Laura Bush Says Cannot Support Stem Cell Research
Despite the impassioned pleas of Nancy Reagan, despite the fact that she lost her own father to Alzheimer's, Laura Bush is still refusing to endorse stem cell research. Never mind the fact that it just might help in the search for a treatment, if not a cure, for Alzheimer's.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Laura Bush, whose father died from Alzheimer's, said on Wednesday she admired Nancy Reagan's devotion to former President Ronald Reagan until his death but could not back her call for relaxation of stem cell research restrictions....
Mrs. Bush, whose father died in 1997, said she had great respect for the former first lady and that she was an excellent role model for families struggling to cope with the illness.
"I know how very difficult it is for the patient, obviously, but also for the caregiver. It requires unbelievable strength of character to take care of the person you love as you see them slip away like that -- 'the long goodbye' they call Alzheimer's," the first lady told the CBS "Early Show" from Sea Island, Georgia, where leaders of the Group of Eight countries are meeting.
But Mrs. Bush said she did not endorse Nancy Reagan's call, already rebuffed by the White House, to allow greater stem cell research to proceed in the hope it would provide some answers to the disease or possibly a cure....
"There are stem cells to do research on and ... we have to be really careful between what we want to do for science and what we should do ethically," the first lady said. "Stem cell ... is certainly one of those issues that we need to treat very carefully."
Pressed on whether she was prepared to endorse Mrs. Reagan's impassioned call for restrictions to be lifted, she replied, "No."
More than 200 members of the U.S. Senate and House (of Representatives have also urged Bush to allow researchers to use embryonic stem cells to eventually provide brain cell transplants to Alzheimer's patients. They also hope to use embryonic stem cells to treat Parkinson's, spinal cord injuries, heart disease, diabetes and a range of other illnesses.
Despite the promise that stem cell research shows in making progress on a number of diseases, Social Conservatives still steadfastly refuse to budge. How many people will have to die before these people realize that what they oppose on moral and ethical grounds may well hold the key to finding cures and treatments? Or do their morals and ethics outweigh what little compassion they can scrape up? Does ideolgical purity really outweigh all other considerations?
"Compassionate Conservatism" is a mean-spirited joke. WE DESERVE BETTER.
