Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Not to mention the moral issues that most here cannot fathom...there's a big difference between adult stem cell and embryonic stem cell success stories.
Adult Stem Cells v. Embryonic Stem Cells
Adult stem cell research has been far more successful in providing cures for serious illnesses. I understand that there have been some horrific failures with embryonic stem cell research where the stem cells form into tumors.
I also understand that Obama also wants to rescind a Bush's rule that strengthened job protections for doctors and nurses who refuse for moral reasons to perform abortions. So...there you have it...we are no longer free to be moral...wonderful...just wonderful. Tell me about tolerance again...how does that work?
Adult Stem Cells v. Embryonic Stem Cells
Adult stem cell research has been far more successful in providing cures for serious illnesses. I understand that there have been some horrific failures with embryonic stem cell research where the stem cells form into tumors.
I also understand that Obama also wants to rescind a Bush's rule that strengthened job protections for doctors and nurses who refuse for moral reasons to perform abortions. So...there you have it...we are no longer free to be moral...wonderful...just wonderful. Tell me about tolerance again...how does that work?
halik
Lifer
- Oct 10, 2000
- 25,696
- 1
- 81
That wouldn't be a conservative lobby group, would it? That's like getting unbiased papers from the Family Research Counsel...
How about we let CMB Ph.Ds decide what works and what doesn't, rather than some fundie Christian organizations? After all, the scientists' goal is medial progress and truth, your goal is pushing dogma.
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Please link to all the embryonic stem cell success stories and let's compare....let's see if you're the biased one or not.
halik
Lifer
- Oct 10, 2000
- 25,696
- 1
- 81
Do you hold a doctorate in any sort of biology study? No ? Well then what's the point of arguing whether *you* think the research is worthy? I certainly am not qualified to evaluate the results of the research on hand...
It's pointless in any case, because you don't really care about the outcome of the research. You care about the dogma that it goes against. Might as well admit it...your motives have NOTHING to do with medical research and outcomes thereof.
Please... That site is completely biased in their 'research'. Try again.
Your 'morals' are another persons oppression. Do you feel the same about moral situations like a pharmacist refusing to prescribe or even carry 'the pill'? What about rubbers? What about muslim cabbies not wanting alcohol in their cab or checkout clerks not handling meat from pigs?
Tolerance? I don't think social conservatives want to go down the tolerance path.
Working overtime to get that Darwin award, are you?
If there were any justice, the only people who wouldn't benefit from the potential medical advances possible through fetal stem cell research would be the tards who fight so hard to stop others from benefitting from it.
OrByte
Diamond Member
- Jul 21, 2000
- 9,303
- 144
- 106
Some great quotes from Obama. I love the fact that there is an ADULT in the White House now, someone with some damn common sense!!
"Promoting science isn't just about providing resources it is also about protecting free and open inquiry," Obama said. "It is about letting scientists like those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it's inconvenient especially when it's inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology."
"Rather than furthering discovery, our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values," Obama said. "In this case, I believe the two are not inconsistent. As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering. I believe we have been given the capacity and will to pursue this research and the humanity and conscience to do so responsibly."
AP source
"Promoting science isn't just about providing resources it is also about protecting free and open inquiry," Obama said. "It is about letting scientists like those here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion, and listening to what they tell us, even when it's inconvenient especially when it's inconvenient. It is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology."
"Rather than furthering discovery, our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values," Obama said. "In this case, I believe the two are not inconsistent. As a person of faith, I believe we are called to care for each other and work to ease human suffering. I believe we have been given the capacity and will to pursue this research and the humanity and conscience to do so responsibly."
AP source
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
I linked some factual information that included the peer-reviewed references. Instead of offering information that challenges these facts...you attack the source instead of making any intelligent counter-argument to support your particular chosen 'dogma'.
I don't have a doctorate in biology...so, does this mean I cannot express a valid opinion that's supported by factual information? I asked you to support 'your' opinion with factual information and what do I get...squat. Instead I get the typical reaction of a person who's unable to support there position rationally...i.e. attack the source as well as the messenger. Yeah...it's tough to be confronted with some facts that don't particularly line up with what you want to believe. So sad.
FYI...I know my motives are clearly ideological and I've made no pretense about that...this seems to be more of a revelation to you than to me. Perhaps one of us realizes their position is purely ideological and the other doesn't...no?
So...here I wait...please provide some facts to support your position. I won't hold my breath.
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
I linked some factual information that included the peer-reviewed references. Instead of offering information that challenges these facts...you attack the source instead of making any intelligent counter-argument to support your particular chosen 'dogma'.
I don't have a doctorate in biology...so, does this mean I cannot express a valid opinion that's supported by factual information? I asked you to support 'your' opinion with factual information and what do I get...squat. Instead I get the typical reaction of a person who's unable to support there position rationally...i.e. attack the source as well as the messenger. Yeah...it's tough to be confronted with some facts that don't particularly line up with what you want to believe. So sad.
FYI...I know my motives are clearly ideological and I've made no pretense about that...this seems to be more of a revelation to you than to me. Perhaps one of us realizes their position is purely ideological and the other doesn't...no?
So...here I wait...please provide some facts to support your position. I won't hold my breath.
Do ya think maybe the potential embryonic breakthroughs might be held back a little by the restrictions put in place during the last 8 years? I still want to know what the difference is between using an unwanted embryo in stem cell testing and throwing it in the garbage. Either way, it's dead.
That would be a stretch because private funding within the United States can still work on them. As well are there any restrictions abroad for public funded research? afaik there hasnt been much of anything except cancer downstream when using embryoic cells. This may change in the future, we dont know. But right now adult stem cells are showing much more potential.
Like I said earlier this is one of the biggest wedge issues that isnt a real issue. Much like the estate tax. People get all riled up about nothing based on their ideological views. Today is a big victory but in 10 years if nothing changes people will still blindly believe embryoic cells have "potential" and need public funding.
The whole argument is dishonest. So far adult stem cells have certainly been more useful than embryonic ones. Embryonic stem cells have a lot of potential though. Even if adult stem cells are always more useful, who cares? They can both provide cures, and for one to be good the other doesn't need to be bad.
If they tell you a cure is under either box A (adult) or box B (embryonic), if you aren't an idiot you lift up both boxes.
What do these fertility clinics do with the left over embryos?
What is the Catholic Church's position on left over embryos? Plant them in virgins?
If the embryos are going to be destroyed, why not use them for research purposes?
-Robert
What is the Catholic Church's position on left over embryos? Plant them in virgins?
If the embryos are going to be destroyed, why not use them for research purposes?
-Robert
halik
Lifer
- Oct 10, 2000
- 25,696
- 1
- 81
Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
I linked some factual information that included the peer-reviewed references. Instead of offering information that challenges these facts...you attack the source instead of making any intelligent counter-argument to support your particular chosen 'dogma'.
I don't have a doctorate in biology...so, does this mean I cannot express a valid opinion that's supported by factual information? I asked you to support 'your' opinion with factual information and what do I get...squat. Instead I get the typical reaction of a person who's unable to support there position rationally...i.e. attack the source as well as the messenger. Yeah...it's tough to be confronted with some facts that don't particularly line up with what you want to believe. So sad.
FYI...I know my motives are clearly ideological and I've made no pretense about that...this seems to be more of a revelation to you than to me. Perhaps one of us realizes their position is purely ideological and the other doesn't...no?
So...here I wait...please provide some facts to support your position. I won't hold my breath.
First of all you linked a clearly biased lobbyist organization, which will not give you an objective picture of the topic on hand.
But more to the core of my argument - Neither one of us have any sort of qualification to evaluate the research on hand (your argument) . Whether you can dig up or cherry pick some articles from PubMed is really besides the point, since neither one of us can understand the content within.
This is why your argument is void, same way my argument regarding the validity of the research would be void. It's not an ad-hominem (i.e. "attack the messenger"), because the basis of your argument assumes knowledge of the topic in order to be able to evaluate its merits.
The main difference between you and I is that you're trying to justify your dogma with things you know nothing about, where as my position is to let the people that do the research decide the merits of the research (there's no dogma on my part). If people with MCDB doctorates decide that embryonic stem cells are useless, then they'll stop researching it. If it's people clutching bibles with no bio background that want to decide the research is fruitless, it's nothing more than a dogma push.
In the end, your argument amounts to what "intelligent design" is to creationism - it's a faux-science wrap on an inherently untenable underlying position.
It probably would have been to our advantage if more money had been available for embryonic stem cell research had been made available during "Slick" Clinton's Presidency, but neither the science, nor the awareness of it, were as high on the public horizon.
If you think embryonic stem cell research is "voodoo" science, prove it, instead of parroting your mindless drivel. :roll:
I thought our nation functioned perfectly fine in the 1990s? Isn't that what you lefties say? Or did Slick 'hold us back' for 8 years! :laugh:
jonks
Lifer
- Feb 7, 2005
- 13,918
- 20
- 81
yep, we should all just get down on our knees and pray! only the lord saves.
Given the wealth of informative and analytical posts you've made in recent months it's not really surprising that you are proud to be a champion of anti-intellectualism. (That computer you're using? It's the Devil!)
In other news, they were going to flush these things down the toilet anyway, so where's the outcry about the "immoral destruction of human life" that would have constituted?
Who knows, who cares. We have wars to fight, banks to bailout, and Obama's health care industry complex to fund without tackling private sector research.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 392
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter