>Dolores Gross's entry yesterday prompted me to tell of the well
>written response by Senator Jesse Helms to my letter to him urging
>him to be a co-sponsor of the Udall Bill. He basically said he
>would like to support it but can't because it doesn't specifically
>forbid funds for fetal tissue research. I personally suspect that
>most Republicans dislike giving money to anything that doesn't
>directly help themselves, and his caveat is just a convenient way
>of politically being for the bill while actually being against it,
>if you know what I mean. If anyone has a good arguement to counter
>Jesse's, please send it to me. I would like to continue trying to
>change his mind. A jouster of windmills, Bruce McCallum
Just when I thought Jesse might be making some sense (re;
potential dangers of the chemical weapons treaty, Mainland
China), he's back to the dogmatic Religious Right* gang.
I'm against late term abortions, and even oppose
middle term abortions. There is, however, a supply
of fetuses and embryos from natural stillbirths and so on. (Do the
people who oppose research on stillborn fetuses, or donation
of their tissue, also oppose organ donations from dead adults?)
Also, I don't oppose first trimester abortions.
The whole controversy is due to political ideologues
who are grandstanding and playing to their Religious Right
constituents, even at the price of blocking a cure for a
terrible disease. Since Dad has PD (and probably additional
neurodegenerative problems), those people are going to
have a big problem with me if they answer to
me at election time.
Ideally, of course, they'll figure out how to use pigs (and I
think they're doing something with rats). Of course, there are
some people who are against that, too...
-Bill
* I'm referring only to those who want to impose their
beliefs and practices on everyone else.
