Slashdot Mirror
Obama Answers Science Policy Questionnaire
thebestsophist writes "A couple months ago, Scientists and Engineers for America, Science Debate 2008, and a bunch of other science organizations sent McCain, Obama, and all the Congressional candidates a bunch of questions on science and technology. Topics included biosecurity, genetics research, and national security, as well as the more common questions on research and education. Well, Senator Obama just answered."
Senator McCain has not responded to the questionnaire at this point in time, but the site has a profile of his views and actions relating to science policy, which provides a good basis for comparing the candidates' stances. We've previously discussed the differences between the two candidates' technology platforms. According to a recent NPR story, both candidates intend to keep politics out of science.
One thing I've realized about Obama is, the guy will promise you ANYTHING to get elected. It became clear during his acceptance speech. In less than 30 minutes he promised to lower taxes, eliminate the dependency on foreign oil, improve the education and give health care to everyone for free. After that I stopped listening. Achieving one of those things would be a stretch goal, achieving them all is downright impossible, and he knows it (and if he doesn't - god help us all).
4 years from now Republicans will have a field day with this guy and the results won't be pretty.
That said, he's STILL a heck of a lot better than McCain, particularly now when McCains VP pick is known.
In other words: fuck up someone else's life if it fits your belief system.
It's typical of Americans to not be able to see past their own noses. I mean, the fact that people from the US call themselves American and differenciate it from Canadian, Mexican, Costa Rican, Brazilian, Peruvian, etc. says volumes.
The usual disclaimer that stereotypes is not reflective of every individual in a group applies, but leave out the major cities, and surveys show most people haven't left the country even once, even to Mexico or Canada. It's hard to have a broad view of the world without a broad horizon.
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
Many such folk think nothing of destroying human embryos to advance science, just as they think nothing of aborting a fetus if the mother doesn't want it. I suspect many wouldn't even object to allowing a living baby to die of neglect if the mother intended him to be aborted anyway;
Maybe, unlike you, they actually want to reduce abortion.
Pro-lifers are FOR abortion. Pro-choicers are AGAINST abortion. The most effective way to prevent abortion, without a SHADOW OF A DOUBT, is access to birth control and comprehensive sex education, preferably free access. Most pro-lifers oppose birth control, especially free birth control for teenagers, therefore they support abortion and want more abortions.
It's not okay to kill embryos, or anything human, in order to learn.
So you oppose biopsies?
Human embryos are intelligent enough ... to attempt fight the scissors that are inserted to "implement" the abortion. Every gynaecologist knows this, for they've seen it. [2] are known to have won this fight, and manage somehow to induce labour, ending in them taking their first breath.
A fetus has never had a hand-to-hand battle in utero with a doctor. The whole notion is silly.
They certainly don't protest in a court of law
Let me ask you a question: Do you think random strangers should be able to determine the custody of YOUR children? By this I mean that a random person could walk by your home and complain to the police that he "doesn't like the way you're raising your kids" and your children would be assigned to another family or even imprisoned or executed. Do you agree with this?