pro-lifers and stem cell research

[aircooled]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: aircooled
Modern medicine would not be were it is today if it weren't for doing scientific research on dead people. Why is this any different. You are not saving a baby's life by preventing stem cell research.

And a lot of very sick experiments on animals...

Weren't some of the early doctors of medicine grave robbers?

Yeah, if I remember correctly, early doctors would typically pay peasants to rob graves.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: SNC

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004
Pretty straight forward. Kinda contradictary too.

Pro-lifers are obviously pro-life. Now, doesn't that also make the pro-stem cell research? Seeing how stem cells might save lives?

Eh, no, pro-lifers are trying to limit the choice so they are anti-choice.

And stem cell search is a tool of satan, no good christian will ever admit to anything else.

Just so we are clear, you are for killing children?
I am having a hard time understanding how someone can justify the killing of one person to save another.
Would people in favor of Embro stem cell research, also be in favor of taking the heart out of a healthy death row inmate to save the life of someone? Pro baby killers run there mouth about pro lifers trying to limit a woman?s (I use that term lightly in this context) right to choose. Where is the child?s choice to live.
I just done understand how not allowing someone to kill a life is even debatable.

No, i am pro-choice abortion which meanst that i am pro choice aborting a fetus, no one is talking about babies except the anti-choice people who don't know the difference.

The sad part is that they also refuse to educate themselves about the difference.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Where it becomes immoral is if you start having women get pregnant just for the purpose of an abortion.

There are also stem cells in adults that could be used as well.

:thumbsup:

 

[NJDevil]

You guys do realize that they don't create embryos for the purpose of destroying them to harvest stem cells. When these embryos are created for purposes such as in vitro fertilization, some are left over, and instead of throwing them out (destruction?), why can't they use them for research? There are other forms of stem cells but they aren't nearly as versatile as these are, because embryonic stem cells can form any sort of tissue in the body.

They do not create embryos soley to destroy them, the gathering of stem cells is just a better way to use the embryos that would be "thrown out" and thus destroyed anyway.

I completely agree that creating embryos for such purposes is pretty unethical, but that's not how they get them!

 

[andy2812]

Even Bush agrees that the embyronic stem cells are the ones that hold the most promise. This come directly from the Whitehouse website
Whitehouse.org

"However, most scientists, at least today, believe that research on embryonic stem cells offer the most promise because these cells have the potential to develop in all of the tssues in the body."


In embyronic stem cell research, embroyos are not created just for research. They are created for in-vitro fertilization and are extra embryos that aren't need and would be destroyed anyway.

 

[AntiEverything]

Seems to me the that the issue, whether or not they admit it, is that when somebody dies that it was "the will of god".

Aborting baby - done by a person - bad

Dying from disease - caused by god - good

*shrug*

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: andy2812
Even Bush agrees that the embyronic stem cells are the ones that hold the most promise. This come directly from the Whitehouse website
Whitehouse.org

"However, most scientists, at least today, believe that research on embryonic stem cells offer the most promise because these cells have the potential to develop in all of the tssues in the body."


In embyronic stem cell research, embroyos are not created just for research. They are created for in-vitro fertilization and are extra embryos that aren't need and would be destroyed anyway.

Ehhhh, you write whitehouse.org as link description but link to whitehouse.gov?

 

[SNC]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: SNC

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: IHateMyJob2004
Pretty straight forward. Kinda contradictary too.

Pro-lifers are obviously pro-life. Now, doesn't that also make the pro-stem cell research? Seeing how stem cells might save lives?

Eh, no, pro-lifers are trying to limit the choice so they are anti-choice.

And stem cell search is a tool of satan, no good christian will ever admit to anything else.

Just so we are clear, you are for killing children?
I am having a hard time understanding how someone can justify the killing of one person to save another.
Would people in favor of Embro stem cell research, also be in favor of taking the heart out of a healthy death row inmate to save the life of someone? Pro baby killers run there mouth about pro lifers trying to limit a woman?s (I use that term lightly in this context) right to choose. Where is the child?s choice to live.
I just done understand how not allowing someone to kill a life is even debatable.

No, i am pro-choice abortion which meanst that i am pro choice aborting a fetus, no one is talking about babies except the anti-choice people who don't know the difference.

The sad part is that they also refuse to educate themselves about the difference.

So there is a difference between a fetus and a child. With the exception of size there is none.
You people that try to justify the murder of a child by calling it something different are warped!
At what point do you stop calling it a fetus and start calling it a child? At birth? Where do you people draw the line? At the point of the first cell division, the process of creating life has started. If you abort it you are responsible for ending that life. SIMPLE!! One day "pro choicers" will be viewed the same as people who use a gun to kill a person. A MURDERER!!

 

[HomerJS]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Garuda
Stem cell research involves the destruction of embryos. I'm a medical student, and I just can't see how people can justify that. The ends don't justify the means.

So does invitro fertilization. But being a med student you probably already know this. So sacrificing some embryos is OK when you're trying to make a new life, but not OK when trying to benefit an existing one?

I don't see where Garuda has come out in favor of invitro fertilization.

He hasn't, I'd just like to see which side he comes out on if he responds. We have been sacrificing embryos for this a lot longer than for stem cell research and nobody has raised much of a stink over it. I honestly think this hostitlity towards stem cell research is being fueled by the pharma industry by way of the politicians they rent. The last thing big pharma wants to see is cures for all the diseases their drugs treat, and the outcry against it isn't coming from the average person as much as it is the average sheep. But if Garuda's logic is consistant on the subject I'll go ahead and apologize for implying he's a sheep.

Bump. I want to hear his answer too.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: HomerJS

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Garuda
Stem cell research involves the destruction of embryos. I'm a medical student, and I just can't see how people can justify that. The ends don't justify the means.

So does invitro fertilization. But being a med student you probably already know this. So sacrificing some embryos is OK when you're trying to make a new life, but not OK when trying to benefit an existing one?

I don't see where Garuda has come out in favor of invitro fertilization.

He hasn't, I'd just like to see which side he comes out on if he responds. We have been sacrificing embryos for this a lot longer than for stem cell research and nobody has raised much of a stink over it. I honestly think this hostitlity towards stem cell research is being fueled by the pharma industry by way of the politicians they rent. The last thing big pharma wants to see is cures for all the diseases their drugs treat, and the outcry against it isn't coming from the average person as much as it is the average sheep. But if Garuda's logic is consistant on the subject I'll go ahead and apologize for implying he's a sheep.

Bump. I want to hear his answer too.

Obviously he is upset over the Murders of all the children in the dishes too, leave him be and pray over all the dead children in the dishes.