Maybe it's because I've been only presented with one viewpoint in ultraliberal Massachusetts, but it seems to me that there's not a good argument against embryonic stem cell research, when there are embryos being destroyed at fertility clinics anyway. Can someone elaborate on this?

religion or something, I haven't heard a really solid argument against it either.

It seems that Bush has a problem killing things that do not yet have conciousness, yet he is okay going to war and killing thousands.

Note: I am not saying we should'nt be going to war, I am just pointing out a conflict. That is for another thread.

I have not heared any good reason for banning gay marrige either.

uhm...as trust has saod before, the Bush admin is the only admin ever to allocate federal funding for stem cell research

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=12021.msg118320#msg118320 date=1120197255]
uhm...as trust has saod before, the Bush admin is the only admin ever to allocate federal funding for stem cell research
[/quote]

So what's your point? Stem cell research has only recently boomed in the past few years, so it is a relatively new field still in it's infancy. Bush had to allocate the funds due to the potential that stem cell research has. But in any case, many scientists don't like the restrictions set forth for federal funding.

Then maybe they should go screw themselves?

[quote author=Banana fanna fo fanna link=topic=12021.msg118001#msg118001 date=1120012536]
Maybe it's because I've been only presented with one viewpoint in ultraliberal Massachusetts, but it seems to me that there's not a good argument against embryonic stem cell research, when there are embryos being destroyed at fertility clinics anyway. Can someone elaborate on this?
[/quote]

It's one of those things that go back to the religious idea of "Can We Play God", but going with that idea, should we help someone who has cancer or mend a broken arm when someone breaks it, because it was "God's Will"?

Religion should be held as an idea, and not brought into science and research and definately not government, but in this it seems it is.  If we ban stem cell research, whats next?  Are they going to arrest a teenager because he wacked off and killed billions of sperm that could have become a person? 

I know this seems stupid, but there should be some common ground, like in the first post.  If they are going to die anyways, why not use them for research?  I could understand if someone just wanted to get pregnant and cell that fetus for money, that could be concitered wrong.  But if they merely are going to trash it, why not study it?

This is one of the reasons I dislike politics.

[quote author=Nabeshin link=topic=12021.msg118354#msg118354 date=1120226933]
It's one of those things that go back to the religious idea of "Can We Play God", but going with that idea, should we help someone who has cancer or mend a broken arm when someone breaks it, because it was "God's Will"?
[/quote]

Nabeshin, you're picking at straws. Those don't apply at all, because playing God is supposedly beyond the human scope. Accidents also happen, and God has nothing to do with consequence, he(?) sets things in motion and stands back. Read the Bible sometime, maybe you'll then know what you're talking about.
[quote author=Nabeshin link=topic=12021.msg118354#msg118354 date=1120226933]
Religion should be held as an idea, and not brought into science and research and definately not government, but in this it seems it is.  If we ban stem cell research, whats next?  Are they going to arrest a teenager because he wacked off and killed billions of sperm that could have become a person? 
[/quote]

Your argument is foolish; sperm are not sentient and unaware of their own existence. Sperms usually die after fertilizing the egg, and therefore really has no existence. What we're talking about is messing with embryos and things that will become self-aware. Bringing that child that was "going to die anyways" to life should be a crime; it(?) was not supposed to be alive, and living in a controlled enviroment all your life, being studied or used is not a way to live. Stem cell research is not banned, so what are you worried about? Also, Religion is intertwined with science and government, mostly as many things that are held as God-created are un-explained and will remain that way for a good while. Why would religion be an idea? It's a way of life and a testament of HOW to live. You need to explain yourself, or make sense at the least.

[quote author=Nabeshin link=topic=12021.msg118354#msg118354 date=1120226933]
I know this seems stupid, but there should be some common ground, like in the first post.  If they are going to die anyways, why not use them for research?  I could understand if someone just wanted to get pregnant and cell that fetus for money, that could be concitered wrong.  But if they merely are going to trash it, why not study it?
[/quote]
You're playing the fool now - we aren't talking about cattle or livestock, its about humans - Sentient beings. The old saying comes to mind now: Do unto others what you would wish for them to do unto you. Would you enjoy being treated as property and treated as simply a tool? Living in a padded room, studied?

Maybe you don't like politics because you don't understand it. Don't hurt yourself thinking, ok?

[quote author=Shout link=topic=12021.msg118309#msg118309 date=1120189021]
It seems that Bush has a problem killing things that do not yet have conciousness, yet he is okay going to war and killing thousands.
[/quote]

Shut the hell up. People like you are why I'm not a democrat.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118447#msg118447 date=1120263540]
[quote author=Nabeshin link=topic=12021.msg118354#msg118354 date=1120226933]
It's one of those things that go back to the religious idea of "Can We Play God", but going with that idea, should we help someone who has cancer or mend a broken arm when someone breaks it, because it was "God's Will"?
[/quote]

Nabeshin, you're picking at straws. Those don't apply at all, because playing God is supposedly beyond the human scope. Accidents also happen, and God has nothing to do with consequence, he(?) sets things in motion and stands back. Read the Bible sometime, maybe you'll then know what you're talking about.
[/quote]

God sets things in motion. He showed us one way for humans to reproduce, and set us up with intelligent minds and a desire to learn, so that we would one day we would be able to clone each other. God sets things in motion and stands back, waiting for, and hoping for, the time when humans will be able to clone to procreate.


Well, that, or God knows and controls everything that happens, down to the smallest insect. If your harvest goes wrong, it's God's will. Obviously there's a purpose to it. Maybe he does not want you to get too fat? Who are you to stand against his will when there's a drought? All this artifical watering is really just artifical insemination of the earth.

If you break a leg, maybe it means he wants you to slow down and lead a slow life, not for some human to play God and put you back together? All these humans healing people, something obviously reserved for God's representatives, that's just an affront to God's will.


[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118447#msg118447 date=1120263540]
Your argument is foolish; sperm are not sentient and unaware of their own existence. Sperms usually die after fertilizing the egg, and therefore really has no existence.
[/quote]

Sperms do not die. They shed their previous shells and move on to be a part of a greater existence. Besides, embryos are not sentient, and they are unaware of their own existence.


[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118447#msg118447 date=1120263540]
You're playing the fool now - we aren't talking about cattle or livestock, its about humans - Sentient beings.
[/quote]

We're not talking about sentient beings. We're talking about a few cells with no self-awareness.

ROFL!
"He showed us one way for humans to reproduce, and set us up with intelligent minds and a desire to learn, so that we would one day we would be able to clone each other." That's one for the quote stack, fo'sure.

Where did you pick that up? He being the being that he is, how can you fathom what his thoughts and his hopes and what he waits for? How can you pass judgement, being a mortal compared to an infinite being? It completely boggles my mind.

Don't contradict yourself - If he sets things in motion, and stands back, then how does he control everything that happens? Once he sets everything in motion, then its all waiting.

Once again, I don't see how you can pass judgement. If your harvest goes wrong, you don't lose weight - You lose your farm and probably go without food for months. What do you mean by artificial watering? Irrigation? It seems plenty natural to me, and a whole lot less back pain when you get old. It's not as if its hurting the earth, as you're implying - It's just a faster means of transporting the water back to the earth.

