Modern Science Shreds Pro-Abortionists’ Stem Cell Argument

Terrorism and the Iraq War defined the presidency of George W. Bush, but in the more tranquil months before 9/11, the president’s early term was defined by a very different issue: Stem cells.

Back in August of 2001, Bush gave what was then naively hailed as possibly one of the defining speeches of his still-nascent presidency.

“The issue of research involving stem cells derived from human embryos is increasingly the subject of a national debate and dinner table discussions,” the president said, before announcing that federal funding would be limited to existing stem cell lines.

Long hailed by scientists as the source of possible “miracle cures” to previously debilitating diseases, stem cells stayed in the national conversation in the early 2000s and into the next decade.

The controversy is tied to the abortion question because many experts believed that early stem cells could hold the keys to new discoveries. And those cells, often, come from aborted fetuses.

TRENDING: Complete Ignorance: Protesters Are Asked If They Would Rather Have Trump or Maduro as Their Leader

“Researchers typically take tissue samples from a fetus that has been aborted and grow cells from the tissue in Petri dishes,” CNN explained in 2015. “One concern is that women would have more pregnancies or abortions because they want to donate fetal tissue.”

Those kinds of concerns were amplified after Planned Parenthood employees were revealed to be bluntly discussing the harvesting of human organs from aborted fetuses, appearing to view lifeless human beings as nothing but lab experiments.

But while advocates on the right expressed concern and urged caution, many in the research community and the political left scoffed. Fetal tissue, experts declared, was vital to research — and pro-life voices were often dismissed or mocked as opposing science.

“Using fetal tissue is not an easy choice, but so far there is no better choice,” insisted University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill researcher Lishan Su in a 2015 Scientific American piece. “Many, many biomedical researchers depend on fetal tissue research to really save human lives.”

Do you believe fetal stem cell research is immoral?

Fast-forward to 2019. It now turns out that the scientists who were so sure that fetal and embryonic stem cells were vital to research just a few years ago may have been very, very wrong.

Instead, leading scientists are finding that it is actually adult stem cells — which can be obtained by ethical means — are far more promising.

“Adult stem cells are the successful standard for stem cells,” wrote David A. Prentice, Ph.D., in a groundbreaking research paper published by the peer-reviewed medical journal “Circulation Research.

“Although in the past their regenerative/reparative capacity was ignored, misunderstood, or even maligned, a rapidly growing host of clinical applications are being developed, and the clinical utility of adult stem cells is increasingly validated in the literature,” Price wrote.

Going on to call adult stem cells the “true gold standard in regenerative medicine,” the scientific paper confirmed what many conservatives have been saying since at least the Bush era: We don’t need to harvest human fetuses or embryos to make progress and potentially cure diseases.

RELATED: Caving to the Left: CNN Changes Republican Editor’s Title After Liberal Backlash

“Nonembryonic stem cell research has surpassed embryonic stem cells,” Prentice explained.

His conclusion left no doubt about his findings in the matter.

“The superiority of adult stem cells in the clinic and the mounting evidence supporting their effectiveness in regeneration and repair make adult stem cells the gold standard of stem cells for patients.”

That’s stunningly good news, yet the establishment media has stayed mostly quiet on this development, at least compared to the wall-to-wall coverage embryonic stem cells received in recent years. It seems left-leaning journalists just aren’t as interested in covering stories that don’t allow them to defend abortion.

At the same time, this leading-edge research is another important reminder that science is never actually “settled,” whether the issue is stem cells, climate change, or dozens of other topics.

Science is a process, and assumptions can be overturned in a very short time when new evidence emerges.

Those discoveries can bring many benefits, but they must also be tempered by morality that protects and dignifies human life.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct

Thugs Accused of Stabbing Kid 100 Times Not Animals, According to Liberals

President Donald Trump has made it exceedingly clear that while he has no problem with welcoming legal immigrants who abide by our laws and are productive members of society, that view is diminished for those who come here illegally, and he has almost no regard whatsoever for those who commit violent and horrific crimes while in our nation.

Recall in May 2018, when Trump referred to members of the brutal and murderous street gang MS-13 as being like “animals,” and how elected Democrats and the liberal media purposely mis-characterized his remarks as pertaining to all immigrants and absolutely blew their tops with indignant outrage.

Even then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi joined in on the faux outrage over the president’s choice of terminology to describe members of a gang whose motto is “rape, control, kill,” and seemingly defended sadistically violent MS-13 members as being endowed with “the spark of divinity, the dignity and worth of every person,” that apparently placed them above reproach, despite their violently murderous activities.

Now, less than a year later, it will be interesting to see if now-Speaker Pelosi and the rest of her Democratic caucus, as well as their media allies, will have anything to say about a recent report of a brutal and sadistic murder of a young immigrant by his fellow MS-13 gang members, a murder that was just about as animalistic as it gets.

Fox News reported five MS-13 gang members were recently arrested in Maryland and charged with murder over the vicious stabbing death — reportedly stabbed at least 100 times — and subsequent attempted burning of the body, of one of their own.

TRENDING: Complete Ignorance: Protesters Are Asked If They Would Rather Have Trump or Maduro as Their Leader

The victim, identified by a gang tattoo on one of his shoulders, was named as 16-year-old high school student Jacson Pineda-Chicas, whose stabbed and burned body had been found on March 9 on the side of a road in Stafford, Virginia, roughly 60 miles from the location in Prince George’s County, Maryland, where the murder is believed to have occurred.

The suspected murder site was the home of a local MS-13 clique leader identified as 29-year-old Jose Ordonez-Zometa, who has been charged with murder along with four other members of his gang. Law enforcement authorities believe that Pineda-Chicas was taken to the home of Ordonez-Zometa by the other gang members for a meeting that ended up being a murder.

“He was stabbed around 100 times,” said Prince George’s County Maj. Brian Reilly in a press conference on Friday, according to Tribune Media. “That goes to how violent this attack was and how it wasn’t just one person who did this. The group turned on their own.”

Authorities explained that while the gang’s leader, Ordonez-Zometa, lived in Prince George’s County, the gang itself operated in the Fairfax County region. The five suspects arrested and charged with first-degree murder, among other charges range in age from 16-29, and will all be tried as adults for the horrendous crime.

Although investigators have yet to determine exactly why the gang so brutally turned on one of their own in a murderous manner, the victim’s mother believes it was because he wanted to leave the gang and live a normal life.

The NBC affiliate in Washington, D.C., spoke with the unnamed mother of Pineda-Chicas, who explained that her son had been forced to join the gang when they still lived in El Salvador, prior to moving to the United States in an effort to flee that situation.

Of course, thanks to the lax immigration laws that Democrats refuse to help fix, the MS-13 gang has a strong presence here in the U.S., and the teen was unable to escape them.

The mother further explained that her son had been accused of cooperating with the police and had offered himself up as a sort of sacrifice to the gang in order to protect the rest of his family, who had reportedly been threatened with death by the gang.

Do you agree that murderous gang members can be compared to animals?

This sort of behavior is simply unacceptable in a civil society like our own and can indeed be labeled as being animal-like in its brutality and ferocity and inhumanity.

RELATED: Local Sheriff Explodes on Dem Lawmakers: ‘We Will Not Comply’ with Restrictive Gun Laws

To be fair to Pelosi and her ilk, yes, all humans are born with an innate dignity and spark of divinity, but those characteristics are all but traded in and lost when people like these MS-13 thugs engage in animal-like pack behavior, such as turning on a weaker member with murderous intent.

