate human insulin for diabetics, etc. Promoting oversight, review and even contemplation is good, outright banning before we even fully understand the science is just reactionary superstition ala the ludites.

Re:I'm not passing judgement... (4, Informative)

raygundan (16760) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619875)

If you have examples of the same people making both arguments, you have a point. Otherwise, just chalk it up to the fact that a bazillion people post here, and it's likely there are a lot of people on both sides of the issue. "Slashdot" is not a guy with two sets of opinions that contradict, it's a lot of people with their own opinions in one place.

I'm not opposed to GM anything. I do, however, wish we'd spend a little more time testing things out before deploying them on a large scale, and a little less time suing farmers whose crops accidentally cross-pollinated with a patented GM species next door.

I'm guilty. (1)

IAAP (937607) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620042)

"Slashdot" is not a guy with two sets of opinions that contradict, it's a lot of people with their own opinions in one place.

I'm against GM food but I'm all for genetically modifying humnity. The human race is so pathetic that we need to improve ourselves anyway we can.

And, I'd be more than happy to volunteer to be the poster boy for the reasons to GM humans.

Re:I'm guilty. (5, Funny)

CosmeticLobotamy (155360) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620078)

I'm all for genetically modifying humnity. The human race is so pathetic that we need to improve ourselves anyway we can.

That's exactly how I feel about GM corn. Fucking stupid corn.

Re:I'm not passing judgement... (3, Informative)

Arandir (19206) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619882)

This is slashdot. Why we didn't invent the double standard, we did manage to patent it!

Let me clue you in. Microsoft, Corporations and Bush are Evil(tm). Keep that simple fact in mind and you will be able to easily understand the apparent contradictions in the Slashdot psyche. Genetically altered foods are bad because Evil(tm) Agribusiness Corporations are behind it. Genetically altered humans are good because Evil(tm) Bush doesn't want them. See, it's simple!

Re:I'm not passing judgement... (1)

swid27 (869237) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619885)

It's also rather hypocritical to be opposed to "GM foods" when genetic modification is PRECISELY what we've been doing to our foodstuffs (albeit in a much less dramatic fashion) for millenia.

Not the point. (1)

FatSean (18753) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620100)

Garden varieties have been bred, but the breeders don't sue you if they find some of your heirloom tomatoes were polinated with their 'custom' breed. The GM douche-bags do. Their shit could pollute an entire country's selection of a species...and it's perfectly legal for them to demand payment. That's MY issue.

Besides, subverting the usual selection mechanisms, and breeding only a limited number of generations, and restricting interaction with the 'real world' means that many issues in these GM crops could go un-noticed. They could take years to become apparant...and by then...how hard will it be to start over with the 'original' strains? Hopefully someone will keep them going...as long as they don't get polluted by the 'copywritten' GM strains....and then the grower gets sued.

Re:I'm not passing judgement... (1)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620108)

Oh, no sir. You have it wrong. When it's done over the course of millenia, it's all natural, and that makes it okay.

Re:I'm not passing judgement... (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619979)

Show me an example. You know slashdot isn't a group that all thinks exactly alike. out of 100 slashdoters Im sure you could easyly find 10 that vocally detest modified foods and a completely diffrent 10 people that think genetic modification is ok.

So please give me some names and posts of people that are doing this so I can put them on my foes list.

Re:I'm not passing judgement... (1)

jeffasselin (566598) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620067)

Most people don't argue against GM food per se, but against its use in consumer products.

For what it's worth, I'm in favor of GM food and genetic modifications on animals and human beings.

Re:I'm not passing judgement... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14620081)

The use of genetically modified humans aren't starving people. It takes more than a gust of wind to spread genetically modified humans. Even if genetically modified humans were commonplace, it would be incredibly difficult for the rest of us to die out.

There are huge differences between genetically modified people and genetically modified crops. Just because the basic science is the same, it doesn't mean the ramifications are.

Bush = Chimera (-1, Troll)

Whammy666 (589169) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619770)

I'm all for banning human-animal cloning. Take Bush for example: Here's what happens when you try to merge a human with a chimpanzee. You get a Homo Nesciens chimera as president. Lord knows, we don't need any more of those.

Re:Bush = Chimera (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620006)

The truth in your argument reminds me of most of the rest of the anti-Busy retoric.

If you can give me a clear and concise argument of something Bush does bad, why he thinks it is good, and why you think it is bad please do so.

