Stem Cell Research For or Against?

[warcleric]

GL: if it fails then so be it....but if it succeeds we will truly be inferior, not just be perceived as inferior. Who is going to want to give health insurance to a person that wasnt cured of all genetic defects when they were born.

 

[Cattlegod]

<< What's your point? The controversy arises here because this is human life. Is it alright to use humans for research, provided that they're especially bred for that purpose? I don't think so. >>




you are wrong.

it is not human life. human life is conscious thought and the ability to tell right from wrong, make decisions and believe. a bundle of cells is nothing, it is just a wad of water, protein an carbon. the second you say that the embryo can think, can make a conscious notion, say right from wrong is the same second i call you a fool.

 

[WordSmith2000]

<< WS2000, what are you offering as a bulwark against a slide into a 'Secular Humanist' future where life has no value. Why thump the thumpers if you can neither appreciate their concerns or offer anything i of value as an alternative. Just a question....I don't want to sound like I'm thumping a thumper thumper. >>



From MSN today:

?This is really ghoulish ? creating human embryos for the specific purpose of destroying them,? said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for National Right to Life, a group that opposes abortion and embryonic stem cell research. ?It?s totally wrong to kill human embryos for research.?

This is the kind of hypocrisy about which I am speaking. I will believe that Douglas Johnson is really pro life vis?a?vis this issue when he offers up his wife, sister or daughter to carry excess embryos. Unless he can do this, he is just shilling for his ?constituency?. And what alternative does Douglas Johnson offer? Just repression of science. How sad.


Hmmm. First, I offer nothing as a bulwark against a Secular Humanist future, because in that society, life will have even more value than it has now, IMO. I do not appreciate their concerns because I feel they are largely hypocritical. Pointing out their hypocrisy is what I offer as something of value. In this case, showing you why the religious ?concerns? are bullsh!t and saying that GWB should fund the research is another thing of value that I offer.

Isn?t it Ironic how a couple of GWB?s closest aides are urging him privately to allow Stem cell research, but have been told that they cannot speak out about it since their opinion does not agree with the Christian Coalition?

It would be nice if, just once, GWB would do something that is right, rather than bowing to his special interest groups.

 

[Texmaster]

<< From MSN today:

?This is really ghoulish ? creating human embryos for the specific purpose of destroying them,? said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for National Right to Life, a group that opposes abortion and embryonic stem cell research. ?It?s totally wrong to kill human embryos for research.?

This is the kind of hypocrisy about which I am speaking. I will believe that Douglas Johnson is really pro life vis?a?vis this issue when he offers up his wife, sister or daughter to carry excess embryos. Unless he can do this, he is just shilling for his ?constituency?. And what alternative does Douglas Johnson offer? Just repression of science. How sad. >>



Dont dismiss his beliefs and the beliefs of other just because you dont agree. And I agree with him that embryos should not be conceived for the sole purpose of stem cell harvesting. There are other sources for embryonic stem cells most notably in invitro embryos that are tabbed to be discarded that can be used. Thats far easier to sell than embryos specificially conceived for stem cell harvesting.



<< Isn?t it Ironic how a couple of GWB?s closest aides are urging him privately to allow Stem cell research, but have been told that they cannot speak out about it since their opinion does not agree with the Christian Coalition? >>



Actually, some have spoken out and if they hadn't you wouldn't know to criticize And I doubt very highly you have a shred of evidence that Bush is secretly trying to silence them.



<< It would be nice if, just once, GWB would do something that is right, rather than bowing to his special interest groups. >>



Now you are just ranting without a shred of evidence to back that statement up. I suppose you are going to return your tax return Bush is sending out or are you too young to receive one?

 

[RedFox1]

Cattlegod:
you are wrong.

it is not human life. human life is conscious thought and the ability to tell right from wrong, make decisions and believe.

Sounds like your definition. You're entitled to that. But since when am I &quot;wrong&quot; if I don't agree with you?

This sounds pretty goulish to me. As far as a human embryo is a human embryo; it's still human even if it is tiny and unrecognizable as human life. It may not seem like human life, but it's undeniably still very different from a dog embryo or a duck embryo.

Obviously I'm badly outnumbered here, but I'll stick to my guns on this one.
-RedFox1

 

[Cattlegod]

i see your arguement, and i understand your opinion. however there is one thing i don't quite understand. if you are so pro life for the human, then why did you say this?




<< it's undeniably still very different from a dog embryo or a duck embryo >>



i would think if you thought we couldn't use the embryo of a human, then we shouldn't be able to use the embryo of a duck or a dog or any animal for that matter. i just don't see what makes us better than a dog or a rat. is it just the fact we are more intelligent? other than that i do not see the difference between a dog and a rat or us other than cosmetic appearances.

 

[warcleric]

Cattle: what made us better is evolution. We are superior to every other species on land, is there any doubt about this?

 

[Elledan]

<< We are superior to every other species on land, is there any doubt about this? >>

Yes, most certainly.

Mentally we might be superior, but physically, we're a disgrace. The Human body is just about the most fragile and least resistant body compared to the bodies of other species.

 

[LadyJessica]

RedFox1,

What is your definition of &quot;human&quot;?

 

[warcleric]

Elledan: doesnt matter, if we wanted to we could wipe out every other species of land animal, we are dominant.

 

[Cattlegod]

<< Cattle: what made us better is evolution. We are superior to every other species on land, is there any doubt about this? >>




i agree we are superior, but that does not mean we can abouse our powers.

take this for example. the united states is vastly superior to ethiopia. does that mean we can test on them? or heck, why not just nuke the country and use it as our landfill?

whether or not you agree with me or not, if you kick a dog in the ribs it is going to feel the same as if someone kicked you in the ribs. i do not believe in a god, however i do believe in the values he stands for, and it is that is what is important.


now another example, the embryo of a dog and the embryo of a human... take them, and set them both in the dirt. i don't care how much superior the human embryo is, they will both decompose and die. neither is more advanced at that point than the other, the only thing that differs is the end product. people are getting worked up over this stem thing way to much, they need to redefine their words. to be human is to think for yourself, have opinions, believe and think. an embryo cannot do any of these. if people are willing to go back this far, where do we draw the line? why stop at the embryo, why not go back to the sperm? are we to throw someone in jail every time they masturbate?

 

[Elledan]

<< Elledan: doesnt matter, if we wanted to we could wipe out every other species of land animal, we are dominant. >>

And 90% of Humanity is too stupid to wisely use this power.

 

[warcleric]

Elledan: heh, I agree wholeheartedly.....but the question was just are we superior.

 

[WordSmith2000]

<< Now you are just ranting without a shred of evidence to back that statement up. I suppose you are going to return your tax return Bush is sending out or are you too young to receive one? >>



I am 42. I made enough last year to get that rebate back seven times. And Bush did not come up with this rebate idea; it was put forth by the Democrats as part of the compromise put together for this misguided tax cut. Will I send it back? No, I will buy Haliburton stock with it. I may be a Liberal, but not all Liberals are idiots.

The reason why I did not provide links concerning the two White House members is because I am at work and am performing commando raids to ATOT, and formatting my replies offline. I will post here later tonight if I log on from home.

 

[Jothaxe]

<< Stem Cell Research For or Against? >>



Strongly for.

But then again I am also for controlled experimental genetic engineering. Call me radical if you must.

-jothaxe

 

[Moonbeam]

WS2000, pointing to the hypocracy of the opposition does nothing to provide a bulwark. H person can be a hypocrit and be on the right side of an argument. My point is that unless you understand why fundamentalists are concerned about in this issue, how can you structure an argument that adresses their concerns. Unless you know their concerns you don't even know yourself if they have no reality. I believe in stem cell research. I do not believe that the sanctity of life should be viewed so narrowly that such research is stopped. I do believe, however, that the road down genetic research is a slippery sloap and if I could conclude, with some magic vision and with certainty that the fundamental rights that flow out of an absolute conception of the sanctity of life cannot be preserved, I would not go down that road no matter what else is lost. What I am saying then is that the fundamental issues here are about the collision of absolutist theory of the sanctity of live and the social benefitsw of medical advancement. We would not want, for example to have our lives extended in perpetuity powering the matrix.

