Quote: “Well, the people of Kentucky don't accept the change.”

Speak for yourself. The folks I know from that commonwealth have a deep respect for the rule of law, particularly rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court. Or do you believe that most Kentucky citizens deem such rulings inconsequential?

I’m curious, Gene. Where did you get the idea that all of Judaism and Christianity define marriage as being solely between a man and a woman? There are priests, ministers and rabbis who officiate gay weddings. You might want to do some reading here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blessing_of_same-se...

and here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_a...

Actually, you might have a point IF she had walked away but allowed her deputies to issue the licenses. She didn’t. She stripped her deputies of their choice to do their duties. Watch the video. She completely shut down the issuance of the licenses. [“We will not be issuing any licenses today.”] The court order was the culmination of the lawsuit brought by four couples who were denied their rights to marriage licenses. Notably, while Davis sat in jail for disobeying the court order, her deputies issued those licenses, thus fulfilling the court order, which is why she was released. Had she allowed her deputies to do this from the outset, this would not have been a story in the first place.

And yes, because of this she is seen as a bigot. And yes, more people will rally around the rights of gays to marry. In the end, history always looks kinder on tolerance. Her grandchildren will read about her and be ashamed.

We’re talking about Michelle Cretella here. She’s all three.

Well, not gods - but certainly great men.
It's been an honor to know them.

Quote: “Of course you can site all the pro-death organizations here…”

Kindly specify which of these organizations are “pro death” and provide your evidence:

World Health Organization
U.S. National Cancer Institute
American Cancer Society
American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
German Cancer Research Center
Canadian Cancer Society.

I’ll save you the trouble. You have no evidence to provide. None.

Thank you for your patience, V. As with many in the right-wing, you ask for a false distinction so allow me to put this in proper context. The research timeline on adult stem cells is quite old. After adult stem cells had undergone decades of study, Dr. E.Donnell Thomas invented the bone marrow transplant in 1956 – when Eisenhower was President. He received the Nobel Prize for his work about 30 years later. ln fact, the debunking of Prentice’s list (back in 2006) came on the 50th anniversary of that first major breakthrough with adult stem cells.

By contrast, human embryonic stem cells were not even isolated (let alone studied) until 1998, so your question fails to account for time. In this respect, fairness dictates that you allow the study and research of ESC a similar amount of time and then compare.

As with any scientific venture, ESC research has seen successes and failures – just like adult stem cells. No approved treatments have yet been produced by ESC research, but great progress is being made. Likely to emerge first will be pancreatic beta cells to cure diabetes. Two different teams have developed individual methods using human embryonic stem cells, which have cured diabetes in mice - something that all the years of adult stem cell research has failed to accomplish.

Back to Dr. Thomas… Until his death in 2012, Thomas had been outspoken supporter of all varieties of stem cell research, including embryonic. More poignantly, he was among the eighty Nobel laureates who signed a letter, which included the following statement:

“Some have suggested that adult stem cells may be sufficient to pursue all treatments for human disease. It is premature to conclude that adult stem cells have the same potential as embryonic stem cells -- and that potential will almost certainly vary from disease to disease. Current evidence suggests that adult stem cells have markedly restricted differentiation potential. Therefore, for disorders that prove not to be treatable with adult stem cells, impeding human pluripotent stem cell research risks unnecessary delay for millions of patients who may die or endure needless suffering while the effectiveness of adult stem cells is evaluated.”

The eighty Nobel laureates in support can likewise be compared to the list of Nobel Prize winners who object to ESC research. There are none.

As it stands today, to say that we don’t need embryonic stem cell research because adult stem cells can provide all we need is patently false. We simply don’t know which conditions or diseases might be treated or cured by which stem cell type.

When Anthony Atala (Wake Forest) invented induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS), even he reprimanded those who claimed that this was the silver bullet negating need for ESC research. Though the technology continues to advance, a major hurdle was that iPS required the manipulation of four genes, two of which are triggers for leukemia. Still, I have high hopes for this research.

One of the difficulties in having this discussion is that you view this as a competition between one type of stem cell and another, whereas medicine views this as a fight between mankind and disease.

No, V, what this demonstrates is your lack of understanding of the subject. Your question was about fetal tissue, not embryonic stem cells. Where did you get the idea that fetal tissue was comprised of embryonic stem cells? Stem cells from fetal tissue are adult stem cells. And yes, Jonas Salk developed the polio vaccine from research on aborted fetal tissue.

Allow me to suggest you engage in more homework and less snark.

I will do this in two parts. First:

Source: The medical Journal SCIENCE, 28 July 2006, p. 439, S. Smith et al.

Background: The list of 70+ treatments by adult stem cells (originally 65 treatments, later expanded to 72, then to 73) originated from a paid hack biologist of the religious right wing named David Prentice. His “data” was disproven. The most outrageous of his “scientific/medical references” was, I kid you not, a press clipping from the Denver Post.

In 2006, having had enough of Prentice’s falsehoods, a team of 3 medical scientists went through each and every one of his claims. Over 90% of his 70+ claims were proven false, peer reviewed and the results published. The team consisted of Dr. Shane Smith of the Children's Neurobiological Solutions Foundation in Santa Barbara, Calif.; Dr. William B. Neaves of the Stowers Institute for Medical Research in Kansas City, Mo.; and Dr. Steven Teitelbaum of Washington University in St. Louis.

You can find the published supporting results here: https://web.archive.org/web/20090619130622/http:/...

Prentice was pretty much laughed out of the research world, but continues to serve as a mouthpiece for anti-abortion groups.

If you know about Prentice, then this might tip you off... I personally know Bill Neaves and Steve Teitelbaum. However, I never met Smith.