Even before Congress changed hands, a gap existed between it and President Bush on federal funding for new embryonic stem-cell research. His second veto of a bill to bolster such research brought talk of an override attempt or yet another legislative do-over. Bush’s executive order urging on those who do “ethically responsible” research won’t satisfy the many who see embryonic stem cells as the pluripotent key to curing major illnesses. Both sides are just working the process as they can. But does the repeatedly stated will of the legislative branch mean nothing to Bush?
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Late-night laughs
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- Blaidd_Drwg69 on Too many exemptions
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Late-night laughs
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
58 Comments
OK — here is the low down on this thing.. IMHO… Those who are avidly opposed to Embryonic Stem Cell Research are essentially the same as the Right to Life groups… Those groups generally oppose In Vitro Fertilization… Which means, they dont approve of the USE of embryonic stem cells they claim will be “killed” if used for research…
What is their intended use for these embryonic stem cells, since they dont believe in using them to bring them to LIFE???
And, if I read it correctly, well over 60% of those who HAVE embryonic stem cells in the freezer, are more than willing to have them used for the research projects…
So, once again, we see this President upholding the “religious” and some would say “moral” values of those who oppose the use of those embryonic stem cells for ANY USE, but who claim they represent “living” entities???
I dont believe they can be classified as living entities, unless they are attached to a uterus?? Thus, In Vitro Fertilization, which they also condemn…
In fact, many of those opposed to embryhonic stem cell research are also the same folks who condemn ANY form of birth control, EXCEPT for rhythm methods…
Again, the President has aligned himself with predominantly religious groups who object to the use of embryonic stem cell research… They and Bush call it protecting “life” — but in reality it is protecting life that cannot even exist within their own views of life…
Anybody care to argue the point??
I don’t care to argue the point. A living, breathing human should take priority over some blastocysts in a petridish that are destined for the landfill.
This is an issue which needs to be passed, and passed, and passed by a reality-based Congress, even if it’s inevitable that Shrub will veto it thanks to the “every sperm is sacred” minority Republics.
I don’t care if he vetoes it a dozen times, make him veto it a thirteenth time.
This is a wedge issue that’s certain to split the Republic Party coalition.
Does it “mean” anything? Not all that much. But much, much more than the Pledge of Allegience or “partial-birth abortions,” or any number of pseudo-issues Republics have leveraged to win their marginal victories at the polls for the past fifteen years or so.
Rub Shrub’s nose in the patent idiocy that is objecting to embryonic stem cell research. At every opportunity.
Since Reagan, the Republic Party has thrived on simplistic explanations to complicated problems. With George WMD Bush, the chicken have come home to roost. All those so-called “principled” stances — a balanced budget, term limits, no “Nation-Building” or intervention into foreign conflicts without an Exit Strategy, et al — have been sacrificed for the profitablity of Halliburton, Blackwater, et al.
Republics never believed in anything except their lust for power. The Republic Party never believed in anything except for achieving their place at the public trough.
Republics have claimed to be the “conservative” voice in American politics. But when a true Conservative steps up, the Republics do everything in their power to marginalize his candidacy.
During the last two election cycles it was evident that Allen Keyes was the most elequent, most thoughtful proponent of so-called “conservative” values. He was rejected by Republic Party voters out of hand. I thought at the time it was indicative of Republic Party voters’ racism.
I have to reconsider that position. Ron Paul expresses just about every conservative principle the Republic Party *says* it stands for (read their platform). And he’s getting what? Three percent of Republic Party support?
That should probably tell you something about the Republic Party.
They’ll use any emotional issue, they’ll cite any so-called “moral” argument, they’ll say anything that works up to and until Election Day to sway voters.
But for them it’s all about getting taxpayers’ money to the pharmaceutical companies, for-profit health insurers, Big Oil, Halliburton, Blackwater, et al.
