Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: Michael J Fox Says Republicans Want Him to Die!

  1. #1

    Michael J Fox Says Republicans Want Him to Die!

    Not really.

    What he ACTUALLY is saying, in a round of new ads in Maryland and Missou is that Democrats support Abortion/Stem Cell Research, and hence want to cure him.

    Republicans are against Abortion/Stem Cell Research, and want him to die (along with people with hundred of other afflictions). In fact, reports say (since it hasn't aired in VA yet) that MJF stopped taking his meds....to really show his point.

    Sadly, the facts don't seem to bear him out. Ironicly, in Maryland, Ben Carden (the Dem) actually voted AGAINST Stem-Cell Research......because it was for Bone Marrow and Cord Blood-based Stem Cell work (the ones already being used, apparently showing results, and the one getting almost all the private sector investment (see link)). Steele, the Repub is reportedly for BOTH non-Embryonic-related types, but not for the one that requires the destruction of a human fetus.

    This is interesting, especially in light on mine and Queens discussion recently of the Republican ad campaign saying Democrats are weak on Terror (i.e. Democrats will kill you).

    Interesting article on the subject on this Conservative Think-Tank's website:

    [url]http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/hl888.cfm[/url]

    The source for almost all of this was the Righty-right Radio chatter of Mark Levin, whom I listened to on the way home this evening. Seemed an interesting topic for debate here.
    Last edited by Warfish; 10-24-2006 at 07:47 PM.

  2. #2
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,393
    As with most debates with libs, it's an intentional campaign of disinformation. Most people on the right have a problem with the [b]government funding[/b] of embryonic stem cells. Private industry can fund what they want. There are other types of stem cells (cord blood, adult, etc) that don't require human fetuses and scientifically, these other cells are much more promising.

    This thing with michael j. fox is a perfect example of Ann Coulters point: lib's will use spokespeople that they think are untouchable. God forbid you disagree with fox or sheeman or the jersey girl 9-11 widows, even if they get as nasty and guttoral as a human being can, then you are attacked by the media.

    We all know Halliburton is a greedy corporate entity with no morals. If human embryonic stems cells held such potential for making so much profit, they would have created ninja death squads to rip the fetuses right out of unsuspecting mothers.

    Also (in the spirit of my moreon.org bretheren) I hear that killing human fetuses causes greenhouse gases and global warming.

  3. #3
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=Spirit of Weeb]
    This thing with michael j. fox is a perfect example of Ann Coulters point: lib's will use spokespeople that they think are untouchable. God forbid you disagree with fox or sheeman or the jersey girl 9-11 widows, even if they get as nasty and guttoral as a human being can, then you are attacked by the media.

    [/QUOTE]

    I guess the rats have used up all the victims in America for their campaigns of fear and now need to go to Canada to find more....

  4. #4
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,393
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]I guess the rats have used up all the victims in America for their campaigns of fear and now need to go to Canada to find more....[/QUOTE]

    I think fox became an American citizen. That reminds me: doesn't Canada have a universal health care system? The left is always saying how much better that is than our greedy capitalist system. So why didn't he take advantage of that? I'm sure he'd be cured by now.

    Maybe because Bush is President and "there are no American checks and balances", he somehow skirted international law and vetoed stem cell research in Canada and took away their free health care.

  5. #5
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    6,888
    [QUOTE=Spirit of Weeb]I think fox became an American citizen. That reminds me: doesn't Canada have a universal health care system? The left is always saying how much better that is than our greedy capitalist system. So why didn't he take advantage of that? I'm sure he'd be cured by now.

    Maybe because Bush is President and "there are no American checks and balances", he somehow skirted international law and vetoed stem cell research in Canada and took away their free health care.[/QUOTE]


    You are correct my man. Canada does have a Universal health care system. Anyone at anytime can walk into a hospital and receive medical attention. It is a great system, however it needs some serious overhauling because of the abuse.

    I for one am all for people who need medical attention receiving it, but I also think that is what emergency care is for. I believe if you want a family doctor, one should have to pay for those services, which would drastically cut down the cost of health care (if family doctors could charge a yearly fee, this would be there income. $2500 per family and you care for 200 families is alot of money for doctors to earn, and only works out to be $210 per month).

    By the way, I don't think MJF needs our universal health care...I think he can afford his treatments up in Hollywood...

