On 7/21/06, Gruss Gott wrote: > Wouldn't that be make Bush's policy murder then? That is, isn't he > allowing viable embryos to be destroyed for research - or at least not > brought to term which would be the same thing, right?
No. He said these 88 or whatever number, embyos have already been destroyed and are being used for research. From that day on, in 2001, any embryos that are destroyed for research can not recieve federal funding. > Wouldn't the position be that all of these fertilized embryos need to > be brought to term (not used for research) or their parents are guilty > of murder (even if that's not the law)? He wants them to be available for adoption. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/message.cfm/forumid:5/messageid:211686 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