How are humans playing God when healing the sick and the wounded? I fail to see what you're getting at.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=12021.msg118473#msg118473 date=1120278634]
[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118447#msg118447 date=1120263540]
[quote author=Nabeshin link=topic=12021.msg118354#msg118354 date=1120226933]
It's one of those things that go back to the religious idea of "Can We Play God", but going with that idea, should we help someone who has cancer or mend a broken arm when someone breaks it, because it was "God's Will"?
[/quote]

Nabeshin, you're picking at straws. Those don't apply at all, because playing God is supposedly beyond the human scope. Accidents also happen, and God has nothing to do with consequence, he(?) sets things in motion and stands back. Read the Bible sometime, maybe you'll then know what you're talking about.
[/quote]

God sets things in motion. He showed us one way for humans to reproduce, and set us up with intelligent minds and a desire to learn, so that we would one day we would be able to clone each other. God sets things in motion and stands back, waiting for, and hoping for, the time when humans will be able to clone to procreate.


Well, that, or God knows and controls everything that happens, down to the smallest insect. If your harvest goes wrong, it's God's will. Obviously there's a purpose to it. Maybe he does not want you to get too fat? Who are you to stand against his will when there's a drought? All this artifical watering is really just artifical insemination of the earth.

If you break a leg, maybe it means he wants you to slow down and lead a slow life, not for some human to play God and put you back together? All these humans healing people, something obviously reserved for God's representatives, that's just an affront to God's will.

[/quote]

That makes perfect sense. I have no idea what you are talking about Topaz. You are not looking at the big picture, you are looking at your own narrow-minded veiw of what is against god and what is not against god.
[quote author=Adron link=topic=12021.msg118473#msg118473 date=1120278634]
Sperms do not die. They shed their previous shells and move on to be a part of a greater existence. Besides, embryos are not sentient, and they are unaware of their own existence.
[/quote]

What about the sperm that do not fertilize? They just live in the birth canal for all time?

[quote author=Banana fanna fo fanna link=topic=12021.msg118468#msg118468 date=1120275078]
[quote author=Shout link=topic=12021.msg118309#msg118309 date=1120189021]
It seems that Bush has a problem killing things that do not yet have conciousness, yet he is okay going to war and killing thousands.
[/quote]

Shut the hell up. People like you are why I'm not a democrat.
[/quote]

It's not true then?

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118480#msg118480 date=1120282923]
Where did you pick that up? He being the being that he is, how can you fathom what his thoughts and his hopes and what he waits for? How can you pass judgement, being a mortal compared to an infinite being? It completely boggles my mind.
[/quote]

How can you pass judgement, being a mortal compared to an infinite being? How can you fathom what his thoughts and his hopes are and what he waits for? Who are you to say that we should not be cloning humans?


[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118480#msg118480 date=1120282923]
Irrigation? It seems plenty natural to me, and a whole lot less back pain when you get old. It's not as if its hurting the earth, as you're implying - It's just a faster means of transporting the water back to the earth.
[/quote]

Cloning? It seems plenty natural to me, and a whole lot less back pain when you get old. It's not as if its hurting the earth, as you're implying - It's just a faster means of producing offspring, or helping people with serious diseases / defects get a normal life.

I can only post my viewpoint on the subject. There are three aspects which people object to this for:

1: Abortion-esque...Basically, being against this is about 10 times worse then being against abortion. There are complications (if people started allowing cloning and the like) that could kill almost living beings.

2: "Playing God"... Well my view is that if God didn't want this to happen, even if it could lead to being able to cure alot of pain in the world, then God won't allow it to happen, or give us the knowledge to do it.

3: "Theres no proof that this could ever help us, so why bother(spending money)." - The people who use this argument are by far the dumbest of them all. They're upright saying, We don't know yet, lets just give up. They can burn in hell, IMHO.

I wish we did more of this. I actually supported Bush through this War crap which I don't totally agree with. I loved his Social Security plan. But when he gives out 674 Million dollars, that we payed for.... and then cuts all federal funding of stem cell research. (Which you could thank for saving your life, or you childrens life some day) then you have officially crossed the line, in my book.

I believe that we shouldn't be cloning because its utterly against my set of moral and ethics. You need to draw a line where humans can go and cannot go. Also, I'm entitled to my opinion as you are yours, however twisted yours happens to be.

And really, who wants to grow up with an older You? That's funny, as cloning is not modifying genes, its copying the original's complete genetic makeup and putting it in another human's body to grow normally. Another question: How is cloning going to help people live normal or better lives? Creating specific body parts, or engineering entire human beings for use as spare parts? You're going to need to answer to yourself, not me, on that one. Do you consider it morally right to create and destroy humans at a whim? Are you truly that selfish, that self serving, to act as a god?

Cloning people in the sense that people seem to be using here is science fiction. Talking about cloning in a conversation about stem cells is nonsensical fear-mongering.

It's very realistic. We'll be cloning humans legally or illegally in a matter of years.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118697#msg118697 date=1120436561]
And really, who wants to grow up with an older You? That's funny, as cloning is not modifying genes, its copying the original's complete genetic makeup and putting it in another human's body to grow normally. Another question: How is cloning going to help people live normal or better lives? Creating specific body parts, or engineering entire human beings for use as spare parts? You're going to need to answer to yourself, not me, on that one. Do you consider it morally right to create and destroy humans at a whim? Are you truly that selfish, that self serving, to act as a god?
[/quote]

Who says we need to grow entire humans? I think it would be quite simple to grow single organs, IE hearts for people who's hearts have failed them, livers for people with liver cancer, or new muscles for people with muscular distrophy. Stem cell research != cloning. Creating copies of people is not the point of stem cell research. Helping people is. Of course, as with anything, you will have people abusing it.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118697#msg118697 date=1120436561]
Also, I'm entitled to my opinion as you are yours, however twisted yours happens to be.
[/quote]

That is uncalled for. I could say you opinions are twisted for not being for purseing something that could save and increase the quality of life of thousands. Choose your words wisely.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=12021.msg118706#msg118706 date=1120438289]
Cloning people in the sense that people seem to be using here is science fiction. Talking about cloning in a conversation about stem cells is nonsensical fear-mongering.
[/quote]

Agreed.

I really can't foresee how you would harvest and nurture those specific organs without fertilizing the egg and creating a human first, but I'm not a scientist.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118721#msg118721 date=1120441722]
I really can't foresee how you would harvest and nurture those specific organs without fertilizing the egg and creating a human first, but I'm not a scientist.
[/quote]

Key point:

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118721#msg118721 date=1120441722]
but I'm not a scientist.
[/quote]

Neither am I. The best I can do is speculate. But I do know that the egg must be fertilized. Does it need to grow into an entire human? Most likely not.

It's really all about what you think this "human" you're talking about is... Is a single fertilized egg a human? Is a single cell a human? (if it is, it gets even more interesting to figure out whether the cell is two humans if this is an egg going to turn into twins)

If I were to chop off my arm, I'd say the arm was the arm, and I was the human, but what if I grew an extra arm off some stem cells? We're already growing skin btw.

It's more about what that embryo's going to grow into, not the current state it's in.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118797#msg118797 date=1120483034]
It's more about what that embryo's going to grow into, not the current state it's in.
[/quote]

That does not make sense. When a baby is born, leave it on the ground to get up, get a job and support itself, treat it like an adult, because 'thats what it's going to grow into'.

ITS A HUMAN BEING YOU'RE FUCKING WITH, NOT YOUR OWN BODY OR OF YOUR OWN CHOICE. IT DID NOT CHOOSE TO BE CLONED OR GENETICALLY ALTERED. HOW CAN YOU NOT UNDERSTAND IT?

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118871#msg118871 date=1120508399]
ITS A HUMAN BEING YOU'RE FUCKING WITH, NOT YOUR OWN BODY OR OF YOUR OWN CHOICE. IT DID NOT CHOOSE TO BE CLONED OR GENETICALLY ALTERED. HOW CAN YOU NOT UNDERSTAND IT?
[/quote]

Thats uncalled for. Don't get so emotional over an internet discussion.

[quote author=Shout link=topic=12021.msg118644#msg118644 date=1120402793]
[quote author=Banana fanna fo fanna link=topic=12021.msg118468#msg118468 date=1120275078]
[quote author=Shout link=topic=12021.msg118309#msg118309 date=1120189021]
It seems that Bush has a problem killing things that do not yet have conciousness, yet he is okay going to war and killing thousands.
[/quote]

Shut the hell up. People like you are why I'm not a democrat.
[/quote]

It's not true then?
[/quote]

It would take too much effort to make a watertight explanation of how that is a generic and unapplicable argument.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118797#msg118797 date=1120483034]
It's more about what that embryo's going to grow into, not the current state it's in.
[/quote]

The current state is everything. Look down the toilet bowl next time you've visited it, and consider if it looks like a human. Your excrement will some day be someone.

Besides, if you consider what things will grow into, realize that everyone will some day die. We'll all be mucus. And then we'll be new people.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118871#msg118871 date=1120508399]
ITS A HUMAN BEING YOU'RE FUCKING WITH, NOT YOUR OWN BODY OR OF YOUR OWN CHOICE. IT DID NOT CHOOSE TO BE CLONED OR GENETICALLY ALTERED. HOW CAN YOU NOT UNDERSTAND IT?
[/quote]

lol, There have been speculations that we could grow/"engineer" specific organism's, without cloning an entire human being. Once again, people like you who fight this won't even let us try and figure out a way to do that.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg118721#msg118721 date=1120441722]
I really can't foresee how you would harvest and nurture those specific organs without fertilizing the egg and creating a human first, but I'm not a scientist.
[/quote]

There for justifying everything you've debated so far to have absolutely no standing, other then your personal opinion of not thinking its not worth trying because you and people like you have absolutly no idea.

So yes, why don't we all try and convince other people to not futher our knowledge on something just because we currently are totally ignorant on the subject and have no true knowledge to the extent of the benefits(or cost for those benefits) of this research. Thats what you're really trying to convince people of, to be stupid and not try.

All we can do now is speculate, to the potential benefits and costs of this research. Objecting to that is sheer stupidity, and due to there being no basis for not trying to further our knowledge on any subject for that matter. I pity people like you because you're either arguing something you really don't understand, or just being lazy, good luck getting through life with that attitude.

I don't think you could grow an arm straight from an embryo...I think the embryo would have to be more developed (like a fetus?) & then chop it off & grow it more.

Killing thousands to save thousands?

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119088#msg119088 date=1120602813]
Killing thousands to save thousands?
[/quote]

A stem cell is not a person. It will never be a person. Stems cells come from embryos that are going to be thrown away anyway.

An embryo is a fertilized egg, which will eventually grow into a living, breathing human being. Unless it's aborted, of course. How is it going to be thrown away anyway?

That's what he's talking about -- the stem cells that would be used come from aborted fetuses.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119142#msg119142 date=1120611291]
An embryo is a fertilized egg, which will eventually grow into a living, breathing human being. Unless it's aborted, of course. How is it going to be thrown away anyway?
[/quote]

Lets say a woman is infertile. One way they let women like that have lil babies is to enseminate the eggs outside of the body. And not just one. They do something like 40 I think. Now, a woman is not going to have 40 kids all at once. They take one of the successfully fertilized eggs and do away with the rest.

There is one diffrence between the embryo of a human and the embryo of any other multi-celluar creature: the number of chromosomes (spelling?). That's it. The rest of it is all the same.

A chicken egg is a fertilized egg, which will eventually grow into a living, breathing, chicken. But you are going to eat one! How horrid!

Shout, that's a question of ethics, which you're obviously unaware of.

[quote author=Banana fanna fo fanna link=topic=12021.msg119171#msg119171 date=1120619282]
Shout, that's a question of ethics, which you're obviously unaware of.
[/quote]

It's something I am very well aware of. But I don't understand why it is. And everyone will tell me the same thing 'Because of what it will be'. I don't find that to be a compelling enough argument, just like you don't find my comment about Bush to be a compelling enough argument.

Ethics is something that should be brought into question alot; but it seems the only time it is, religion gets involved as well. And most religions are not represented on these forums, (or races), the grand majority being white christians from the U.S. There is not really much diversity, it just seems there are those for and those against, and almost always the line is drawn at what you can and can't do in Christianity.

Well, people and chickens are different. It is OK to slaughter chickens to feed people, not vice versa. Sorry. This isn't a religious thing, either.

And, Shout, I'm not at odds with you about this one either...I think I support stem cell research (haven't heard a good argument against it yet)

Stem cells needn't be taken from the embryo...a company in Arizona has been accepting umbilical cords for preservation for the past 5-10 years.  The issue at hand is not whether we can use stem cells, its where we get them.  On a 60 minutes episode 5 or so years ago, they had a piece on a little boy who used stem cell treatment to cure sickle cell anaemia.  The results were profound, not only did the little boy become cured of his ailment, his blood type changed from O to B...it literally restructured his blood system.  This is phenominal...nobody knows why this happened or how it works.  I believe they ought be studied, but I also believe that to prevent huge political and social issues, we should just stick to gathering them from the umbilical cord.  Why must it be the embryo?

It is my belief that cloning shouldn't be done on humans because we do not understand the reppercussions of cloning, it degrades the meaning of humanity, and it causes social uproars.  Recall Dolly who died mysteriously.  Besides, there isn't a point to cloning humans.  Unless, you want to treat human beings as spare parts...and that is inhumane (even to the nonreligious).  However, microbiologists clone cells everyday...pretty neat huh?  This does have a purpose though, microbiologists use bacteria as tools to accomplish tasks, from preserving paintings to manipulate a bacteria that cleanly generate Vitamins (used for nutrition to farm animals).  Off topic, but I've actually seen DNA extracted, you can see it with the naked eye...it is a thin strand of white stuff (sorry, there is no cool helix or neat little colored balls).
Furthermore, human beings are intelligent creatures, there could be serious psychological problems with a human who is aware that he/she was born in a test tube and was a copy of someone else rather than being truly unique.  And the thought of objectifying the reproduction process is apalling.  What meaning does human reproduction have if it becomes a lab experiment (remember, humans are intelligent beings, if we were to meaninglessly reproduce, we would indeed resemble animals in that aspect)?  Anyhow, its probably more fun to reproduce naturally.

Advance medical knowledge you say?  We don't even know how a majority of the body works now...let's start there!  Besides, if cloning is useless to begin with (unless you want to talk about manufacturing ideal humans to do certain jobs) then there is no point to tamper with it.

The point in "tampering" with cloning is to learn what can be done. We do not know now how far we will be able to get, but if we don't try, we will never know.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=12021.msg119219#msg119219 date=1120649862]
The point in "tampering" with cloning is to learn what can be done. We do not know now how far we will be able to get, but if we don't try, we will never know.
[/quote]

If it's that necessary, let's get cloning on animals perfect first, this way we have less chance of messing up another human being needlessly.  :-\
Really, I don't really see why we need to test the limits of cloning (especially on humans, I doubt we should be messing with this stuff)...I mean it literally has no point.  Why don't we focus our attention on the brain and AI...perhaps we can use AI to study mental disorders that occurr in the brain in a way that could never be done before.

If we should test the limits of everything, why don't we figure the maximum velocity of two african swallows and a coconut.

[quote author=nslay link=topic=12021.msg119253#msg119253 date=1120663278]
I mean it literally has no point.  Why don't we focus our attention on the brain and AI...perhaps we can use AI to study mental disorders that occurr in the brain in a way that could never be done before.
[/quote]

There is definatly a point to stem cell research. Think of Downs Syndrome, which is a genetic disorder. Stem cell research can help people avoid disorders like this, and potentially reverse the damage.

What people do not seem to realize is that the research is not conducted on humans. It can be performed on the results of failed artificial ensemination, umbilical cords, and aborted fetuses, all of which are thrown in a trash can somewhere anyway. The researchers are not stealing babies from mother's wombs.

[quote]
If we should test the limits of everything, why don't we figure the maximum velocity of two african swallows and a coconut.
[/quote]

That's a high school physics problem...

[quote author=Shout link=topic=12021.msg119259#msg119259 date=1120665224]
[quote author=nslay link=topic=12021.msg119253#msg119253 date=1120663278]
I mean it literally has no point.  Why don't we focus our attention on the brain and AI...perhaps we can use AI to study mental disorders that occurr in the brain in a way that could never be done before.
[/quote]

There is definatly a point to stem cell research. Think of Downs Syndrome, which is a genetic disorder. Stem cell research can help people avoid disorders like this, and potentially reverse the damage.

What people do not seem to realize is that the research is not conducted on humans. It can be performed on the results of failed artificial ensemination, umbilical cords, and aborted fetuses, all of which are thrown in a trash can somewhere anyway. The researchers are not stealing babies from mother's wombs.

[quote]
If we should test the limits of everything, why don't we figure the maximum velocity of two african swallows and a coconut.
[/quote]

That's a high school physics problem...
[/quote]

agreed

It cured sickle cell anaemia in a child...there is definately a motive to research stem cells.
I just don't know why we have to get them from embryos when we can get them from umbilical cords without a problem from anyone.

Exactly! It is an outrage to not further study stem cell research. Just because something could potentially be used negatively doesn't mean that you can just disregard all its positive potential. If the research gets to the point where people are messing around with cloning I have no doubt that there will be laws put in place to limit the inhumane. To limit all of the research together is just highly concerning, as you're stopping the development of your own race. Limiting yourself to be substandard even knowing that you can do better.

Personally, I think it all comes down to your view on life. Some people think they can ignore the facts, focus on ideals like God and live in denial, in hopes of maintaining a simple (to their own understanding) and manageable lifestyle.

My view on life is eventually, the Sun shall implode. I would love to knowingly admit that if we just kept a simple, non-progressing lifestyle, that we would all be happy, knowing thats all that counts in the end, but eventually humanity would no longer exist. So we must progress, part of that comes with killing off diseases that our own progression created, all while making sure we don't kill ourselves off first (radiation/global warming/ect). I'm perfectly content knowing I personally won't live forever. Whether or not we live through our own memories or through our offspring, I just can't die knowing that when my life flashes before my eyes I did absolutely nothing to contribute to what I feel must preserve humanity.

Basically, I have chosen the role I wish to play. The sooner you realize that the guy I just said who believes in God and lives in denial is about as important is me is the real complicated part. :P The picture is bigger then our own lives, some people need to do stupid things in their life so that we may learn from them, no matter how major. Other take the route of caring for a large family and much like the concept of a teacher, "pass it on" to the next generation, giving them a chance to choose their own path, and there for molding them into their own personality.

We have no idea how strong or smart we will need to be to maintain humanity in the future. Which is why we all need to play our own roles, in hope that enough people have taken direct approaches, to come to a solution. All while having whiney people to make sure we don't get too reckless.

[quote author=Hostile link=topic=12021.msg119297#msg119297 date=1120681171]
Exactly! It is an outrage to not further study stem cell research. Just because something could potentially be used negatively doesn't mean that you can just disregard all its positive potential. If the research gets to the point where people are messing around with cloning I have no doubt that there will be laws put in place to limit the inhumane. To limit all of the research together is just highly concerning, as you're stopping the development of your own race. Limiting yourself to be substandard even knowing that you can do better.

Personally, I think it all comes down to your view on life. Some people think they can ignore the facts, focus on ideals like God and live in denial, in hopes of maintaining a simple (to their own understanding) and manageable lifestyle.

My view on life is eventually, the Sun shall implode. I would love to knowingly admit that if we just kept a simple, non-progressing lifestyle, that we would all be happy, knowing thats all that counts in the end, but eventually humanity would no longer exist. So we must progress, part of that comes with killing off diseases that our own progression created, all while making sure we don't kill ourselves off first (radiation/global warming/ect). I'm perfectly content knowing I personally won't live forever. Whether or not we live through our own memories or through our offspring, I just can't die knowing that when my life flashes before my eyes I did absolutely nothing to contribute to what I feel must preserve humanity.

Basically, I have chosen the role I wish to play. The sooner you realize that the guy I just said who believes in God and lives in denial is about as important is me is the real complicated part. :P The picture is bigger then our own lives, some people need to do stupid things in their life so that we may learn from them, no matter how major. Other take the route of caring for a large family and much like the concept of a teacher, "pass it on" to the next generation, giving them a chance to choose their own path, and there for molding them into their own personality.

We have no idea how strong or smart we will need to be to maintain humanity in the future. Which is why we all need to play our own roles, in hope that enough people have taken direct approaches, to come to a solution. All while having whiney people to make sure we don't get too reckless.

[/quote]

You can believe in God without living in "denial."  Those who believe in God are living as much of an assumption as those who don't believe in God.  Those who argue for God are just as bad as those who argue against God.  And you (in general) slap the religious?  How ironic when you are apart of a group that has its own belief system.  However, I think it is a crime to be spoonfed beliefs ... it's one thing to know and understand what you believe and be able to arrive at the same conclusions, and its another to regurgitate what you are taught.  The Catholic Church has a book on its beliefs called the Catechism, it is particularly useful to look up reasonings as to why certain things are believed to be true (in the Church) and with any claim there is a citation.  The Church is a very logical organization (perhaps there is corruption).  Now, I haven't seen anywhere where "the Sun will implode" is denied as a fact in the Church ... I haven't seen any scientific claim made by the Church (I do know the Church claimed the Earth was the center of the universe hundreds of years ago ... it was overturned, actually its funny, but quite recently...councils take a lot of time to process things).  I suppose its habit for some people of the Church to be skeptical of scientific studies, but I don't observe this in the Church.  It's only when science hits certain "soft spots" that it questions.  Really, 5-10 years ago when science was doing research on stem cells, no one had a problem because the cells were taken from the umbilical cord.  Of course people will cause a fuss over taking them from embryos though, religious and non religious alike!

[quote author=Shout link=topic=12021.msg119259#msg119259 date=1120665224]
[quote author=nslay link=topic=12021.msg119253#msg119253 date=1120663278]
I mean it literally has no point.  Why don't we focus our attention on the brain and AI...perhaps we can use AI to study mental disorders that occurr in the brain in a way that could never be done before.
[/quote]
There is definatly a point to stem cell research. Think of Downs Syndrome, which is a genetic disorder. Stem cell research can help people avoid disorders like this, and potentially reverse the damage.

What people do not seem to realize is that the research is not conducted on humans. It can be performed on the results of failed artificial ensemination, umbilical cords, and aborted fetuses, all of which are thrown in a trash can somewhere anyway. The researchers are not stealing babies from mother's wombs.
[/quote]

I never said there wasn't a point to stem cell research...I said there is no point to cloning humans.

[quote author=Shout link=topic=12021.msg119259#msg119259 date=1120665224]
[quote author=nslay link=topic=12021.msg119253#msg119253 date=1120663278]
If we should test the limits of everything, why don't we figure the maximum velocity of two african swallows and a coconut.
[/quote]

That's a high school physics problem...
[/quote]

Its a quote from Monty Python, I'm just pointing out that not all limits need be tested

I'm not sure, but you should consider reading my entire post.

You usually make a decision based on the benefits outweighing the risks. I don't think this applies here.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119325#msg119325 date=1120688360]
You usually make a decision based on the benefits outweighing the risks. I don't think this applies here.
[/quote]

How doesn't it apply? Before you we're responding based off lack of knowledge, what is the excuse this time?

You're saying that non-embryo gathered stem cells that could save lives (without taking them) or improve the lifestyle of millions is not worth even furthering our knowledge in? lol

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119325#msg119325 date=1120688360]
You usually make a decision based on the benefits outweighing the risks. I don't think this applies here.
[/quote]

huh?

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119325#msg119325 date=1120688360]
You usually make a decision based on the benefits outweighing the risks. I don't think this applies here.
[/quote]

In anceint Greece (or Rome, can't remember), it was forbidden to cut into the human body. They thought it was barbaric and was against their gods, which they belived in as fiercefuly as you belive in yours, some said the body should not be mangled as such. Now we know that cutting someone open is many times necessary to keep them alive. Now how does this apply here? We now stand at a potental breakthrough in medical science, with a strong possiblity of being able to prevent or even reverse genectic disorders. But people do not want to do stem cell research, beacuse it is seen as barbaric and is againsts god, and some say the body should not be mangled as such. History repeats itself, and it is now.

[quote author=nslay link=topic=12021.msg119313#msg119313 date=1120686287]
I'm not sure, but you should consider reading my entire post.
[/quote]

Sorry, I misread your post. :'(

[quote author=Shout link=topic=12021.msg119417#msg119417 date=1120746445]
[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119325#msg119325 date=1120688360]
You usually make a decision based on the benefits outweighing the risks. I don't think this applies here.
[/quote]

In anceint Greece (or Rome, can't remember), it was forbidden to cut into the human body. They thought it was barbaric and was against their gods, which they belived in as fiercefuly as you belive in yours, some said the body should not be mangled as such. Now we know that cutting someone open is many times necessary to keep them alive. Now how does this apply here? We now stand at a potental breakthrough in medical science, with a strong possiblity of being able to prevent or even reverse genectic disorders. But people do not want to do stem cell research, beacuse it is seen as barbaric and is againsts god, and some say the body should not be mangled as such. History repeats itself, and it is now.
[/quote]

I don't believe in a god, if you've read my other posts. What I'm saying is that you'll be sacrificing lives to make others better. Is it truly worth it?

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119418#msg119418 date=1120746597]
What I'm saying is that you'll be sacrificing lives to make others better. Is it truly worth it?
[/quote]

You will not be killing things that will become humans. I don't want an umbilical cord. Do you? So why not give it to science? In artificial ensemenation, there are 40 eggs fertiziled. Only one is placed back in the womb. Who wants the other 39 embryos? No one. Send it off for stem cell research. When a fetus is aborted, who wants that? No one. Again, stem cell research.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119418#msg119418 date=1120746597]
I don't believe in a god, if you've read my other posts.[/quote]

That was not the point. I am saying we are being held back by the fact that people are not willing to experiment. Think of what life would be like if it was illegal to do surgery. How many people died in the early days of this pratice? Now how many people are saved because of it? The better part of stem cell research is that you don't have to kill people to do the research.

Now you can say that this point is stupid, that surgery is something we need, and we wouldn't be where we are without it. Exactly. Think of where we could go with stem cell research.

[quote author=Shout link=topic=12021.msg119421#msg119421 date=1120747479]
[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119418#msg119418 date=1120746597]
What I'm saying is that you'll be sacrificing lives to make others better. Is it truly worth it?
[/quote]

You will not be killing things that will become humans. I don't want an umbilical cord. Do you? So why not give it to science? In artificial ensemenation, there are 40 eggs fertiziled. Only one is placed back in the womb. Who wants the other 39 embryos? No one. Send it off for stem cell research. When a fetus is aborted, who wants that? No one. Again, stem cell research.
[/quote]

I still have not heard a good argument that refutes this.

[quote author=Banana fanna fo fanna link=topic=12021.msg119453#msg119453 date=1120757883]
[quote author=Shout link=topic=12021.msg119421#msg119421 date=1120747479]
[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119418#msg119418 date=1120746597]
What I'm saying is that you'll be sacrificing lives to make others better. Is it truly worth it?
[/quote]

You will not be killing things that will become humans. I don't want an umbilical cord. Do you? So why not give it to science? In artificial ensemenation, there are 40 eggs fertiziled. Only one is placed back in the womb. Who wants the other 39 embryos? No one. Send it off for stem cell research. When a fetus is aborted, who wants that? No one. Again, stem cell research.
[/quote]

I still have not heard a good argument that refutes this.
[/quote]

Once again, Until you care to read and understand the fact that you don't need to use embryos, you're just being ignorant on the subject. You keep basing your entire arguement off that fact and we're saying theres a viable (no where near as "inhumane") alternative in umbilical cords. Don't even bother typing a reply unless it takes that also into consideration.

How do you propose we create new body parts? I'm all for fixing mutations in genes (sickle cell disease, Cystic Fibrosis) but towards the end of replacing bodyparts, nope.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119561#msg119561 date=1120785541]
How do you propose we create new body parts? I'm all for fixing mutations in genes (sickle cell disease, Cystic Fibrosis) but towards the end of replacing bodyparts, nope.
[/quote]

Cloning is transfer of all dna, we're already doing part dna modifications on pigs to grow body parts. Stuff like that insulin producing organ...

[quote author=Hostile link=topic=12021.msg119550#msg119550 date=1120783143]
[quote author=Banana fanna fo fanna link=topic=12021.msg119453#msg119453 date=1120757883]
[quote author=Shout link=topic=12021.msg119421#msg119421 date=1120747479]
[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119418#msg119418 date=1120746597]
What I'm saying is that you'll be sacrificing lives to make others better. Is it truly worth it?
[/quote]

You will not be killing things that will become humans. I don't want an umbilical cord. Do you? So why not give it to science? In artificial ensemenation, there are 40 eggs fertiziled. Only one is placed back in the womb. Who wants the other 39 embryos? No one. Send it off for stem cell research. When a fetus is aborted, who wants that? No one. Again, stem cell research.
[/quote]

I still have not heard a good argument that refutes this.
[/quote]

Once again, Until you care to read and understand the fact that you don't need to use embryos, you're just being ignorant on the subject. You keep basing your entire arguement off that fact and we're saying theres a viable (no where near as "inhumane") alternative in umbilical cords. Don't even bother typing a reply unless it takes that also into consideration.
[/quote]

Hey asshole, I'm agreeing with you.

Are we talking about stem cell research or cloning? You're confusing me by hopping from subject to subject.

[quote author=Post Subject]
Re: Stem cell research
[/quote]

For the record, I'm all for stem cell research.  I haven't really read much of this thread, but here's how I feel in a nutshell:  They would only be using A) Umbilical cords, B) Leftover embryos from artificial ensemination, and C) Fetuses that have already been killed via abortion.  So I ask, what's the fucking point of arguing against it?  You're not ending potential human lives to do it (I know, I know, abortion, but that's another person's choice), and it could potentially revolutionize medical science and increase the quality of life for some people exponentionally.

And anyone who is arguing about it because of religious reasons....just shut up.  So many good things throughout history have been ruined/hindered because of/by religion.  Any time we're hindered from making a significant advance that could potentially change the world because of some fucking fairy tale, it makes me want to fucking vomit.

End rant.

[quote author=DarkMinion link=topic=12021.msg119689#msg119689 date=1120846337]
For the record, I'm all for stem cell research.  I haven't really read much of this thread, but here's how I feel in a nutshell:  They would only be using A) Umbilical cords, B) Leftover embryos from artificial ensemination, and C) Fetuses that have already been killed via abortion.  So I ask, what's the fucking point of arguing against it?  You're not ending potential human lives to do it (I know, I know, abortion, but that's another person's choice), and it could potentially revolutionize medical science and increase the quality of life for some people exponentionally.

And anyone who is arguing about it because of religious reasons....just shut up.  So many good things throughout history have been ruined/hindered because of/by religion.  Any time we're hindered from making a significant advance that could potentially change the world because of some fucking fairy tale, it makes me want to fucking vomit.

End rant.
[/quote]

What a completely uneducated and biased post.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119698#msg119698 date=1120849479]
[quote author=DarkMinion link=topic=12021.msg119689#msg119689 date=1120846337]
For the record, I'm all for stem cell research.  I haven't really read much of this thread, but here's how I feel in a nutshell:  They would only be using A) Umbilical cords, B) Leftover embryos from artificial ensemination, and C) Fetuses that have already been killed via abortion.  So I ask, what's the fucking point of arguing against it?  You're not ending potential human lives to do it (I know, I know, abortion, but that's another person's choice), and it could potentially revolutionize medical science and increase the quality of life for some people exponentionally.

And anyone who is arguing about it because of religious reasons....just shut up.  So many good things throughout history have been ruined/hindered because of/by religion.  Any time we're hindered from making a significant advance that could potentially change the world because of some fucking fairy tale, it makes me want to fucking vomit.

End rant.
[/quote]

What a completely uneducated and biased post.
[/quote]We're all biased.
What part was uneducated?...I spose it is the moronic assumption that God is some made up character

Yes, please elaborate, Topaz.  And I'm sorry if me not believing in fictional characters offends you.

Better have to believed & been wrong than disbelieve & be wrong

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119698#msg119698 date=1120849479]
[quote author=DarkMinion link=topic=12021.msg119689#msg119689 date=1120846337]
For the record, I'm all for stem cell research.  I haven't really read much of this thread, but here's how I feel in a nutshell:  They would only be using A) Umbilical cords, B) Leftover embryos from artificial ensemination, and C) Fetuses that have already been killed via abortion.  So I ask, what's the fucking point of arguing against it?  You're not ending potential human lives to do it (I know, I know, abortion, but that's another person's choice), and it could potentially revolutionize medical science and increase the quality of life for some people exponentionally.

And anyone who is arguing about it because of religious reasons....just shut up.  So many good things throughout history have been ruined/hindered because of/by religion.   Any time we're hindered from making a significant advance that could potentially change the world because of some fucking fairy tale, it makes me want to fucking vomit.

End rant.
[/quote]

What a completely uneducated and biased post.
[/quote]

What a completely hypocritical post.

[quote]Better have to believed & been wrong than disbelieve & be wrong[/quote]

Why?

You believe & are wrong you just die & nothing happens

You don't believe & are wrong you die & end up in hell

Sorry, that doesn't frighten me.  And why would you call me a moron for not believing in god?  I don't call you a moron for being a believer...

[quote author=Shout link=topic=12021.msg119704#msg119704 date=1120850699]
[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119698#msg119698 date=1120849479]

What a completely uneducated and biased post.
[/quote]

What a completely hypocritical post.
[/quote]

I'll second that. lol

PS: It has nothing to do with God, regardless its moral debate, and one is only pertained to the embryo/abortion side of it.

To say you follow a religion out of fear is basically why religions were created in the first place. To control people. Don't talk to me about Jesus, he was the brightest man of his time. Its the people who turned his teachings into fanatical followings and even ironically go against his teachings to defend them, that are the real galactically stupid.

DM might not want to call you moron for it, but I have no problem with it if you're going to take that approach. I think religions are a great way to get through life. If you truly follow most of the religions out there, and have a full understanding of them, they all teach you to live a lifestyle which will ultimately lead you to happiness. Isn't that all thats important?

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=12021.msg119713#msg119713 date=1120853427]
You believe & are wrong you just die & nothing happens

You don't believe & are wrong you die & end up in hell
[/quote]

Pascal's wager ... however in Christianity, God probably wouldn't follow such a gig.  Faith isn't meant to be analogous to Pascal's wager.  If you are to believe, believe because you truly feel so, and not because of Pascal's wager.

[quote]
"God is or He is not...Let us weigh the gain and the loss in choosing...'God is.' If you gain, you gain all, if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, unhesitatingly, that He is."
[/quote]
[url]http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PascalsWager.html[/url]

Canned response:

OK, but there are more religions in the world. And there are some with rules such as --you should have no gods beside me...

Suddenly you need to pick say one choice out of 10, where 9 are different gods and 1 is none. And if you pick the wrong one, you lose.....

[quote author=DarkMinion link=topic=12021.msg119689#msg119689 date=1120846337]
For the record, I'm all for stem cell research.  I haven't really read much of this thread, but here's how I feel in a nutshell:  They would only be using A) Umbilical cords, B) Leftover embryos from artificial ensemination, and C) Fetuses that have already been killed via abortion.  So I ask, what's the fucking point of arguing against it?  You're not ending potential human lives to do it (I know, I know, abortion, but that's another person's choice), and it could potentially revolutionize medical science and increase the quality of life for some people exponentionally.
[/quote]

Agreed

[quote author=Adron link=topic=12021.msg119748#msg119748 date=1120862679]
Canned response:

OK, but there are more religions in the world. And there are some with rules such as --you should have no gods beside me...

Suddenly you need to pick say one choice out of 10, where 9 are different gods and 1 is none. And if you pick the wrong one, you lose.....
[/quote]

You don't know religion or haven't studied it too well, then.

Anyway, addressing the stem cell argument- You're going to need to grow the embryo into a state where you can harvest the body parts or whatever it is you want from the clone(?) and grow it however. Are you considering murdering the child after taking the necessary or intended body parts from the host? That's worse than perhaps, what Stalin did. Or, would you rather allow the host to grow without those limbs? I'm surprised that so many people believe that this is the right path. Sure, research it, but why go so far to kill a thousand to benefit another? Does human life matter so little to you?

Oh, and DM: If people without religion truly wish to purs.ue something, then they will do it regardless of restrictions or other's beliefs. And, for the record, I do believe that religion has benefited mankind. You can take it from there to understand why I made that remark. If you can't understand that, then I'll explain- You didn't take the time to make the research on religion's impact on mankind, or you didn't understand it. Plus, you took a rather closed-minded approach towards it, more towards the supposed negativity instead of the positive effects

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119778#msg119778 date=1120878740]
Oh, and DM: If people without religion truly wish to purs.ue something, then they will do it regardless of restrictions or other's beliefs. And, for the record, I do believe that religion has benefited mankind. You can take it from there to understand why I made that remark. If you can't understand that, then I'll explain- You didn't take the time to make the research on religion's impact on mankind, or you didn't understand it. Plus, you took a rather closed-minded approach towards it, more towards the supposed negativity instead of the positive effects
[/quote]

Indeed. Religion is a powerful regulator of human conduct.
[quote]
... He [Benjamin Franklin] called them the essentials of every religion.  In their distilled form they were:

[quote]
That there is one God, who made all things.
That he governs the world by his providence.
That he ought to be worshipped by adoration, prayer and thanksgiving.
But that the most acceptable service of God is doing good to man.
That the soul is immortal.
And that God will certainly reward virtue
and punish vice, either here or hereafter.
[/quote]

This belief to him, was indeed a powerful regulator of his conduct and by it his life's achievements may be best understood and appreciated.
[/quote]

A quote from Benjamin Franklin's, The Art of Virtue

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119778#msg119778 date=1120878740]
You don't know religion or haven't studied it too well, then.

Anyway, addressing the stem cell argument- You're going to need to grow the embryo into a state where you can harvest the body parts or whatever it is you want from the clone(?) and grow it however. Are you considering murdering the child after taking the necessary or intended body parts from the host? That's worse than perhaps, what Stalin did. Or, would you rather allow the host to grow without those limbs? I'm surprised that so many people believe that this is the right path. Sure, research it, but why go so far to kill a thousand to benefit another? Does human life matter so little to you?

Oh, and DM: If people without religion truly wish to purs.ue something, then they will do it regardless of restrictions or other's beliefs. And, for the record, I do believe that religion has benefited mankind. You can take it from there to understand why I made that remark. If you can't understand that, then I'll explain- You didn't take the time to make the research on religion's impact on mankind, or you didn't understand it. Plus, you took a rather closed-minded approach towards it, more towards the supposed negativity instead of the positive effects
[/quote]

You're so far mislead and stubborn for that matter, to not even acknowledge the other aspects of stem cell research. You're point is growing very old, as thats your own, very (quote) "uneducated" comprehension of the research. By killing off stem cell research you're not stopping potential future misuse and inhumane actions which are also considered a part of it. You're killing off all the part that can cure gene mutations just by using umbilical cords. That -is- stem cell research too, you know. As for embryos, you're obviously too stubborn to understand that the only ones that have ever been used we're from actions that are already in progress, and would be and still are thrown into the garbage, anyways! Now, opposing to taking them and then growing it into a human being, is cloning. Thats being opposed to cloning humans, not being opposed to stem cell research. (So much for calling everyone uneducated)

Religion has helped mankind. Like I said, it was used to control people in past times. That was very neccessary then, we didn't know what we know now back then. Its just anouther part of human progression.

PS: Stop being so hypocritical. Say your opinions, ask questions, learn, teach, but don't counter any point you're trying to get out by calling out other peoples views by saying their uneducated, biased, closed mind, when you're no better.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119778#msg119778 date=1120878740]
[quote author=Adron link=topic=12021.msg119748#msg119748 date=1120862679]
Canned response:

OK, but there are more religions in the world. And there are some with rules such as --you should have no gods beside me...

Suddenly you need to pick say one choice out of 10, where 9 are different gods and 1 is none. And if you pick the wrong one, you lose.....
[/quote]

You don't know religion or haven't studied it too well, then.
[/quote]

I have studied it well enough to know that people kill each other over it. And I have studied it well enough to know that if the christian god is the god, you lose if you believe in the norse gods, and if the norse gods are the gods, you lose if you believe in the christian god.


[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119778#msg119778 date=1120878740]
Anyway, addressing the stem cell argument- You're going to need to grow the embryo into a state where you can harvest the body parts or whatever it is you want from the clone(?) and grow it however. Are you considering murdering the child after taking the necessary or intended body parts from the host? That's worse than perhaps, what Stalin did. Or, would you rather allow the host to grow without those limbs? I'm surprised that so many people believe that this is the right path. Sure, research it, but why go so far to kill a thousand to benefit another? Does human life matter so little to you?
[/quote]

Here's a link to an example of what researchers are trying to do with stem cells: [url]http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/24/eveningnews/main676424.shtml[/url]

As you can see, stem cells can be used to grow cloned organs without having to kill a human to harvest them.


Here's a link to someone speaking of creating children to help other children survive: [url]http://www.dnapolicy.org/pdfs/Strongin_PGD_7.03.pdf[/url]

That's an example of creating a child and using something from it to save another child, without having to kill it to harvest it.


You're thus utterly wrong. There's no need to be killing grown children to harvest body parts. Science solves it all for us if we just encourage research in the field.

It depends what you consider "grown" and when life begins, but...

If you'd read my posts, like some other people on these forums, you'd understand my point of view. I'm not speaking out against curing or repairing genetic mutations - I'm against cloning and using clones to replace body parts. Also, if you'd read what I wrote to DM, you'd understand why I said that.

I suppose there'll always be closed-minded people who only listen to their own voice.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119887#msg119887 date=1120950298]
It depends what you consider "grown" and when life begins, but...

If you'd read my posts, like some other people on these forums, you'd understand my point of view. I'm not speaking out against curing or repairing genetic mutations - I'm against cloning and using clones to replace body parts. Also, if you'd read what I wrote to DM, you'd understand why I said that.

I suppose there'll always be closed-minded people who only listen to their own voice.
[/quote]

Well, if you look at the post about copying human cells into animals and having the animals grow human body parts that can be harvested just like we grow animals for meat already.... Or would you say the animal is a human as soon as you put in some human cells?

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg119887#msg119887 date=1120950298]
It depends what you consider "grown" and when life begins, but...

If you'd read my posts, like some other people on these forums, you'd understand my point of view. I'm not speaking out against curing or repairing genetic mutations - I'm against cloning and using clones to replace body parts. Also, if you'd read what I wrote to DM, you'd understand why I said that.

I suppose there'll always be closed-minded people who only listen to their own voice.
[/quote]

So in essence, you support stem cell research then? Only object to human cloning? :p

PS: Feels like you're avoiding me and just about all of my posts. Doesn't show much when you keep reverting to picking on other people who took a more direct approach to posting their views then me for explaining it more. Very rude :P

Yeah :-X

So it seems to me we all agree that stem cell research is OK...?