Whether Pelosi and others will admit that remains to be seen, but once again, Trump and his supporters have been proven right in referring to MS-13 gang members as being like animals.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct

Pro-Life Demonstrator Punched In The Face

A pro-life activist in Massachusetts was punched in the face while he was demonstrating outside an abortion clinic on Thursday, according to police.
At around 9:30 a.m., officers were called to Women’s Health Services in Brookline after a male pro-life protester was physically assaulted by a female outside the clinic.

via Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailywire.com/rss.xml

OH MAN! Obama’s Brother Suggests That Michelle Is Really ‘Michael’

Don’t expect Malik Obama to be getting a Thanksgiving invitation to the Obama compound this November…

The former President’s brother who has frequently been a critic of his famous sibling has gone where few have dared to venture by suggesting that is sister-in-law, former FLOTUS Michelle Obama may really be a “he”  or in his words…

YIKES!

Not to lend any credence to the ugly rumor that the Emir Of Obamastan’s wife may be a transvestite – there are those who will – but expect this lurid rumor to fuel speculation from those who have pointed out that Michelle has the physique to play free safety for the Chicago Bears.

The American Mirror has the story on this family feud HERE.

The Beta male ex-POTUS has always seemed to be a bit light in the loafers so brother Malik may have stirred up some real shit here in terms of the inevitable conspiracy theories.

 

via Downtrend.com

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://downtrend.com

House Democrats Block 19 Times Vote on Bill to Protect Babies Who Survive Abortion

Nineteen times House Democrats have blocked a vote on a bill that would protect babies who survive an abortion.

“It is a shocking reality that the majority party in the people’s House refuses to allow a vote to protect the lives of newborn babies,” Rep. Mike Johnson, R-La., chairman of the Republican Study Committee, said in a statement.

This bill simply affords infants born alive during a failed abortion attempt the same care any other newborn would receive. I cannot comprehend how any person could justify standing in the way of these children and the lifesaving care of a physician—but that is the position of today’s Democratic party.

On Thursday, House Democrats yet again blocked a vote on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which would require medical professionals to give the same medical care to a baby who survives an abortion as they would to any other baby of the same age, and to take the baby to a hospital.

If an abortionist intentionally kills the child who was born alive, he or she would face fines or up to five years in jail, according to a press release from House Minority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La.

Monica Burke, a research assistant in the DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation, says the issue shouldn’t be political.

“Providing babies who survive an abortion with proper medical care should not be controversial,” Burke said. “Current law is insufficient to protect these infants. Current law does not stipulate that doctors must provide care for these children, which means that children can be left to die without legal consequences. Taking measures to protect innocent, vulnerable babies with bills like the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would be a step in the right direction.”

Republicans have been calling for unanimous consent on the born-alive legislation as they attempt to keep the issue publicly alive while they gather signatures for the discharge petition.

The discharge petition strategy, which is rarely successful, requires gathering at least 218 signatures from House members to oblige the chamber’s Democratic leadership to bring the bill to the floor for debate and a vote.

Discharge petitions may be considered on the second and fourth Mondays of the month when the House is in session.

Republicans currently hold 197 seats compared with Democrats’ 235 seats, meaning Republicans would have to acquire 21 signatures from Democrats to force a floor vote.

The post House Democrats Block 19 Times Vote on Bill to Protect Babies Who Survive Abortion appeared first on The Daily Signal.

via The Daily Signal

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.dailysignal.com/

Bernie’s mission in 2020: Let me explain why socialism is awesome

Don’t we have a century of experience in socialism that speaks for itself? No no no, Bernie Sanders tells New Hampshire Public Radio in an interview this morning. Americans have the wrong idea about socialism, all evidence to the contrary, and he’s making it his mission in 2020 to sell it as a brand:

“I think what we have to do, and I will be doing it, is to do a better job maybe in explaining what we mean by socialism — democratic socialism. Obviously, my right-wing colleagues here want to paint that as authoritarianism and communism and Venezuela, and that’s nonsense.”

Thirty years ago, I worked with an older man named Lowell who was as ardent a socialist as Sanders is today. We spent a lot of time arguing about the nature and the end game of socialism, during which Lowell would use the Soviet Union as the example of how it can succeed in sustaining itself. After its collapse, Lowell switched arguments and insisted that the Soviets had never been proper socialists in the first place.

We have already begun to see that argument coming from others, not just Sanders. A few years ago, American fans of socialism cheered the Chavistas and Maduro as successful socialists who had ended exploitation by international capitalists in Venezuela. Hollywood activists swooned over Hugo Chavez in particular as the savior of the poor. Now that Venezuela is in its second week of a nationwide blackout and massive starvation has swept its former first-world land, suddenly the idea that Venezuela adopted actual socialism is “nonsense.” Riiiiiiiight.

What does Bernie mean by “democratic socialism”? That’s a bit of a muddle for the man who keeps using the term:

“What I mean by democratic socialism is that I want a vibrant democracy. I find it interesting that people who criticize me are busy actively involved in voter suppression trying to keep people of color or low-income people from voting, because they don’t want a vibrant democracy. I do.

“Second of all, what it means, Rachel, is that in the wealthiest country in the history of the world we can provide a decent standard of living for all about people. That’s just the reality. That’s not Utopian dreaming; that is a reality. Health care for all can be done and we can save money in doing it. We can have a minimum wage which is a living wage, and I’m delighted to see that you know, right now, five states already passed fifteen dollars an hour minimum wage. The House of Representatives is gonna do it. We have got to do that.”

Notice that this answer doesn’t actually provide a definition for “democratic socialism,” because such a definition doesn’t actually exist. The term is an oxymoron, theoretically and especially in practice. Socialism requires the seizure of the means of production, which is not democracy in any way, shape, or form. It doesn’t have minimum wages but forced redistribution of wealth in a state frozen by ending capitalism which produces it. That redistribution has to be performed by authoritarian mechanisms with enough strength to seize the wealth and production in the first place.

Lest anyone mistake Sanders for something less than a socialist, this is precisely what would happen in a Medicare for All program. The federal government would seize control of the health-care industry by forcing all providers to accept reimbursement for costs from Washington bureaucrats. That would force the government to ration care as the provider pool stops expanding to meet demand, effectively redistributing care along the preferred political priorities of those in charge. When that results in widespread dissatisfaction, more and more authoritarian steps would be imposed to meet the program targets — and more and more corrupt officials would rise to fake those results and sustain the program.

We already know this because we’ve seen it happen in Venezuela in every industry … and here in the US in the Veterans Administration in the health-care industry. The only reason we don’t see more of it in Medicare now is because the private sector is overcharging other patients in order to cover Medicare losses. Once Sanders and the other “democratic socialists” prohibit private health insurance, we’ll all be in a VA disaster. If we’re lucky, that is; we might end up in the equivalent of the Indian Health Service.

Sanders doesn’t need to “a better job” in explaining socialism in 2020. The twentieth century and F.A. Hayek did a splendid job in explaining it already, and Venezuela has given everyone an object lesson as a reminder of it. Hard pass.

The post Bernie’s mission in 2020: Let me explain why socialism is awesome appeared first on Hot Air.

via Hot Air

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://hotair.com

Free Stuff! New Jersey’s Largest City Plans To Test Universal Basic Income Program

Giving away “free money” without the incentive to work is socialism on steroids. Via Fox News: New Jersey’s largest city plans to test whether universal basic income is feasible, making it the latest government to flirt with a program that would guarantee income for residents whether or not they have a job. Newark Mayor Ras Baraka announced his decision […]

via Weasel Zippers

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.weaselzippers.us

Poll: New York Voters Overwhelmingly Oppose Illegals Getting Drivers Licenses

Could it be New Yorkers are finally getting some sense? Between this and the AOC poll. Via Daily Caller: A majority of New York State voters, according to a newly released Siena College poll, overwhelmingly oppose illegal immigrants receiving driver’s licenses. Sixty-one percent of New York voters say they do not believe non-citizens should receive […]

via Weasel Zippers

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.weaselzippers.us