LTP,Good post except for the part about Keyes…He’s just another nutcase. But the overall problem is, something is broke in Washington and it’s not just the republicans who are at fault. It’s the whole system. As with the stem cell issue, the will of the people is not being carried out by either party. It seems that only special interests and the lobbying groups have a voice in Washington. I had hoped that after the Abramoff scandal, we might get some reform. But now that the smoke has cleared, we’re back to business as usual. What would have been called bribery back in the day is now called lobbying and campaign contributions. And a democratic congress hasn’t made any difference. They seem to be a bunch of incompetents. What a bunch of clowns!
On stem cells, Bush is just playing to his base; it’s what he does. His presidency is over. Now all he can do is stand in the way of progress and we can count on him to do just that. Bush will go down in history as the biggest mistake we’ve ever made.
There’s not too many people who get it. Thanks to the media who propogate their slant. The numbers they claim are a joke! Anybody can take a poll to a narrow set of people and word the issue to get whatever answer they want.Thank you Mr. President for having the fortitude to stay the course.Eventually the pro life people will be the majority thank goodness. That has the anti people trying to do as much as possible until the inevitable happens.
Why don’t those that hold the fertilized cells as life, volunteer themselves or their wives to bring the cells to fruition (20% said they would donate).Then, they could either raise or adopt out after birth.
Yeah Phantom,
Then when your daughters go off to college they can set up their own fetal farms to earn money for fun and profit.
I suppose it depends if you define a fetus as an organism. If the organism is alive and able to develop then that should qualify the definition as a living developing organism.
Environmentalists get all spastic about Snail Darters in any stage.
Perhaps Snail Darters are more important than a human fetus.
The bill passed by Congress would have provided money to research ONLY those embryos that are DESTROYED AS MEDICAL WASTE. The clumps of cells (blastocysts) are still destroyed; they are incinerated intead of used in research. Bush and the people he fools aren’t saving anything! It’s another lie.
Adult stem cells have been used in research since the 1940s and only in the last 10 – 15 years have treatments been discovered. Embryonic stem cells were DISCOVERED less than 10 years ago.
There is a good possibility that many diseases can be treated by ES cell therapy. There are many bugs to work out, but given sufficient time and financial resources, it’s a good bet that at least some diseases will be treated.
When we have a new president we will fund the research that will bring treatments and cures for all, even bush. Science won’t exclude anyone.
“Then when your daughters go off to college they can set up their own fetal farms to earn money for fun and profit.”Posted by: Republican | June 22, 2007 at 08:06 AM
Much as I hate to agree with Republican, he has a valid point. How long before the ultra-rich figure out a way to use organ or clone farms to extend life? Just clone a body and use the parts, or in the near future, just have your 80 year-old brain transplanted into an 18 year-old clone body. That may be sci-fi now, but in a few years….
I can remember when the idea of heart transplants was scoffed at as sci-fi.
Personally, I’m not sure what to think about embryonic stem cell research. At first it seemed like a reasonable idea, but there’s some promising research with adult stem cells and recent skin cell discoveries.
Do we really need to go down the moral “slippery slope” involved with embryos?
Has anyone seen “The Island (2005)”? That is where we are headed if we continue down the path of destroying embryos for research.
Embryonic stem cells have shown zero positive results (however they have created tumors in test subjects) and do not hold any promise. Adult stem cells are currently used in more than seventy therapies and have lots of promise.
If embryonic stem cells were soooooo promising, why isn’t the private sector pooling money into the research (thus not requiring public funds)? If they are the magic cure everyone thinks they are, companies would stand to make millions or more.
Those that do the actual medical research state that embryonic stem cells provide the best possible chance for progress – I’ll take their word for it over the word of any politician.
But the question remains unanswered by those opposed to stem cell research…………
Why do you object to research, but you are fine with having the blastocysts thrown in the trash?
If you are against ES cell research be honest about it. Be honest enough to realize embryos are harvested and fertilized to help bring wanted babies into our world. In the process, there are MANY more thrown away than are implanted into a Mother’s womb. Now if protecting “life” is your goal, look at reality and admit the problems with fertility clinics. And don’t fool yourself into thinking anything is being saved; it’s not. Blastocysts left over at fertility clinics are destroyed; hundreds of thousands of them, more than could ever become “snowflake” babies. As long as there are fertility clinics there will be left-over blastocysts thrown away.
There are dishonest devious people in the world. If those people want to clone spare human parts, make “The Island” reality; make themselves a new 18-year old body for their 80-year-old brain THEY WILL TRY. Ethics or legality won’t be part of their thinking.
Most scientists are ethical people whose goals are finding cures and treatments.
And always remember the cures and treatments that will be the result of ALL kinds of stem cell research will benefit mankind, even those who would rather those left-over blastocysts are destroyed by being thrown away.
Very good summation, Lindainks.. Well stated… Now, if we can just get people to see the LIE Bush and others are propagating!!
The private sector, universities and states are pouring money into SCR and embryonic stem-cell research. There is no reason the federal gov needs to throw money at it also. Bushes reasons may be out there but the end result is the Democrates want to waste more federal money and he is stopping them which is the right thing.
Finally, some serious discussion instead of rhetoric!
The real question is, “Should our government be a part of funding a monster, even one that has the potential to be beneficial to some people?”
Embryonic stem cell treatments have not shown any positive results, although umbilical cord stem cells and adult stem cell treatments have. That does not mean that they won’t, nor does it mean that pivate industry can’t do the research. Currently it only means that the government will not help with funding. Also, it will not prevent other countries from working with research and developing procedures.
This is an area that we should proceed cautiously, but we should listen to scientists and follow their lead. The Bush administration hasn’t been known for embracing the views of the scientific community. That has led to distrust of their purposes by the general public. Maybe it is time for them to get their head out of their “past” and use some common sense.
I’ve visited several medical research facilities where ES cell research is ONE of the types of research being conducted. The ES cell research is conducted with private money while at a nearby bench another type research is going on with federal money.
In laboratories the most expensive pieces of equipment are generally shared. But because of the mix of federally-funded research and ES cell research (which BY LAW can’t use federal funds) those expensive pieces of equipment must be duplicated. And these very ethical scientists duplicate that equipment and keep detailed records so there is NO DOUBT they have used federal funding in any way.
I think our most brilliant should concentrate on their research not these details; and the money to duplicate equipment should be used for their research.
I could type all day about the details and complexities and the time spent on staying legal. These scientists aren’t trying to make “The Island” reality!
Right here in Kansas our legislature introduced a bill that would have made a scientist doing ES cell research a criminal. Oh it was cleverly worded so it fooled those who look no further than what they want to believe. It failed, but the Phillllll Kline types make everything about their protection of the unborn, to the exclusion of those who are born and suffer.
We could all make a long list of ways federal money is wasted. I personally would rather spend on research that has the potential to ease suffering and offer hope and treatments than all those wasteful projects we would put on our lists.
Lindainks, get real!!!There is more money in sickness then in making people healthy.
Rhonda,
Concealed Carry has been the “repeatedly stated will of the legislative branch” in Kansas for over a Decade.
Graves vetoed it.
Sebelius vetoed it.
It took an override to accept it.
YOUR PAPER took stances against it and still does.
Why don’t you see the “stated will of the legislative branch?”
17-month-old twins Michael and Paige Bell, of Traverse City, MI are among the leftover frozen human embryos who were adopted and birthed recently.There are no leftover human beings.- – -The promising treatment right now for unethical actor Michael Fox’s Parkinson’s disease, and that of half a million other Parkinson’s patients, is gene therapy. A tube about the width of a hair is threaded through a hole about the size of a quarter at the top of the skull. The tube delivers a dose of a virus engineered to ferry copies of a gene into cells of a brain region called the subthalamic nucleus. The gene copies enable the cells to pump out more GABA, a brain chemical lacking in Parkinson’s patients. Parkinson’s sufferer Nathan Klein, 59, of Port Washington, NY received this treatment in 2003, and his symptoms have almost entirely disappeared, with no side effects. Others have improved.Useless, unethical embryonic stem cell research has never evidenced any likelihood of treatment or cure for Parkinson’s disease, or any other disease or injury, and will not be ready for human trials for decades, if ever.Well then, where is the clamor in Congress for gene therapy research, in addition to successful adult stem cell research, with its dozens of cures? Is this a Washinton game, or does anyone in federal government besides President Bush and a handful of stubborn pro-lifers really care about curing people? Does the ESCR lobby consider crippled and suffering victims of disease and injury to be dupes for their profit? Why isn’t Mr. Fox saying anything about gene therapy? Who bought him off?