We can rant and rave all WE like... (0, Flamebait)

CyberLord Seven (525173) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619804)

...but half the population of the United States supports him.
I really don't care what he thinks or says, he has only three more years to FSCK things up. What scares me is that approximately half the voting public agrees with him and could get someone just like him, or worse, in office.
I don't see anything slowing the Religious Right. I thought they were a temporary fad back in the 1980s, but they are still here and growing more powerful. Just think about Intelligent Design and how far it got before it was slapped down.

Re:We can rant and rave all WE like... (0, Flamebait)

ral8158 (947954) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619981)

Just FWI, I'm a republican, and heavily right-wing, and the people I know don't vote for Bush because they support him. They vote for him because it's either him, or John Kerry (Or it was in the 2004 election). Let's face it, at least he's consistent. I don't think John's supporters even knew where he stood. He may be bad a spending money, but believe it or not, it could be a *lot* worse. If you think I'm wrong, when Hillary is in office because you voted for her, because you didn't want the republican alternative (whoever that is), you'd *better* not complain.

Re:We can rant and rave all WE like... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14620106)

I'm splitting my post into two parts. The first is a reasonable argument, targeted toward liberals. Since conservatives typically respond better to forceful non-sequiturs than logic, an answer for them is included as well.

Answer 1: Then just do us a favor and refrain from voting. You want to roll with the racists and fundies but not take responsibility for it, which is flip flopping of a much higher order than anything John Kerry ever did.

Answer 2: Die in Iraq, fundie!

Re:We can rant and rave all WE like... (1)

gmletzkojr (768460) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620018)

What scares me is that approximately half the voting public agrees with him and could get someone just like him, or worse, in office.

I don't think this is completely accurate. I would venture to say that at least some of those people who voted for him were scared more by the other Presidental candidate.
I don't mean to ask you directly who you voted for (if you did), but didn't you look at those 2 candidates in the last election, and wonder to yourself, "This is the best 2 people that we have to pick from?" Of all the people available in the United States that are eligible to become President, those two monkeys are the cream of the crop, that rose above everyone else??

I would venture to say that people that voted for Bush voted for the devil that they knew, instead of the one they didn't know.

One would hope... (3, Insightful)

sexyrexy (793497) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619810)

One would hope that Bush's statements on scientific advances prove that he is not anti-science, no more than pro-lifers are anti-women. It is silly (though convenient) to label someone with whom you disagree as evil - it doesn't make sense that any President would actively work to thwart something like scientific progress in general. It DOES make sense that a President would try to do what's best for the country, and that is where the disagreement lies.
 
  Rather than saying "I am for progress and Bush is against it because I am Good and he is Bad", try to understand why his position is what it is - you just might discover that there are intelligent arguments on all sides of the table.

Re:One would hope... (1, Interesting)

OwnedByTwoCats (124103) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619938)

Bush is anti-science.

Anti-abortionists are anti-women.

It doesn't make sense that a President would actively work to thwart something like scientific progress in general, but that is what the President and much of the Republican party have been about for the last 25 years.

I don't care why flat-earthers are flat-earthers. I know enough to know that they are in loonie-land. The same for the consuming-tobacco-doesn't-cause-cancer brigade. And the holocaust-revisionists. And the pi-equals-3-ists. And the creationists and IDists. They are all dedicated to opposing reality.

One gets tired of listening to the endless repetition of the same old lies.

Re:One would hope... (2, Funny)

Kesch (943326) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620101)

And the pi-equals-3-ists.

My computer truncates integers you insensitive clod.

Re:One would hope... (4, Insightful)

Whammy666 (589169) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619995)

It's well documented that Bush's anti-science stance is quite real. Bush has been critisized by virtually every scientific discipline for his interferrence with basic scientific research. Unlike those trained in the scientific method, Bush draws his conclusions first, then cherry picks or suppresses any research that supports/challenges his predrawn conclusions. Not only does this represent a poor understanding of the scientific method, it's any incredibly stupid way to form public policy.

Re:One would hope... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14620013)

"there are intelligent arguments on all sides of the table"

You must be new here.

Re:One would hope... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14620097)

One would hope that Bush's statements on scientific advances prove that he is not anti-science

It proves that he's a fucking idiot. Where am I supposed to get my insulin, once he's banned the human-bacteria hybrid that produces it [wikipedia.org] ? You'd think that if you're going to go stand up and stutter out a big speech you might have someone actually check it over to make sure it doesn't sound like you have absolutely no touch with reality.

