Minnesota Votes

2005 House Bill 13 (Stem Cell Research)

[Comments on this legislation] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

  • Introduced by Rep. Lyndon Carlson, Rep. Karen Clark, Rep. Jim Davnie, Rep. Barbara Goodwin, Rep. Mindy Greiling, Rep. Bill Hilty, Rep. Frank Hornstein, Rep. Thomas Huntley, Rep. Phyllis Kahn, Rep. Margaret Anderson Kelliher, Rep. Ron Latz, Rep. Tim Mahoney and Rep. Michael Paymar on January 6, 2005, to allow the University of Minnesota to use state funds for stem cell research and establish a state policy that the use of embryonic and other stem cells for research be permitted. Doctors would have to get informed consent from patients to use human embryos following fertility treatments. The sale of fetal tissue would be prohibited and would be a gross misdemeanor. An unspecified amount of money would be appropriated for these provisions (SF730 Companion Bill).
    • Referred to the House Health Policy and Finance Committee on January 6, 2005.
    • Motion by Rep. Phyllis Kahn on January 10, 2005, to add Representative Karen Clark as an author of HF13. The motion passed in the House by voice vote on January 10, 2005.
    • Motion by Rep. Phyllis Kahn on January 12, 2005, to add Representatives Goodwin and Mahoney as authors of HF13. The motion passed in the House by voice vote on January 12, 2005.
    • Motion by Rep. Phyllis Kahn on February 7, 2005, to add Representative Latz as an author of HF13. The motion passed in the House by voice vote on February 7, 2005.

Line

Comments

Introduced by Rep. Lyndon Carlson, Rep. Karen Clark, Rep. Jim Davnie, Rep. Barbara Goodwin, Rep. Mindy Greiling, Rep. Bill Hilty, Rep. Frank Hornstein, Rep. Thomas Huntley, Rep. Phyllis Kahn, Rep. Margaret Anderson Kelliher, Rep. Ron Latz, Rep. Tim Mahoney and Rep. Michael Paymar on January 6, 2005. New Comment

1) sacrafice [by Anonymous Citizen on October 24, 2006]
interesting for those who can sacrafice veterans in war but are not willing to make the even handed gesture in return for those who are injured (spinal,head)

you can watch people die from a distance. meanwhile you live while the whole world dies.
Reply New Comment

Line

2) re: sacrafice [by Anonymous Citizen on October 25, 2006]
It's spelled 'sacrifice'.

With that astounding intellect, I'm not suprised you're taking the liberal position.
Reply New Comment

Line

3) Stem Cell Research [by Anonymous Citizen on July 27, 2005]
How can we not take the gifts of modern science and not put them to a common good for our friends and loved ones, good to see our State stand up and be a leader in support of Stem Cell Research
Reply New Comment

Line

4) No to ESCR [by MN1 on June 28, 2005]
Why should the government and us taxpayers be forced to fund embryonic stem cell research--I think that if this is something the mass population supports the private sector will be able to more than adequately provide the funding.
Reply New Comment

Line

5) agree [by Anonymous Citizen on July 13, 2005]
I whole heartedly agree
Reply New Comment

Line

6) Excellent Bill! [by Dan Waters on June 21, 2005]
I'm glad to see MN taking a stand against the religious 'craziness' that seems to have gotten a toehold in US Federal and State government!
Reply New Comment

Line

7) IT WOULD BE BETTER [by jemoon on June 17, 2006]
OH DANNY BOY READ MATTHEW 18: ESPECIALLY VERSES 5-7.

NO MATTER WHAT YOU OR I BELIVE. THE ONE WHO HAS EARNED THE RIGHT TO JUDGE ALL HUMANITY, WILL JUDGE.
Reply New Comment

Line

8) Dan [by Anonymous Citizen on June 24, 2005]
I believe that to far left liberals like you, Dan, ALL religion is "craziness".

What you lefties are going to find out only too late is that it is actually the moral fabric holding society together. And after you've gotten it out of every aspect of public life, you are going to be the first casualty of the monster you created.

