  urlLink Stem Cell Research OK, here is an issue that completely sets me against GWB and the GOP position. Any curtailment of bioresearch is unacceptable to me, and I'll speak out any time I have the chance. The fact is - I want to live as long as possible, and if medical science has a shot at extending my life, then I want that research to happen. There have been some promising finds in anti-aging research, and it isn't a fantasy to beleive that a child born today could live 150-200 years baring an accident. By the time they finally pass on, children born in that year might live three times as long, or even have a reasonable life expectency measured in millenia, given body replacement technology. Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit had a column at TechCentralStarion today, linked urlLink here about longevity.
It raises some intersting questions - notably, how will people react to research that might one day make death an accident? And how do we meet the objections of the religious who might oppose the idea that we can 'escape God's judgment' by avoiding death? Or how about the environmental people who complain about overcrowding (which is a myth) and wish to preserve our 'natural' life span? I'm with Mr. Reynolds - death sucks, and natural is not always good. Anto-aging research, as well as death prevention technology, is a moral requirement. Anyone care to argue that we have a duty to die? I'm loaded for bear on this one, so bring it on....(spoiling for a good argument too, so help me out here. ) 