Because the areas of research you bring up are already federally funded.
Gene therapy research is federally funded.
Adult stem cell research has been ongoing since the 1940s and is federally funded. Within the last 10 – 15 years some treatments have been found. Hooray! Everyone is excited and ready to pump more money into this valuable research.
Embryonic stem cells were DISCOVERED within the last ten years. Scientists agree they offer the greatest hope and given adequate time and funding will provide cures and treatments.
Those who really care about life and suffering realize it makes sense to fund ALL TYPES of stem cell research — adult, embryonic, those found in amniotic fluid, hybrids. And when the treatments and cures are found everyone will benefit. Even those who clamor about funding what is already funded like YOU.
Are your straw men arguments being funded? Why do you feel it is ethical and useful to throw away the left-over blastocysts? Are you one of the handfuls of stubborn pro-lifers that think you are protecting something by throwing it away?
If you are against ESC research, at least be honest.
Parkay,You aren’t one of those bastards who insist on prolonging people’s suffering because you believe it’s somehow purifying, are you?
Those who oppose embryonic stem cell research are the same ones that have no problem with in vitro fertilization.
If these so-called religious types were serious about their religious faith, then they would let God decide on whether or not they can conceive a child.
Isn’t it interesting that these so-called religious types denounce scientists in the embryonic stem cell research, evolution and global warming but they are all for scientists when they can implant multiple fertilized eggs into their womb and then wind up with multiple births. If these so-called religious types are really acting in faith, they would let God take over and they would stop using scientists to get that baby.
After all, nature being nature will take the natural course and any fertilized egg (no matter if it is by a turkey baster) will develop into a living baby. Just don’t praise God when what man does on his own through manipulating science turns out to be a baby. God had nothing to do with it – pure science of nature did it.
I really never understood anti-research people’s thinking. Nutters like Parkay suggest that since no cures have been found that there are no cures to be found. I’m supposing that when people first started researching a vaccine for polio the same could be said that there would never been a vaccine for polio.
This is a reason religious zealots like Parkay tend not to be research scientists.
Keep in mind these same nuts decried curing syphilis because to do so would divert God’s punishment for the sexually wicked. They denounced artificial hearts because that would take power away from their gods to kill people with bad hearts. Now they denounce scientific research into curing Parkinson’s because they believe their gods value the existence of a few cells over the suffering of living humans. Not that their gods actually believe that, it’s just the expression of the overinflated egos of religious zealots who claim to be their god’s spokesmen.
Even Christian Scientists will wear glasses when they need them but will have no problem denying them to others. Parkay will be more than happy to partake of the cures this research will provide.
Thank you Doug,
For providing us with a perfect example of anti-religious hate filled rhetoric.
Seems you are skipping any rationality in your attacks and going straight to absurdity.
Nathan, so pointing out the illogical arguments of pro-death fundies like you and Parkay is “anti-religious hate rhetoric”. Apparently you think you two are the representatives of all Christianity and Parkay really does speak on behalf of your gods. That interesting. And you think it’s anti-religious hatred for pointing out that it’s only you extremists nuts who want people to suffer with diseases. And it’s anti-religious hatred for pointing out that Christian Scientists eschew medicine although it’s part of their doctrine.
Oh wait, you are the guy who gets upset whenever an Atheist has to educate you on the bible you worship. Take your meds Nathan, your fundamentalism is showing again.
Doug,Suppose these jokers are against stem cell therapy because they’re afraid the people treated with stem cells will come out with bigger stems than theirs?
lindainks55,
I do not think it is ethical to throw out lives that were created, including those by in vitro fertilization. Those who really care about life denounce the destruction of one human being for the betterment of another human being.