Religious people are not "crazies". There are some bad religious people, just like anything. But by and large, religious people are the ones out there doing good deeds, and improving the quality of life for everyone. Believe me, it's not the ACLU.
Reply New Comment

Line

9) RE: Dan [by Anonymous Citizen on July 14, 2005]
It isn't "religious crazies" that "lefties" are worried about...Those people are pretty easy to pick out of a crowd. While I don't consider myself a "leftie", a "rightie", or a "greenie", I do consider myself a PWAP - Person Without A Party aka the Common Sense party. Our country was founded with Christianity in mind. Our laws are based on our forefather's literal interpretation of the Ten Commandments. However, the Bible was written by men and has thus been misinterpreted by men (or women, if that is your belief, WHAT EVER!). Separation of church and state is a rather redundant, idealistic scenario because of this.

Now to my opinion regarding this Bill and ESCR....I am not a religious person of the church-going variety. What never occurs to people and never shows up in these conversations is that when a person becomes seriously ill, has a major accident, etc., Christians will pray that God will heal that person, that this "evil that has befallen their loved one" will be turned around by God. If God is who/what I believe him to be, He/She (WHAT EVER!!) is the one who put that person in the situation in the first place. Supposedly, whatever happens is meant to happen based on God's law, not man's. Man is interfering with the natural order of things by saving people and babies who were not meant to be saved. Think about all of the situations where man has intervened and what good does it do? We have nursing homes full of people who were meant to die from massive strokes or other severe medical occurrences. We have unwanted babies being aborted, up for adoption until they're too old to be adoptable, and even abandoned who knows where? We are grossly overpopulated. We haven't learned how to take care of our elderly and we haven't learned how to deal with the untimely death of a loved one. What we are doing is providing a meal ticket for insurance companies because we havent' grown enough emotionally as a society to accept nature as it comes. ESCR is a gross misuse of knowledge and funding that could be used to educate and enlighten people to the ideas stated above.

Yes, it is very, very painful to lose a loved one and I will soon be losing a number of them due to aging issues, etc., and it's hard for me to deal with already. I do believe medical doctors have a place in our society, but saving lives that aren't meant to be saved is just plain wrong. Let's learn to deal with these issues and learn how to heal when they happen.
Reply New Comment

Line

10) There is only one problem with Stem cell research [by Anonymous Citizen on May 31, 2005]
The problem is that stem cell research needs more support to grow.The advancements that could come from stem cell research could help deal with some of the worst illnesses that hit people. If the government gave full backing to the idea there might be a finding in the near future.
Reply New Comment

Line

11) another take on obtaining stem cells [by Anonymous Citizen on March 10, 2005]
Why not use the "waste" (using the previous post's term) from the abortion clinics to aquire new stem cells?
Reply New Comment

Line

12) Shame on Humanity [by Mickey on March 8, 2005]
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. How can we as a civilized people, justify the killing of human life in its most vulnerable state. Please look at this from a moral prospective. This isn’t even a woman’s so called right to chose. This is a Scientists right to destroy human life. The cheapening of human life for the purpose of curing disease, or extending the life of another, is perversion at its worst. Does any person find this truly acceptable? Can we sacrifice a life to improve our own?
God help us.
Reply New Comment

Line

13) Big Picture [by Anonymous Citizen on April 24, 2006]
I ask you to look at the Bigger Picture of the world. Almost half a billion of people worldwide live under some type of incurable diseases and disabilities. So, stem cell research could enable to live a normal life as most of us do. Don't you think those people have the right to live like us?? After all millions of embryos are, one way or the other left discared by fertility clinic. I don't see there is anything worng to use those embryos for humanity.
Reply New Comment

Line

14) No to ESCR [by mattnoah on January 8, 2005]
The UofM should not be in the business of EMBRYONIC stem cell research (ESCR). There is only one way to obtain embryonic stem cells - kill a growing human being, i.e. an embryo. While most embryonic stem cells are the "throw aways" from infertility clinics, it creates a new market for selling embryos and encouraging the creation of more embryos for the sole purpose of destruction in so-called medical research.

Stick with adult stem cells.
Reply New Comment

Line


Copyright © 2008 USA Votes, Inc.  Patent Pending.  All rights reserved.  Terms of use

Capitol Building

Search legislation: