Embryonic Stem Cell Research - Finally!

Interesting analogous overview of the conflict as discussed here.

T_e_c_h_n_o_p_h_o_b_i_a

Just seems pretty hypocritical to me that the party against stem cell research (due to the sanctity of something that MAY become innocent life) has no problem torturing people (who are already life, right?) without giving them the chance to prove their innocence in any court...........or feeding, clothing & teaching other "Life" when that LIFE is poor REAL children!

This one goes back a few pages Mike. At best all you can do is hope to slow down progress, or doom, by keeping gov. out of research. Science marches on no matter what you or I think. Yes it may take longer, but it will be done somewhere. If it turns out good we will benefit and it it turns out bad(like a new disease) we will die. We cannot control the ethics in China, France, etc. and good scientist are starting to flee our country because of our policies. For years they flocked here for the same reason, just reversed.

Kevin

Devil505 wrote:Just seems pretty hypocritical to me that the party against stem cell research (due to the sanctity of something that MAY become innocent life) has no problem torturing people (who are already life, right?) without giving them the chance to prove their innocence in any court...........or feeding, clothing & teaching other "Life" when that LIFE is poor REAL children!

Ohhhhhhhhh noooooooooooo, Dev - those living and breathing creatures can fend for themselves. How dare you think you can take tax money out of someone's pocket to take care of the post born? Their parents should do it but they must want to be poor.

Devil505 wrote:Just seems pretty hypocritical to me that the party against stem cell research (due to the sanctity of something that MAY become innocent life) has no problem torturing people (who are already life, right?) without giving them the chance to prove their innocence in any court...........or feeding, clothing & teaching other "Life" when that LIFE is poor REAL children!

Yeah, Devil, it's always a conundrum to me too. Defining little "d" democracy ... One party; before birth= survival of the fetus, after birth =survival of the fittest. The other party; survival of the fittest from the start, and then there's the history of differing degrees of gun control, populism and socialism attempting to contribute support to their first stated social theorem.

Rodney King ... "why can't we all just get along?"
Kicking and screaming ...

Has anyone noticed that those with an opinion that they are right with no facts to back them up don't learn but when actual facts are presented they fall back on there opinion as fact? Facts are when adult stem cells are used and applied back to doner there is no rejection but when unknown stem cells used nothing good happens. But as usual we will ignore the facts and argue an opinion. Thats socialism to force your unfounded opinion on others whatever the cost. Again California is the example they new what BO was going to do but it came to a vote anyway.

Bill S.

BillMarti wrote:Has anyone noticed that those with an opinion that they are right with no facts to back them up don't learn but when actual facts are presented they fall back on there opinion as fact? Facts are when adult stem cells are used and applied back to doner there is no rejection but when unknown stem cells used nothing good happens. But as usual we will ignore the facts and argue an opinion. Thats socialism to force your unfounded opinion on others whatever the cost. Again California is the example they new what BO was going to do but it came to a vote anyway.

Bill S.

I think when some is tortured to death (without evidence of any guilt) they are just as dead as if they had not been innocent though....am I right?

Is that a fact or an opinion, Dev?

BillMarti wrote:Has anyone noticed that those with an opinion that they are right with no facts to back them up don't learn but when actual facts are presented they fall back on there opinion as fact? Facts are when adult stem cells are used and applied back to doner there is no rejection but when unknown stem cells used nothing good happens. But as usual we will ignore the facts and argue an opinion. Thats socialism to force your unfounded opinion on others whatever the cost. Again California is the example they new what BO was going to do but it came to a vote anyway.

Bill S.

Hey, Bill, didn't you just violate your own rule? (I don't see any backup of your "facts.")

Devil505 wrote:I think when some is tortured to death (without evidence of any guilt) they are just as dead as if they had not been innocent though....am I right?

That is a little ironic coming from a guy from a state with a history of throwing bound women into a body of water to see if they float and then they can execute her for being a witch. Oh yeah, that's right, if they sunk to the bottom like a rock they were innocent. Dead, but innocent.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

New England rivalries. Quaint.

Obama either has more sense than I expected or, as many have characterized those of us who are cautious, a technophobe or perhaps a religious zealot.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first10 ... n-cloning/

Interestingly, the left wing press....er, I mean, mainstream press didn't print this statement by Obama; Too moralistic for the left I suppose.

Some critics say the stem cell research can lead to human cloning, but Obama said his administration would develop "strict guidelines" to avoid such experimentation.

"We cannot ever tolerate misuse or abuse. And we will ensure that our government never opens the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction," Obama said. "It is dangerous, profoundly wrong, and has no place in our society, or any society."

Looks like cloning is out of the question, for now....then again, the left prefers the termite approach.

Yanche wrote:

mikeandgerry wrote:Yes, exactly, nature is capable of reengineering itself without the intervention of man. The article states that genetically engineered corn showed up in traces in genetic studies of mexican corn in fields that hadn't been engineered. The trouble is that man doesn't know how to do it correctly.

You damn well better know what you are doing because if you don't you may end up with corn that cannot reproduce after one generation. Oops! Sorry, folks, we screwed ourselves out of corn!

Faulty argument, when re-engineering any seed crop you never, never do away with the initial seed material. In fact the Svalbard Global Seed Vault and other less grand efforts are specifically designed to prevent seed genebank failure.

John, did you read the article? I cannot comment on seed vaults but I don't think you understand the issue here.

The article states or implies that there were traces of unintended genetic change to crops in Mexico that were not in the control groups. In other words, there was no control over collateral intermingling of gene pools. I am saying that they implemented the hypothesis in the field before it was theory, exposing the natural gene pool to unintended and potentially harmful consequences of combining with engineered genes.

mikeandgerry wrote:Obama either has more sense than I expected or, as many have characterized those of us who are cautious, a technophobe or perhaps a religious zealot.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first10 ... n-cloning/

Interestingly, the left wing press....er, I mean, mainstream press didn't print this statement by Obama; Too moralistic for the left I suppose.

Some critics say the stem cell research can lead to human cloning, but Obama said his administration would develop "strict guidelines" to avoid such experimentation.

"We cannot ever tolerate misuse or abuse. And we will ensure that our government never opens the door to the use of cloning for human reproduction," Obama said. "It is dangerous, profoundly wrong, and has no place in our society, or any society."

Looks like cloning is out of the question, for now....then again, the left prefers the termite approach.

Well, except for the Atlanta Journal Constitution, USA Today, The Washington Post, The New York Times and about 4300+ other instances of it coming up in a search on news.google.com. But, yeah, no mainstream press printed it. Just Faux News.

coaledsweat wrote:

Devil505 wrote:I think when some is tortured to death (without evidence of any guilt) they are just as dead as if they had not been innocent though....am I right?

That is a little ironic coming from a guy from a state with a history of throwing bound women into a body of water to see if they float and then they can execute her for being a witch. Oh yeah, that's right, if they sunk to the bottom like a rock they were innocent. Dead, but innocent.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

I haven't thrown any bound women into any bodies of water in..............weeks now!