Was it stem cell research ban. Or a ban for federal funds for stem cell research?

Actually, Bush never banned the federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research, either. He only restricted the funding to the stem cell lines that were already in existence.

As an earlier poster mentioned, the embryos for the research are donated by patients of in vitro fertilization clinics. If you're questioning the morality of destroying embryos that are 5 days post-conception for scientific research, we should also question what happens to these excess embryos if they don't get donated to research. Most often, they're either abandoned or destroyed.

Interestingly, I recently read the results of a survey of IVF patients, and the majority would prefer to have their embryos donated to science over all other options (store indefinitely, destroy, donate to other couples) available, but that option is available in only a few clinics.

As another poster mentioned, we fund morally questionable practices every day. We all have different moral standards, and it's up to the concensus to determine what's morally questionable on a large scale. Since most Americans have few qualms about human embryonic stem cell research, it will continue to receive funding until it's deemed unnecessary.

This is ONLY relavent to embryonic stem cell research.

Bush banded the federal funding of the research. However, in essence, that banned the research indirectly, since something like 90% of all early medical research is funded federally.

Why should tax payers be forced to pay for a morally questionable practice? Why does no one ask this about the insurance that federal employees have (that the tax payers pay for) that covers IVF? Why does no one ask that about this ridiculous war that our tax money has funded?? Why does no one say that about funding torture techniques?

There are many things worse than using dead embryos that have never had consciousness (and that are dead without the research) for research.

Adult stem cell funding was never touched by any of that. But on the other hand, adult stem cells have been researched for over 100 years, and we already had treatments in practice way before this embryonic stem cell stuff came up.

Bush only banned embryonic stem cell research, why is the research of stem cells of a fetus.

The "people" who said that lied to you ("a half truth is a whole lie").

Bush was against "embryonic" stem cell research, because it required the death of fetuses, and prohibited federal funding for it.

Bush was NOT against "adult" stem cell research, or even "umbilical cord" stem cell research.

of path, you're correct. government money should not be used regardless of the point of controversy surrounding the study. i ask your self whether Hillary could evaluate the dying of unborn little ones so this "study" can proceed a "ban on desire." The ineffective little ones valuable haven't any desire. regrettably, that is all approximately politics and not technology. The study on embryonic stem cells has given us no longer something. the suitable "desire" has actual come from grownup stem cells. technology say one element, yet politics says yet another.

It will save hundreds of thousands of lives.