Truth is absolute; therefore, human life no matter how weak, dependent and fragile it may be is human life, it cannot be anything else.
Yes, some scientists and politicians are trying to make “The Island” a reality by introducing cloning. The slippery slope they want to start down leads right to it.
Hans, I appreciate your honesty and respect your opinion.
Of course there are unethical scientists and politicians (that last one almost goes without saying, doesn’t it!?); there are a few of those in every profession. Those kinds of people aren’t going to let simple things like laws or right and wrong get in the way of their agendas. Thankfully, they are a small number of people. The large majority of scientists are ethical and their work is to help not hinder.
You are the only person I’ve ever communicated with who is both against ESC research AND in vitro fertilization. I’m sure there are others but you’re the first I’ve “talked” with. Those blastocysts not used in research are thrown away at fertility clinics and at least you recognize that is destruction.
There are a whole host of us that have been speaking out against both…we are called the Catholic Church.
When it comes to cloning, there aren’t just a few who are pushing it. Remember that Missouri did the whole “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain” trick with their amendment that got people to think that cloning for the purpose of bringing the embryo to birth and cloning for the purpose of harvesting the stem cells from the embryo were completely different. They both use the process of “somatic cell nuclear transfer”, which produces a human being. Whether that human is allowed to live or is destroyed for its “parts” is the only difference.
All humans have inalienable rights…the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Purposeful destruction of embryos robs them of these.
To date, we’ve had only half of the necessary national debate. Starting the process with an embryo is only part of the problem. The greater question which we need to debate is “where do we stop?”
The embryonic stem cell problem is the flip side of the abortion problem. The abortion question is “how late can a woman wait to decide to destroy the thing?” The embryonic stem cell question is “how long shall we wait before the thing must be destroyed?”
We have to agree on an answer to the latter question before compelling tax contributions to the activity because the embryonic stem cell path leads to slavery. In the absence of a time limit on keeping the embryo alive, someone is sure to say, “I can get a lot more stem cells if I keep this embryo alive for three months,” then someone will say, “And I can get some mature, transplantable organs if I keep this embryo going for a couple of years,” then someone will say, “Give me 18 years to let these embryos develop and I can grow you an army of disposable draftee soldiers from these things, and why not, they were only going to be thrown away, anyway?”
I know many from the Catholic Church who aren’t letting the spin and dire warnings of “what could be” obscure the fact that the blastocyst is thrown away rather than being used for research. And they approve of federal funding just as I do.
Many Americans of all faiths are not scared by the politics of fear any longer.
I’m well aware of the facts of the research, am quite well informed of the processes, have visited several labs, and know several scientists personally who are conducting ES cell research. I also am well aware of the work funded by The Stowers Institute and what was involved with the vote in Missouri.
As I said, I respect your opinion and your honesty. We disagree but that doesn’t make either of us right or wrong, just of differing opinions. I know I am not worthy of judging you or your opinions.
When the next president is elected we will see federal funding for all types of stem cell research. As this additional funding allows more research and more efficiency in the research currently being conducted, we will see cures and treatments that will benefit everyone.
If some crazy deranged person makes all the dire scary warnings a reality it will happen with or without approval of federal funding for the many ethical scientists. That person won’t be stopped by the debate we’re having here.
This is just the latest abortion battleground. Libs are in favor of anything that diminishes the humanity of the unborn. Superior alternatives to ESC are showing up.
ESC research is unnecessary!
The in-vitro fertilization industry has not been ethical, in that it has produced an excessive number of stored, frozen, living human embryos, and has also produced an excessive number of multiple births, which puts the mother and babies at significantly higher medical risk than a single birth. This is not respectful of human life and dignity.I believe the best approach for our federal and state governments to take in this situation is to apply more careful restrictions and oversight to the IVF industry, and also instead to encourage and streamline the adoption of children already birthed as well as “snowflake” adoptions to birth frozen embryos. I know there has already been a federal program encouraging snowflake adoptions of embryos, but it has been insufficient and slow. We need better efforts, particularly since a couple of million married couples are waiting to adopt children for years at a time, often at great expense.This is America. We can do better for American children. Do it.
Parkay, the anti-choicers tend to be Republican. If the party is so respectful of human life then why did they fail to address the issue of universal healthcare when they were in the majority? It’s nice that you guys can give plenty of lip service about caring about other people but until you actually start doing something about it then you can let your hypocrisy take a rest.
Doug,
If we support Universal Health Care will you support a ban on abortion?
I didn’t think so.
Abortion is a medical procedure. How can I, who supports universal healthcare, deny someone who needs healthcare? It’s an oxymoron. Perhaps you know of some other way to end a tubal pregnancy or remove a stillborn from the womb? No, I didn’t think so. Neo-cons never think of the consequences of their actions (or perhaps they just don’t care).
Doug,
When you set up your own standards for what a hypocrite is based on a premise only you agree with then feel free to go about calling people who don’t fit your little view of things as a hypocrite.
You Hypocrite.
As usual you couldn’t address the problem. Live in your isolated little bubble where there are no problems to think about. Some day you may grow up, but not today.
Doug,
When you set up your own standards for what a hypocrite is based on a premise only you agree with then feel free to go about calling people who don’t fit your little view of things as a hypocrite.
You Hypocrite.
Posted by: Nathan | June 24, 2007 at 02:00 AM
————————–
hhmmmm, guess once you’ve set the standards and your very own little view of things it’s fine to continue doing what you belittle others for doing…
Does this seem hypocritical to anyone?
lindainks55,
The Nathan “discussion” continues on open post 6/24.
Linda,
Come out of the woodwork just to comment to me?
I am flattered.
Whatever rocks your boat. This thread is a topic of interest to me; I’ve been posting here since Friday. I checked it this morning and found a most hypocritical post made by you, and asked if anyone else read what I did. If that flatters you, fine.
Linda, I thank you for the open debate.
I must advise that any Catholic who is in communion with the magesterium cannot condone the willful destruction of innocent human life, such as ESC research, because it is intrinsically evil. To assist, whether directly or indirectly, risks self-excommunication. ESC research is one of the non-negotiables, as opposed to say capitol punishment, health care, immigration, etc.
Again, I emphatically state, not opine, that truth is absolute and not relative. No matter how the pro-ESC backers try to spin it, human life is created at fertilization. To kill a more vulnerable human being to better the life of another less vulnerable human being is evil. Such acts have no place in a country such as ours where the right to life is seen as inalienable.
Hans,I know you believe your truths to be absolute, however not all of us are catholic or even christian, and we tend to resent being told what to think by the church.Because you insist on enforcing the valuing of a few cells over the life of a person, I have had to watch dear friends suffer and die. I will probably have to watch more die because the research that could have saved them has been delayed by you assholes. Your church’s latest campaign to promote the suffering and deaths of many thousands of people has stripped it of any authority to judge what’s good or evil!
Thank you Jed for that enlightened post. What I really liked about Linda’s posts was that she didn’t resort to ad hominems.
Let me clarify something. Whether the Catholic Church speaks on something or does not speak on it, truth is still the truth and it is absolute. There cannot be multiple truths about the same thing. This can be shown by reason. For instance, whether you believe gravity is what keeps us from floating into space or not does not change the truth that it is exactly gravity that does such.
To your other point-an embryo is not just a few cells, it is a human being. It has a full set of human DNA and cannot be or become anything else, such as an elephant, iris or chair (the list goes on). I appreciate your pain suffered through the watching of others die; however, we all do die so the destruction of one human life to prolong another human life does not mesh with the natural law.
Lastly, since you bring it up, The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church’s authority to bind and loose (judge) was given by God and cannot be stripped of it by man. The Church is the staunchest defender of the sanctity of the human life and does not promote the needless suffering and deaths of people.
I will pray for you.
That’s another interesting topic — truths. I do agree there are some absolute truths but we would disagree on what qualifies.