Well, now that you guys are understanding the great benefits that stem cell research can safely provide for us, I'll only be fair and admit I do share similar concerns. Should we ever start using it recklessly it could cause serious problems as well, however I really don't think that its a problem worth discussing too much, yet. The only real idea of the problems that could come from -certain- methods of the science have really only been predicted through science fiction media. I'm quite confident that later on, when the actual extent of negative (well more so, questionable) usage of stem cell research, that there would be laws put in place to restrict such things. In the mean time, we really must thrive to even get to that point, and seek out all the safe benefits we can from it.

Anything used recklessly can cause problems. Genetic manipulation, cloning and stem cell processes will all need to be regulated by the legal system, but the research on them shouldn't be blocked. Getting the knowledge is good, we just have to be careful how we use it.

Much like researching weapons, organ transplants, medical drugs, etc..

Anything can and will be abused; stem cell research is no exception.

One of the biggest issues I've been thinking of is abuse - If, per say, a drug addict slash alchoholic were to get replacements for his kidney and liver, he would suffer no consequences for destroying his body (eg, long-lasting). After filling his body with toxins and destroying his body, he would continue to do so (perhaps forever) until his money for drugs, alcohol, and replacement parts ran out.

That's not a problem. If we can replace body parts and fix up drug addicts, that's for the better.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=12021.msg120601#msg120601 date=1121291357]
That's not a problem. If we can replace body parts and fix up drug addicts, that's for the better.
[/quote]

It's a problem when the person doesn't fix his habits because he can always buy a new organ.  Well, I guess that's where capitalism comes in, but I don't think even people with money who abuse drugs should have the oppurtunity on their 3rd+ chance on life.

I wonder how never used liver taste...supposedly people eat those poison filters.
Just think Topaz!  We can feed the world Liver, we'll get our Liver stem cells, put them in a pot and plant them until a new Liver sprouts.  And in England, where their cuisine sucks for the most part (except for Shepards Pie...oh yeah that owns), we can grow them kidneys since they eat that too!

[quote author=nslay link=topic=12021.msg120647#msg120647 date=1121318979]
[quote author=Adron link=topic=12021.msg120601#msg120601 date=1121291357]
That's not a problem. If we can replace body parts and fix up drug addicts, that's for the better.
[/quote]

It's a problem when the person doesn't fix his habits because he can always buy a new organ.  Well, I guess that's where capitalism comes in, but I don't think even people with money who abuse drugs should have the oppurtunity on their 3rd+ chance on life.
[/quote]

You don't need to give people the option to replace their organs to make them smoke / drink. They know their organs take damage from smoking and drinking, but they do it anyway. The number of people starting to smoke/drink because they know new organs can be grown would be minimal. Besides, organs can already be transplanted from human donors.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=12021.msg120658#msg120658 date=1121323823]
[quote author=nslay link=topic=12021.msg120647#msg120647 date=1121318979]
[quote author=Adron link=topic=12021.msg120601#msg120601 date=1121291357]
That's not a problem. If we can replace body parts and fix up drug addicts, that's for the better.
[/quote]

It's a problem when the person doesn't fix his habits because he can always buy a new organ.  Well, I guess that's where capitalism comes in, but I don't think even people with money who abuse drugs should have the oppurtunity on their 3rd+ chance on life.
[/quote]

You don't need to give people the option to replace their organs to make them smoke / drink. They know their organs take damage from smoking and drinking, but they do it anyway. The number of people starting to smoke/drink because they know new organs can be grown would be minimal. Besides, organs can already be transplanted from human donors.
[/quote]

Exactly, which is why we shouldn't give them the option to replace their organs on their 3rd+ time.

[quote author=nslay link=topic=12021.msg120749#msg120749 date=1121383669]
Exactly, which is why we shouldn't give them the option to replace their organs on their 3rd+ time.
[/quote]

Why 3? Why not 1? Or 5? Or none?

I think this is a pretty callous position to take, not to mention arrogant and judgemental. What qualifies you to decide who should receive life-saving medial treatment and who should not? Why should you get to dictate how people should live their lives?

What the hell business is it of yours?

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=12021.msg120751#msg120751 date=1121384200]
[quote author=nslay link=topic=12021.msg120749#msg120749 date=1121383669]
Exactly, which is why we shouldn't give them the option to replace their organs on their 3rd+ time.
[/quote]

Why 3? Why not 1? Or 5? Or none?

I think this is a pretty callous position to take, not to mention arrogant and judgemental. What qualifies you to decide who should receive life-saving medial treatment and who should not? Why should you get to dictate how people should live their lives?

What the hell business is it of yours?
[/quote]

Usually near death experiences or major problems change people.  This would be their second chance.  On the third chance, if they had not changed on their second chance, why should we waste perfectly good organs? 

You might argue that, because we can grow organs, their value diminishes.  True, but that doesn't fix addiciton problems.  I am sure new laws would be placed such that if addicts recieve organ transplants, they ought be put in rehab.

Arrogant?  I'm looking at it practically.

Hehe, I just noticed this, but this reminds me of a warranty system.  Abusing your organs would be a violation of the warranty hehe.

[quote author=nslay link=topic=12021.msg120779#msg120779 date=1121393613]
Hehe, I just noticed this, but this reminds me of a warranty system.  Abusing your organs would be a violation of the warranty hehe.
[/quote]

Of course, whether it should be covered by warranty or not could be debated. I don't see any reason not to provide optional out-of-warranty genetically modified organ transplant services though.

Rofl. Body part warranties.

[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg121100#msg121100 date=1121637925]
Rofl. Body part warranties.
[/quote]

Well, it's typically called something like "medical insurance", and it lets doctors save your life after you've been run over by a truck even when you don't have money on you.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=12021.msg121124#msg121124 date=1121669940]
[quote author=Topaz link=topic=12021.msg121100#msg121100 date=1121637925]
Rofl. Body part warranties.
[/quote]

Well, it's typically called something like "medical insurance", and it lets doctors save your life after you've been run over by a truck even when you don't have money on you.
[/quote]

And how does medical insurance treat people who abuse drugs? 

drug = alcohol, cigarettes etc...

I can see two possibilities:
1) Charge higher rates
2) If it was unknown they abuse drugs, my guess would be that they wouldn't cover costs for say, I don't know, liver disease caused by alcohol?  If they covered the cost, probably charge higher rates afterwards, and maybe penalty fees?

But then again, that depends on your insurance company...
Insurance is based off of a lot of probability, I am sure an insurance company is interested if you do drugs or not.  Given this information they can factor the correct statistics and determine the correct rate to charge.  If you lied about doing a drug and they find out, I'm sure in most cases, this would null and void your contract.  If not, then they might cover costs and then charge higher rates thereafter.
Here, we see that rates determine how "privy" you are to coverage. 

I think that access to medical treatment is a basic right that should be provided to people in any modern society, and that that right can't be conditioned upon one group of people's judgements about another group's lifestyle.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=12021.msg121133#msg121133 date=1121696405]
I think that access to medical treatment is a basic right that should be provided to people in any modern society, and that that right can't be conditioned upon one group of people's judgements about another group's lifestyle.
[/quote]

I think that access to reasonably cost-efficient medical treatment for conditions that aren't self-inflicted, should be provided to everyone in a modern society. I think medical treatment of self-inflicted conditions could well be provided at the patient's own expense. Same with non-cost-efficient medical treatment.