Maybe if he listened more to some real scientists and less to the voices in his head, we might start to look at him as less "anti-science".

Human/Animal Hybrids (5, Insightful)

American AC in Paris (230456) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619811)

It bears mentioning in mind that virtually all of our nation's supply of insulin is generated by human-animal hybrids.

While I doubt that the President's intent is to stop the manufacture of human insulin, I can't help but notice that legislators are historically bad at crafting good legislation on complex scientific subjects. Here's hoping the whole human-animal hybrid thing has the legs of the "stop steroids in baseball" and "manned mission to Mars" schticks he's thrown out in past State of the Union addresses...

Re:Human/Animal Hybrids (2, Informative)

American AC in Paris (230456) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619936)

Picking my own nit: yeast is a fungus, not an animal. The broader point still stands.

Re:Human/Animal Hybrids (1)

cdburrus (640341) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620126)

Maybe he saw the furry hybrid on the last episode of Surface, got scared, and decided something needed to be done ;)

And Slashdot did become Fark (-1, Offtopic)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619821)

Mark your calendars, today Slashdot became Fark, but without the boobies, oh and the threads can be nested.

Re:And Slashdot did become Fark (1)

FerretFrottage (714136) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619963)

Where's the /. photoshop section?

The Rapture (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14619826)

For those in the room who *aren't* baptists or belong to some other "extreme" brand of Christianity, the Rapture cannot come too soon...

Re:The Rapture (1)

MetaPhyzx (212830) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620125)

Ummm. I am of Baptist upbringing, and I don't buy into that Rapture index stuff/mularkey. I'm pretty sure there's quite a few here that don't. You might wanna read my post history, and not generalize.

wha? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14619842)

"Tonight I ask you to pass legislation to prohibit the most egregious abuses"

Prohibit his parents from having any sex? I am afriad it is too late...

Not an ignorant position (4, Insightful)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619855)

Put aside your hatred of Bush and judge on the merits. No, I don't agree with the position but it is a defendable position ethically. And there is a lot there I can agree with.

A ban on the "buying, selling or patenting human embryos" should be fairly universally acceptable, especially the bit about no patenting here amongst the slashdot hordes.

A ban on "creating human-animal hybrids" is more debatable but we damn sure better get a line drawn somewhere and we better do it fast or science is going to race out ahead of ethics and make one hell of a mess for someone to clean up.

And that leaves his call for a ban on "human cloning in all its forms, creating or implanting embryos for experiments" which is where most of slashdot parts company. Fine, lets have it out in Congress, again so some boundraries can be drawn up. And you liberals had better actually pass a bill this time because if you leave it to the courts like you did with abortion you will really get burned because of the shift in the Supremes. So lets actually debate it and come to a political decision we might all be able to live with this time.

Personally I'd like to see medical science be able to use some super advanced cloning tech to make me new spare parts from my own DNA so I wouldn't take immune supression drugs for life if I ever needed a transplant. But I don't really like the thought of creating and killing millions/billions of things that are/maybe/might be/could have been/sorta/etc humans to get there. I suspect a lot of folks are caught in that halfway position.

Re:Not an ignorant position (1)

Ironsides (739422) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619988)

Personally I'd like to see medical science be able to use some super advanced cloning tech to make me new spare parts from my own DNA so I wouldn't take immune supression drugs for life if I ever needed a transplant. But I don't really like the thought of creating and killing millions/billions of things that are/maybe/might be/could have been/sorta/etc humans to get there. I suspect a lot of folks are caught in that halfway position.

Easy solution. Clone animals (which Bush is not calling for a ban on), figure out how to produce only one organ during the cloning process. Once you have that, then it should be relatively easy to port it to humans. BTW, the main problem I fear of hapening with cloning currently is that people will treat fully sentient clones as living organ banks. I know we are a bit far from that right now, but that's what I see as one of the possible abuses (as percieved by me) that will come up.

Re:Not an ignorant position (1)

Prince Vegeta SSJ4 (718736) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620032)

Ban, Schman, i want my monkeyman

-Bart Simpson

Re:Not an ignorant position (2, Interesting)

SewersOfRivendell (646620) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620063)

And you liberals had better actually pass a bill this time because if you leave it to the courts like you did with abortion you will really get burned because of the shift in the Supremes. So lets actually debate it and come to a political decision we might all be able to live with this time.