In a prior post to this thread I asked for those who disagree with ESC research to face the truth of fertility clinics, and the left-over blastocysts that are thrown away. It’s a true fact.
Both times the President has vetoed the bill to provide federal funding to research JUST THOSE blastocysts THAT ARE DESTROYED he has made a speech that was less than honest. He misleads those who aren’t informed into thinking something is really being saved. His veto doesn’t save anything but maybe some possibilities.
Hans, you explained your feelings and disapproval of BOTH ways of destruction. And you explained clearly your feelings when you stated, “…some scientists and politicians are trying to make “The Island” a reality by introducing cloning. The slippery slope they want to start down leads right to it.” I think you would agree that part isn’t an absolute truth, but a possibility you believe in. It’s a possibility I recognize also but I think those who MAY pursue that avenue will not be stopped by laws, or decisions of funding and not by morality. If these people exist, they aren’t moral or legal; they are monsters who will (sadly) try to accomplish their goals no matter what. I know there are evil people, but think there are more who are moral and legal and deserve our respect.
I don’t let those possibilities cloud the potential for good. I have signed the donor part of my driver’s license because if there is anything that might be useful to a living person when I die I want it used. And, I want to see those blastocysts that are thrown away used in research more often and more efficiently. That’s why I approve of federal funding for research WITH THOSE BLASTOCYSTS.
I believe the controls and limitations of the bill passed twice by Congress, vetoed twice by a less-than-honest President are adequate for all the moral, honest scientists who deserve our respect for their work. I also believe that describes MOST scientists. I’m looking forward to the many treatments and cures and the relief for the people who suffer.
Hans,”The Church is the staunchest defender of the sanctity of the human life and does not promote the needless suffering and deaths of people.”
You need to read an honest history of your church; it has been instrumental in the suffering and deaths of millions since it’s rise to power. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot were pikers compared to the genocide of the church.
“To your other point-an embryo is not just a few cells, it is a human being. It has a full set of human DNA and cannot be or become anything else, such as an elephant, iris or chair”
So does every one of the trillions of cells in your body, including the ones you scrub off your skin or flush down your toilet. There are roughly six quintillion cells chock full of human DNA in the world today. Hardly a rare commodity. When a few can be used to prevent thousands of lifetimes of misery, it seems to me that to fail to do so would be immoral to the extreme.
“Whether the Catholic Church speaks on something or does not speak on it, truth is still the truth and it is absolute.”
Tell that to Galileo!When your church’s “absolute truths” stand resolutely in the way of alleviating suffering, then they must be advocating suffering. That’s not truth, it’s sadism.
“The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church’s authority to bind and loose (judge) was given by God and cannot be stripped of it by man.”
When you present the paperwork on that issue, signed by god and properly notarized, then maybe we can discuss it. Until then, you’re just blowing smoke. And please don’t pray for me!
Jed, I don’t mean for you to get angry. I’m just trying to educate you in the areas of your error.
I have read an honest history of The Church, not the tired myths that it is evident you are trying to regurgitate. I was not born into The Church, so I have taken careful study of her. You have made the statement “the genocide of the church” so the burden of proof falls on you to back up your claims.
Now turning to human cells, are you proposing that single skin cells, muscle cells, bone cells, etc. left to their own device will develop into an adult human or at least an organ? If that is so, then why the debate over embryonic stem cells?
I love it when people try to bring up Galileo without know what happened. To fully delve into the Galileo affair would exceed the tolerances of this blog.
To fully address your last paragraph would again consume so much space; nevertheless, we can show through history and reason that Jesus Christ was who he said he was, God. Being such then we must take him at his word. It was he who gave the authority first to Peter then to all of his apostles. The authority has been passed down through the ages to the apostles’ successors, the bishops.
“Being such then we must take him at his word.”
David Koresh said that he was God – should we “take him at his word?”
So did the so-called Rev. Sung Myung Moon – should we “take him at his word?”
Christ.