 

[Moonbeam]

Tex, there is an argument over the effacasy of these two cell types and while you and I agree that embryonic stem cells seem to offer better solutions, that is by no means conclusive. That makes a compromise to use only adult cells a viable compromise also and one with great appeal to those who are profoundly uncomfortable with embryonic research.

 

[RedFox1]

RedFox1,

What is your definition of &quot;human&quot;?


Good question, I'm not sure I really know how to define what a &quot;human&quot; is. In this case though, I think it's enough to see that the father and mother are both human, and the embryo is a human embryo.

-RedFox1

 

[Texmaster]

<< I am 42. I made enough last year to get that rebate back seven times. >>



LOL Dont do the salery game here buddy. Trust me on that. I'm almost half your age and I would greatly dissappoint you.

I'm still waiting for that evidence you have that Bush bows to special interest groups all the time. Its funny, you throw out a bunch of retoric with no backing just to see if it sticks.



<< And Bush did not come up with this rebate idea; it was put forth by the Democrats as part of the compromise put together for this misguided tax cut. Will I send it back? No, I will buy Haliburton stock with it. I may be a Liberal, but not all Liberals are idiots. >>



But Democrats were against ANY tax cut in the beginning. Only when they started reading the polls did they change their minds.

I always find it interesting when Democrats try to take credit for somthing they voted against. Very Amusing.

Next time just stick to the conversation of stem cell research. Leave your bias towards Bush at the door. You shouldn't judge him on a decesion he hasn't even made yet.

And I see you ducked out of your own bias statements attacking someone's religious beliefs. There is a way to aviod those kind of confrontations, that is If you want to.

And of course you offer no evidence that the &quot;Christian Coalition&quot; is dictating White House policy. Just more basless retoric.

Let me say it again:

Actually, some have spoken out and if they hadn't you wouldn't know to criticize And I doubt very highly you have a shred of evidence that Bush is secretly trying to silence them.

 

[Texmaster]

<< Tex, there is an argument over the effacasy of these two cell types and while you and I agree that embryonic stem cells seem to offer better solutions, that is by no means conclusive. That makes a compromise to use only adult cells a viable compromise also and one with great appeal to those who are profoundly uncomfortable with embryonic research. >>



I agree. The reason I avioded that argument was exactly because of what you pointed out. I and I believe others are afraid if we deny all embryonic stem cell research and enbrace the unproven adult stem cell research, we risk future health solutions down the road.

 

[cbuchach]

I hope Bush makes the roght decision and goes ahead with stem cell research. The potential benefits far outweigh a few minor religiously-oriented concerns.

 

[b0mbrman]

Oh lord....how soon before this turns into a full-fledged discussion on abortion? Then there'll be 200+ replies and a bunch of angry people

 

[syzygy]

i do hope bush approves federal monies for this research. there are many conservatives
who favor stem cell research and the only opposition is from the republican's remote
fanatical corners, people who were supposed to have been exiled from legitimacy by
their own party members after they were saddled with some of the blame for
clinton's consecutive terms and gore's powerful showing.

 

[BooneRebel]

If it can improve our quality of life as a people, I'm for it.

However, that's kind of a slippery argument. Engineering corn to include an insect repellant has a short term benefit (lots of corn, no bugs). But after several generations of mutations, the insects become resistant, and there's a possibility of recombination with other plants: Think insecticide-resistant superbugs, or Roundup-resistant poison ivy.

Strictly focusing on the short-term benefits rules out a lot of hairy long-term impact issues. Stem-cell engineering or human cloning could both have great benefits, but could also end up turning us into a &quot;Brave New World&quot; society...

 

[Pastfinder]

For