Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

So it seems to me, Mondak, that your opposition lies not directly with the research itself, but with the notion of government funding of anything other than the utmost minimum required to keep society functioning.

This appears to me to be an anarchist position (in the political sense) and akin to what I believe the Libertarian Party supports in the US. If that's the case, and I'm inferring correctly, then no amount of reasonable (or unreasonable!) arguing on my part will convince you that state funding of scientific research is a good idea.

Perhaps that's the fundamental question here. I absolutely support the idea of useful scientific research, funded by the government. You do not. History has shown that if it is motivated by profit alone then profit will negatively affect the outcome. Much benefit has accrued mankind by research that is NOT corporatized or capitalistic in nature.

With regards to the topic at hand, I think stem cell research is vital. Many of these embryos will be discarded anyway, so it's like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I would go one step further and say I even support the use of cloned embryos.

Gene therapy is also a vital area of research. My sister-in-law gave birth to my niece last week and she has cystic fibrosis. The gene that causes this disease was only discovered in 1989, by Government funded research. Her only hope for a life, free from pain and suffering and not tragically cut short, is through gene therapy. Your selfish point of view (and I mean that along pecuniary lines, with no insult intended) would mean that her chance for a long and fulfilling life is doomed because you don't want "your taxes" to be spent on helping save her life. Or, at best, would be dependent upon some mega-corporation discovering a cure and charging the tens of thousands of suffers a hefty fee so they can line their pockets and drive big expensive cars.

Which brings up another point. They are not "your taxes" at all. They are the states taxes and the funds belong to the state. You are obliged to pay taxes and, beyond the democratic right to vote for different political parties, are not entitled to dictate how those funds are spent.

"Letting the market decide" is not a viable option. It is a smoke-screen created by the ultra-rich to convince you and the rest of society that they have your best interests at heart. They do not. They want to make money off pain and suffering and I shall oppose them and their twisted notions of Reaganistic and Thatcherite socio-economics until the day I (and my niece) die.

Mr Mephisto