  6. #6
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ft Lauderdale by way of New York
    Posts
    13,208
    [QUOTE=Warfish]Michael J Fox Says Republicans Want Him to Die! [/QUOTE]

    I guess they watched Spin City.

    I really haven't read up to much on this but does anyone get hurt or killed during Stem Cell Research? If not then what the **** is the big deal?
    Last edited by New York Mick; 10-24-2006 at 10:28 PM.

  7. #7
    Embryonic stem cell research has nothing to do with abortion. Those embryos get thrown out in the garbage. I heard that Rush said that Michael J. Fox was not sincere in his commercials and he was acting to make his condition worse.

    Warfish you should not equate stem cell research with abortion. They are 2 seperate issues. Also what does this have to do with terror adds by Republicans?

  8. #8
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan]Also what does this have to do with terror adds by Republicans?[/QUOTE]

    Should be pretty clear my friend. I give you more credit that that. Both ads work off fear. Fear of Terror. Fear of Diseases uncured.

  9. #9
    flushingjet
    Guest
    On top of it all, this is a supposedly "good" Hollywood guy (you know, the kind that gives big bucks to Kerry et al but doesnt call the GOP nazis)

    but hes not beyond manipsinating us-he's went off his meds before to exaggerate a public display of his condition to tug at ones heart and purse strings

    to quote another fraud, "he preyed on our fears"!

    like any Dem MD or one who plays one on TV he
    took the hypocritic oath

    emotions....not fact....thats the lib way

    but hey...if a billion dead babies are a stepping stone to a cure for one
    mans affliction , thats a small price to pay, right

  10. #10
    [QUOTE=Warfish]Should be pretty clear my friend. I give you more credit that that. Both ads work off fear. Fear of Terror. Fear of Diseases uncured.[/QUOTE]
    Ok I guess that is one way to look at it. I look at it not as a function of fear but of hope. Stem cell research gives hope to people with chronic illnesses whose lives many times are very bleak. I know some people in this situation and trust me when I say that stem cell research is the only hope they have that they can actually on day might have a better quality of life.

    To have that hope taken away by political hijinks is very painful. Like I said embryonic stem cell research has nothing to do with abortion. These are excess embryos from fertility clinics that are being thrown in the garbage. Unless you are ideologically opposed to in vitro fertilization there is no reason to be opposed to embryonic stem cell research.

    I believe that leaders in the evangelical movement have placed fear in their communities by talk of cloning and embryos being fertilized and just destroyed. Warfish this is where your fear analogy applies - the fear this movement has placed by misinforming.

    The poltician that panders to these fears instead of educating as to what the research is all about absolutely deserve to be defeated.

  11. #11
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    6,888
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan]Embryonic stem cell research has nothing to do with abortion. Those embryos get thrown out in the garbage. I heard that Rush said that Michael J. Fox was not sincere in his commercials and he was acting to make his condition worse.

    Warfish you should not equate stem cell research with abortion. They are 2 seperate issues. Also what does this have to do with terror adds by Republicans?[/QUOTE]


    Check some past posts. We talked about this one. It is an ethical issue...

  12. #12
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan]Ok I guess that is one way to look at it. I look at it not as a function of fear but of hope. Stem cell research gives hope to people with chronic illnesses whose lives many times are very bleak. I know some people in this situation and trust me when I say that stem cell research is the only hope they have that they can actually on day might have a better quality of life.

    To have that hope taken away by political hijinks is very painful. Like I said embryonic stem cell research has nothing to do with abortion. These are excess embryos from fertility clinics that are being thrown in the garbage. Unless you are ideologically opposed to in vitro fertilization there is no reason to be opposed to embryonic stem cell research.

    I believe that leaders in the evangelical movement have placed fear in their communities by talk of cloning and embryos being fertilized and just destroyed. Warfish this is where your fear analogy applies - the fear this movement has placed by misinforming.

    The poltician that panders to these fears instead of educating as to what the research is all about absolutely deserve to be defeated.[/QUOTE]

    Personally, I have no issue with Embryonic Stem-Cell Research funded privately. I have no problem with the use of to-be-discarded embryo's from fertillity clinics either. Remember my friend, when it comes to issues of so-called "morallity", I tend to be a Libertarian LEFTIST, not really a Conservative. While I dislike abortion quite a bit, I would not outlaw it completely, I would simply set time limits on when (how far along) it could be done, and try to find an appropriate middle-ground compromise.

    But on THSI issue, the issue of misleading ads and going off-meds to instill fear of electing one side, I do have an issue or two.

    --First, as stated, Embryonic stem-cell research is the least productive and least safe method of the three types currently available. Both Bone Marrow and Cord-Blood are viewed to be better bets long term, hence why the private sector is deeply funding them, but not Embryonic. To say only Embryonic Stem-Cell research "can give the sick hope" is simply a false and mis-informed statement. Both Marrow and Cord Blood are the true hopes for our sick.

    --Second, when it comes to Govt. funding, if the issue at hard is morally debatable (and lets agree, Embryonic IS debated right now morally, the Left likes it, the Right doesn't. A 50/50-type split is definitely a debated issue). However, the other two types are NOT debated, as they have no moral overtones, limited (or no) dangers to the doner or concerns whatsoever AND are safer and more productive. In such a case, the Govt funding (The issue here) should obviously be spent on the non-debated, more-productive more-proven types of research.

    --Third, plain old dishonesty. In MD, Ben Carden (teh incumbent) voted against Govt. Funding of Cord-Blood/Marrow Stem-Cell Research, because it did not include funding for Embryonic. Voted AGAINST. The Republican, Steele, is for both Marrow and Cord-Blood funding. Yet this ad clearly tries to say that Steele is against all funding of stem-cell research, while Carden will fund it all. It is patently dishonest.

    As I said, this ad tries to put fear into voters, fear that Steele wioll vote against ALL stem-cell research (not just the morally debated Embryonic) and worse, that Steele doesn't care about sick people at all. It also glosses over Cardens no-vote on research funding, and tries to make him out to be a savior because he favors the most dangerous, most unproven and most morally debates type of research.

    And my friend, if you don't think Abortion and Abortion rights are part of this issue, you are not nearly as smart as I give you credit. While it may not be clear and in the open, the desire of the Left to protect all Abortion rights is intrinsic to the core of the issue here, the use of Embryo's as property, and not as people. I won't get into that debate now (we have enough here already), but trust me, it IS part of the Lefts and Rights motivations on this issue as well.

  13. #13
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,934
    [QUOTE=Warfish]As I said, this ad tries to put fear into voters.[/QUOTE]


    I know. Its almost as bad as that idiotic wolf ad from the last election.

  14. #14
    [QUOTE=Warfish]Personally, I have no issue with Embryonic Stem-Cell Research funded privately. I have no problem with the use of to-be-discarded embryo's from fertillity clinics either. Remember my friend, when it comes to issues of so-called "morallity", I tend to be a Libertarian LEFTIST, not really a Conservative. While I dislike abortion quite a bit, I would not outlaw it completely, I would simply set time limits on when (how far along) it could be done, and try to find an appropriate middle-ground compromise.

    But on THSI issue, the issue of misleading ads and going off-meds to instill fear of electing one side, I do have an issue or two.

    --First, as stated, Embryonic stem-cell research is the least productive and least safe method of the three types currently available. Both Bone Marrow and Cord-Blood are viewed to be better bets long term, hence why the private sector is deeply funding them, but not Embryonic. To say only Embryonic Stem-Cell research "can give the sick hope" is simply a false and mis-informed statement. Both Marrow and Cord Blood are the true hopes for our sick.

    --Second, when it comes to Govt. funding, if the issue at hard is morally debatable (and lets agree, Embryonic IS debated right now morally, the Left likes it, the Right doesn't. A 50/50-type split is definitely a debated issue). However, the other two types are NOT debated, as they have no moral overtones, limited (or no) dangers to the doner or concerns whatsoever AND are safer and more productive. In such a case, the Govt funding (The issue here) should obviously be spent on the non-debated, more-productive more-proven types of research.

    --Third, plain old dishonesty. In MD, Ben Carden (teh incumbent) voted against Govt. Funding of Cord-Blood/Marrow Stem-Cell Research, because it did not include funding for Embryonic. Voted AGAINST. The Republican, Steele, is for both Marrow and Cord-Blood funding. Yet this ad clearly tries to say that Steele is against all funding of stem-cell research, while Carden will fund it all. It is patently dishonest.

    As I said, this ad tries to put fear into voters, fear that Steele wioll vote against ALL stem-cell research (not just the morally debated Embryonic) and worse, that Steele doesn't care about sick people at all. It also glosses over Cardens no-vote on research funding, and tries to make him out to be a savior because he favors the most dangerous, most unproven and most morally debates type of research.

    And my friend, if you don't think Abortion and Abortion rights are part of this issue, you are not nearly as smart as I give you credit. While it may not be clear and in the open, the desire of the Left to protect all Abortion rights is intrinsic to the core of the issue here, the use of Embryo's as property, and not as people. I won't get into that debate now (we have enough here already), but trust me, it IS part of the Lefts and Rights motivations on this issue as well.[/QUOTE]
    First of all Warfish I want to say that it is a pleasure discussing an issue with you as you write thoughtfully and without any name calling or insults. I just want to start out by thanking you for that.

    On your points. I don't know that your first point is the generally agree upon scientific point of view. I would refer you to this article on FAQ about the different types of stem cell research. I will reprint just this answer but I would recommend reading the whole page.
    [QUOTE]Do adult stem cells have the same capability as embryonic stem cells?

    For many years, scientists have conducted studies to determine whether the stem cells in adult tissue have the same developmental capability as embryonic stem cells. The general consensus is that adult stem cells seem to be less versatile. Scientists think that embryonic stem cells have a much greater utility and potential than the adult stem cells, because embryonic stem cells may develop into virtually every type of cell in the human body. Adult stem cells, on the other hand, may only be able to develop into a limited number of cell types. Embryonic stem cells also continue to divide indefinitely when placed in culture, while this may not be the case for adult stem cells and this would reduce their capacity to form new cell types. Both adult and embryonic stem cell research should continue simultaneously as they are both critical to our understanding of the etiology, progression and treatment of disease. [/QUOTE]
    [URL]http://www.stemcellresearchfoundation.org/About/FAQ.htm#4[/URL]

    As to your second point I don't agree it is a 50-50 split on the issue. Many pro life conservatives such as Orin Hatch are strongly pro embryonic stem cell research. As a matter of fact the Republican Senate and House both passed measures supporting the research and Bush chose to use his first and only veto on the issue. I think in public opinion polls the vast majority are in favor of it.

    On your 3rd point I am not aware of the intiricasies of the debate in MD. You do make a good case that there was a misleading add and that is deplicable.

    Yes of course I know Abortion Rights are a big part of this issue, but I would argue that it shouldn't be and only is because the pro Life community has tied the two together in a way that is intellectually dishonest and I believe they do it to confuse. Seriously one has nothing to do with the other. How can you possibly say that it is protecting life to throw these embryos in the garbage but not use it for research? That after all is the argument they are making.
    Last edited by Queens Jet Fan; 10-25-2006 at 11:22 AM.

  15. #15
    Bewildered Beast
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    SF via Strong Island
    Posts
    30,722
    [QUOTE=New York Mick]I guess they watched Spin City.

    I really haven't read up to much on this but does anyone get hurt or killed during Stem Cell Research? If not then what the **** is the big deal?[/QUOTE]
    Depends on whether or not you are sleeping when they come for your brain stem.

  16. #16
    Well Mike, who the hell are you that your life is more important then anyone Else's life. No one wants to die, but it is part of the scheme of things!

  17. #17
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    6,888
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan]Yes of course I know Abortion Rights are a big part of this issue, but I would argue that it shouldn't be and only is because the pro Life community has tied the two together in a way that is intellectually dishonest and I believe they do it to confuse. Seriously one has nothing to do with the other. How can you possibly say that it is protecting life to throw these embryos in the garbage but not use it for research? That after all is the argument they are making.[/QUOTE]


    If you don't mind me jumping into this conversation, I believe I can offer a point to consider. When we look at this topic, you can use this logic in determining the reasonings to tie it to abortion.

    If the stem cells that are collected are used for good (research), but come from something bad (abortion), then the action is intrinsically bad (evil). This is an old argument, but still interesting to look at. If the only way to get this research is to abort a child, then ethically we have a dillemma...

    ON the other hand, the argument can come from this angle: What if the eggs come from in vitro fertalization? They need to have multiple eggs in order to succeed, so the excess eggs could be used for research purposes then just being disposed of. Noble, yes, but the opposing argument could come from two angles: If someone cannot get pregnant naturally without intervention, and the need to manipulate nature results in the possiblity of life (extra eggs) being destroyed, is this ethical?