Hans,No, I don’t propose that differentiated cells will turn into anything else when left to their own devices. Neither will a zygote. When people intervene, some cells can be changed into some other types, but only embryonic stem cells can become ALL other cells, at least so far. That makes them the only promising material for research into the mechanisms of cell differentiation. Only when that research has been done will we know the potential for adult stem cells.Your church has used it’s influence to delay such research for too long now. Many people who might have known a life without suffering are now dead, and many more have needlessly suffered for years because of those delays. Your church has claimed to be pro-life, but because of it’s stance on research, it is also pro-misery; not too surprising for a church that promotes self-flagellation. If you think suffering will get you a place in the afterlife, feel free to suffer; just don’t inflict a life of suffering on those who may disagree with you!
Forgive me if there are typos…it is hard to type and flagellate myself at the same time.LOL Can you point me to the text that says I’m supposed to do self-flagellation? I don’t want to be left out.
Jed, an embryo inside a woman’s womb WILL grow into a baby human and once birthed will grow into an adult human. The other aforementioned cells will not. You keep skating around the issue that you are killing one human to better another human.
I see by your last post that you believe some people’s lives are worth more than others. Like I told Linda, that is the slippery slope that leads to the plot of “The Island”.
WSClark, your quote of mine has not context and therefore your statements are null. Again, through history and reason we can show that Jesus of Nazareth is who he said he was, I AM. You cannot do that with David Koresh & Rev. Sung Myung Moon.
“Again, through history and reason we can show that Jesus of Nazareth is who he said he was, I AM.”
What history? What reason?
You need to do better than quoting self-serving Biblical verses. History doesn’t even support the thought that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. We do know that Jesus was a Jewish rebel that was executed by the Romans, but beyond that, history does not support the thought that Jesus was God, anymore so than that claim by Koresh or Moon.
Hans says, “You keep skating around the issue that you are killing one human to better another human.”
Hans, you keep skating around the issue that the human you say you are saving is being thrown in the trash. In your opinion that is a human that is being thrown away. FOR NOTHING! At least be honest.
That clump of cells you call a human is thrown in the trash FOR NOTHING and could save lives.
Hans,”Again, through history and reason we can show that Jesus of Nazareth is who he said he was, I AM.”
If that’s the case, then why do you christians have such a need for blind faith? I’m sure there are people here who would love to hear your proofs.
Hans,Oh, if you’re missing out on your self-flagellation, look up your nearest Opus Dei member- he’ll get you properly started.
WSClark, I quoted zero verses. Again, this thread was not intended for me to defend the authenticity of the Catholic Church. You and Jed are making accusations and claims against Her. It is your burden of proof to back up what you say. If you were really interested in what I am saying, you can read about it in Frank Sheed’s “Theology & Sanity” and Karl Keating’s “Fundamentalism & Catholicism”, among others. BTW, you guys shouldn’t believe everything you see in the movies. Dan Brown’s idea of what Opus Dei is was highly incorrect.
Linda, I, along with The Church, am against in vitro fertilization and the destruction of the embryos that have been created by it. The ends do not justify the means, especially when your are talking about terminating human lives.
It amazes me that people who are against torturing a person to save lives (I’m not saying you are or aren’t since you have not made any statements either way) are for killing humans to better or save others.
This was YOUR quote, Hans…..
“Again, through history and reason we can show that Jesus of Nazareth is who he said he was, I AM.”
Back it up.
Hans,When you have watched people you love suffer and die from diseases that with sufficient research could have been cured, as I have, then get back to me. You seem in dire need of a reality check.I’ve read considerably on the history of religion, as well as most of the writings of Leonardo. I have neither read or seen “The DaVinci Code,” as it seems from what I’ve heard about it to be a fictionalized rehash of all the medieval christian myths surrounding the grail and life of Jesus, and mostly hogwash. My information on Opus Dei came mostly from talking with former members.I haven’t read Keating, but I have seen some of Sheed’s writings, and you couldn’t find a more pro-catholic propagandist even in the Vatican. You might want to balance that with Joseph Campbell’s “Masks of God” set. I believe that’s still available.