Preparing for some doomsday scenario involving an invasion of giant cloned mice-men is hardly at the top of the list of liberal legislative priorities.

The 'liberals'/pre-1980 moderates already have their hands full attempting to save the remains of the Consitution from the wreckage of the rabid religious fundies of the Shrub dynasty, not to mention staving off a shrill and increasingly hostile-to-common-sense corporate consolidated media borg.

So, since you care so much about it, and are oh-so-medically-ethical, maybe you'd like to take charge of the effort to define that particular line. How about it?

Re:Not an ignorant position (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14620087)

Put aside your hatred of Bush and judge on the merits. No, I don't agree with the position but it is a defendable position ethically. And there is a lot there I can agree with.

Come on Charlie Brown, put aside your hatred of Lucy and judge on the merits. This time she's not going to pull the football away.

Ethics of genetics (5, Interesting)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619890)

Maybe you guys disagree with Bush's proposal. But HOW would you change it? What would you remove?

Is it valid to sell or buy a human embryo? To clone embryos? To make human-animal hybrids?

As with all controversial issues, it's not possible to please everybody. So I'd like to ask slashdot what parts they agree and disagree with, and why.

once upon a time (5, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619908)

china enjoyed a heyday of invention: paper, fireworks, pasta, etc., while europe languished

later, before columbus, a chinese explorer, chen ho, was said to have discovered america... chinese officials burned his boats when he got back. were it not for this governmental backwardness, perhaps i would not be living in new york city with it's famous chinatown, perhaps i would be living in new szechuan city with it's famous europetown

after that ignomity, china continued to languish while europeans made massive strides in exploration and scientific discovery and invention, culminating in china's humiliation in the 1800s at the hands of european powers (the opium wars and the concession of hong kong, for example)

so obviously, with such backwards, luddite, anti-scientific thinking now on the lips of the west's most powerful leader, it seems we have a signal that it is china's turn once again (along with korea and japan) to pick up the reigns and lead humanity in the next era of scientific discovery and space exploration, while the west drowns itself in religious fundamentalist simplemindedness

maybe some centuries/ decades from now, the west will be humiliated by the east's wealth and knowledge, and be encouraged to pick up the reigns again, but for now, i see a changing of the guard in the world today in terms of scientific leadership and discovery

the east is beginnig to eclipse the west

and, as an american, that such idiocy and ignorance should be on the us president's lips, i am only deeply ashamed

Re:once upon a time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14619998)

Hear Hear. Hopefully we can deviate from this path, but my guess is not. We will become a service based economy with a service based economy's income. Which is far from good.

Tough debate question for the scientific crowd. (4, Insightful)

ErichTheRed (39327) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619920)

Don't forget that for every scientific, ones and zeros, logical, "scientific truth is the only answer" person out there, there's several thousand religious people who don't like science. How so many people can believe in something that has no proof, no explanation and no evidence baffles me, but they're welcome to their opinion. Until I'm proven wrong, however, I'm sticking with the evidence to the contrary.

No matter what you believe, things have really turned against the scientific community lately. The religious people out there now have enough people in power to push what they want through for quite some time to come. I guarantee it's not going to be the US who finishes solving the stem cell puzzle. Putting another conservative judge on the supreme court didn't help either.

On the other hand, there's this. Every time I get mad at people and wish they'd listen to reason, I remember what the communist states did to suppress religion, and how it didn't work. Replacing someone's core beliefs with unquestioning loyalty to the state is obviously the wrong way to go forward. You need an open society to prevent collapse. However, how do you move society forward while letting those who hold progress back believe what they want?

Restrict breeding. (1)

FatSean (18753) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620030)

Heh. It'll work. Seems like the poor and hyper-religious peoples love to crap out babies. The current tax code encourages this. What future jobs are there for people who dismiss any science they can't comprehend with a 12th-grade or lower education? Not many I would say.

So we encourage the most ignorant and dependent segment of our society to breed. Why would that be? Because children indoctrinated at birth to a world-view have a very tough time dislodging that world-view.
It's good for religion, it's good for nationalism. It's good for blind following.

I guess I don't have a real answer for you. I guess we scientific types will have to outperform the religious peoples. They have advantage in numbers with their breeding practices, but we can still favor quality over quantity.