    I am not arguing for either stance, just offering how it could be raised as ethical...My point for this is this:
    1) There appears to be growing evidence that adult stem cell research is more affective (my actuall knowledge is only limited to what I have read. I am NOT an expert in science). If that is the case, why are we trying to push for embryonic stem cell research? There seems to be the issue of cloning at hand....
    2) If they are using the platform that embryonic stem cell research is for the greater good, but lying about there real agenda, then we have an issue with the whole thing.

  18. #18
    Canada Steve I don't understand your points. The embryos come from in vitro clinics not from aborted fetuses so there is really no issue of the "good coming from something bad." Please read my response to Warfish above. The consensus view is that embryonic stem cells offer greater promise than adult stem cells." and both those avenues should be explored.

    You seem to have a problem with in vitro fertilization. I personally know many couples who sent this route and these are true miracle babies. Are you really saying that we should ban this just because all the embryos might not be used? Really it does seem like you are arguing this when you say, "If someone cannot get pregnant naturally without intervention, and the need to manipulate nature results in the possiblity of life (extra eggs) being destroyed, is this ethical?"

    I disagree with you here in the most emphatic terms. There is absolutely nothing unethical about in vitro fertilization in my opionion. You say you are not arguing it just offering it up? What is there to offer really?

    I might add that if you feel the problem that people have with embyonic stem cell is the discarded embryos why was there no outcry about this when in vitro fertilization started. Why suddenly the outcry when instead of throwing them in the garbage they are being used for research? To me there is incredible hypocrisy in this argument.
    Last edited by Queens Jet Fan; 10-25-2006 at 12:35 PM.

  19. #19
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    6,888
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan]Canada Steve I don't understand your points. The embryos come from in vitro clinics not from aborted fetuses so there is really no issue of the "good coming from something bad." Please read my response to Warfish above. The consensus view is that embryonic stem cells offer greater promise than adult stem cells." and both those avenues should be explored.

    You seem to have a problem with in vitro fertilization. I personally know many couples who sent this route and these are true miracle babies. Are you really saying that we should ban this just because all the embryos might not be used? Really it does seem like you are arguing this when you say, "If someone cannot get pregnant naturally without intervention, and the need to manipulate nature results in the possiblity of life (extra eggs) being destroyed, is this ethical?"

    I disagree with you here in the most emphatic terms. There is absolutely nothing unethical about in vitro fertilization in my opionion. You say you are not arguing it just offering it up? What is there to offer really?

    I might add that if you feel the problem that people have with embyonic stem cell is the discarded embryos [B]why was there no outcry about this when in vitro fertilization started.[/B] Why suddenly the outcry when instead of throwing them in the garbage they are being used for research? To me there is incredible hypocrisy in this argument.[/QUOTE]

    Indeed why wasn't there? You would think this would have been an issue back then, or maybe the opposition did not get media attention. Queen Jets, I don't have a problem with In Vitro, and have never really thought of the issue. I am just using philosophical arguments how this could be. I don't have time to do it right now, but I will dust off some of the old philosophy textbooks and Morality and ethics classwork and see if I can explain it better. If I remember correctly this topic was used in a debate one time. Forgive me for not remembering this stuff off the top of my head. I regularly need to refer back to notes with this stuff...my mind just doesn't remember this stuff as well as others... :)

    I'll get back to you later...

  20. #20
    [QUOTE=Queens Jet Fan]Canada Steve I don't understand your points. The embryos come from in vitro clinics not from aborted fetuses so there is really no issue of the "good coming from something bad." Please read my response to Warfish above. The consensus view is that embryonic stem cells offer greater promise than adult stem cells." and both those avenues should be explored.

    You seem to have a problem with in vitro fertilization. I personally know many couples who sent this route and these are true miracle babies. Are you really saying that we should ban this just because all the embryos might not be used? Really it does seem like you are arguing this when you say, "If someone cannot get pregnant naturally without intervention, and the need to manipulate nature results in the possiblity of life (extra eggs) being destroyed, is this ethical?"

    I disagree with you here in the most emphatic terms. There is absolutely nothing unethical about in vitro fertilization in my opionion. You say you are not arguing it just offering it up? What is there to offer really?

    I might add that if you feel the problem that people have with embyonic stem cell is the discarded embryos why was there no outcry about this when in vitro fertilization started. Why suddenly the outcry when instead of throwing them in the garbage they are being used for research? To me there is incredible hypocrisy in this argument.[/QUOTE]Maybe some people have a problem with in verto fertilization because it actually makes it possible for a virgin to give birth for the first time in history, I mean look at Katie Holmes. :P

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us