Ah, this is a good point. I should have refered to this. Scientists have been rapidly working around the necessity of using embyronic stem cells. I think some wicked smart Japanese scientist almost hit the nail on the head last time I checked, generations ahead of his time. But these methods are not as good, and even more recently, Obama signed a bill allowing the use of IVF embryonic stem cell lines for research.
first of all: +1
Now to respond to the quoted text. The thing is, you really can't find a way of replacing embryonics with non-embryonics until you know the full information about how the process works in detail. An extreme example would be a stone age man trying to refine titanium. Sure, it is physically possible, but without an extensive knowledge of how to refine more basic materials it would take one heck of a 'Eureka!' moment. The same is true of most technologies. You need the intermediaries to give insight into more advanced technology.
And second, he didn't sign a bill to allow the use for research. Research has been going on for years (since before Bush). However, bumbling Bush made a law so they could not use new lines and still get federal funding. Obama just had the good sense to repeal that pointless law.
Why is the law so silly? Well, proponents of the law were afraid of "creating life to destroy it," when in fact it is destroying life which would have been destroyed anyway. IVF procedures almost always have embryos left over, since if they used them all the average IVF patient would have about as many children as Nadya Suleman. And so the embryos are either destroyed when the procedure is over or stay in a freezer until a later date at which time they are destroyed. I don't know about you, but I would prefer using them to improve the quality of life and save lives rather than just be wasted.
Also note, off topic forums are across all Stardock forums, and so it will be more than just JU.
Edit to psychoak(post #10):
Taxes are not mandatory. Just ask Obama's nominees.
And jokes aside, it is the role of government to act in the best interest of the people, even if some of them do not understand it is in their best interest. We aren't the Borg; there will be no universal agreement. Democracy must be based on majority, since a unanimous decision will never be arrived at. But people will benefit when the research yeilds results which impact them in their daily lives, of that there is no question.