I'm overdosed on "Bush is an idiot" jokes. (0, Offtopic)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619949)

I will be very very glad when someone else is elected, so I don't have to hear all those "Bush is an idiot" jokes. It's even worse outside the U.S., where there aren't any Republican fundamentalists, so almost everybody makes "Bush is an idiot" jokes.

Before, Saddam got Iraq oil profits and paid part to kill Iraqis. Now a few Americans get Iraq oil profits, and American citizens pay to kill Iraqis. Improvement?

Re:I'm overdosed on "Bush is an idiot" jokes. (1)

IAAP (937607) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620115)

I will be very very glad when someone else is elected, so I don't have to hear all those "Bush is an idiot" jokes.

Just see what happens if Hillary Clinton is elected President. Then we'll have to put up with a least 4 years of "Bill being the first lady" jokes! They were bad enough when he was Pres, but four more years! - Uugh!

Bush says it - Bad! Greenpeace says it - Good! (1, Insightful)

RexRhino (769423) | more than 8 years ago | (#14619985)

I mean, if you look at the far-right Christian view of genetic engineering and biological science... and you look at the far-left enviornmentalist view of genetic engineering and biological science... they are nearly identical. So why do the far-left and the far-right stop the pretending and just admit they are the same thing? All of you people crying about GWB on Slashdot should be quiet, because you know if Greenpeace said the same thing you would be agreeing 100%!

Unfortunatly for those of us who aren't ludites about genetic engineering and such, there is no powerful politcal force to turn to.

Damn. (1)

Perseid (660451) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620034)

And I was so looking forward to having my very own cat-woman.

NOoooo! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14620049)

My dreams of my own harem of catgirls, ruined!

*sob*

"creating human-animal hybrids..." Huh? (0, Troll)

neutralstone (121350) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620060)

... but humans *are* animals.

rough subject (3, Insightful)

apocalypse76 (254086) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620062)

I think what Bush was trying to say is there's a fine line between doing genetic research that's good for society. And doing genetic research that's destructive to society because it has a possibilty of cheapening life.

Think about the implications of both scenarios for a min. In one way we find amazing life saving drugs, and in another we become slaves because life doesn't matter anymore. Yes, that is extreme in both ways but look at the way most people here are reacting to his speech.

Problem is I don't trust all scientists enough to let them do unlimited research. I also don't trust congress to lay down sane laws that govern the science research. Mainly because who knows what is right or wrong in this situation? The science behind genetics is still relatively new. It should not be strictly goverened by heavy handed laws that are laid out without some serious considerations of thier implications.

Wrong question is asked once again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14620116)

Genetic research (as most subjects that arise) shouldn't even be in the domain of the federal government. The government shouldn't criminalize the activity, nor should it fund it. When you use tax dollars to fund a controversial topic such as this, you are forcing some people to pay for an activity they don't agree with. (Genetic research doesn't seem immoral to me, but forcing others to fund it for me sure does!)

The answer? Don't criminalize it, but don't fund it. Let the free market take over; if there's enough demand for this sort of research (and oh boy is there), it will happen one way or another.

All to often, government becomes the first source we turn to for fixing our problems. Look for other methods before we ask the guns of government to force others to do it our way.

Extremist? (-1, Flamebait)

the computer guy nex (916959) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620119)

"Too many Republicans oppose is extremist views on science"

Most of the population, let alone Republicans, support his views on science. Opposing human cloning, selling of human embreyos, and creation of human/animal hybrids is not extreme.

This was one of Bush's best speaches of the last year, radical liberals are just nit picking now.

Slashdot or San Francisco? (1, Insightful)

thebra (707939) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620127)

Slashdot is so far to the left. What does this have to do with anything? Science? I think not...

Wha? (2, Interesting)

Rooked_One (591287) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620128)

creating or implanting embryos for experiments

This just makes me wonder how many people vote for the right, but then get embryo transplants when they can't have a kid. I mean, that IS an experiement, becuase you do not know if it will work. *sigh* (I voted nader or something like that ;) )

Your mission is clear... (1)

DeafByBeheading (881815) | more than 8 years ago | (#14620148)

For some reason, this reminds me of the Simpsons' military school graduation speech:
The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea.
They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall
mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by
small robots. And as you go forth today remember always your duty is
clear: To build and maintain those robots. Thank you.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?