Advertisement

Archive for Monday, July 24, 2006

Stem cell debate

July 24, 2006

Advertisement

To the editor:

The stem cell debate is alive once again and the advocates of taking human life (in the form of an embryo) in order to save lives are loudly voicing their opinions.

The success of adult stem cells (from umbilical cord or bone marrow transplants), which does not take human life, is rock solid. There is, however, zero success in humans thus far with embryonic stem cells. None! So this time around, the debate is focused on debunking the successes of the use of adult stem cells rather than pointing out the failure of embryonic stem cells.

In the July 20 Lawrence Journal-World article titled, "President vetoes stem cell bill," Sen. Edward Kennedy was quoted as saying, "we will continue this battle" for embryonic stem cell research. It has become painfully clear that the stem cell issue is not about doing the right thing, which is evident for any rational human being; it is about the conscious decision to destroy unique individual human life.

Defending a tiny human embryo is an almost impossible task, in a world that allows the wholesale slaughter, in the womb, of a human being that has been so cleverly labeled a fetus.

Yet no one will deny that Sen. Kennedy is only able to fight his "battle" to allow the destruction of human embryos because he was not terminated in the embryonic stage. I was able to write this letter, as you are able to read it, for the very same reason.

Jeanine Blanck,

Perry

Comments

as_I_live_and_breathe 8 years, 6 months ago

Read the post charon,

Posted by logicsound04 (anonymous) on July 24, 2006 at 9 a.m. (Suggest removal)

..........Your morality and faith are between you and your God. Please leave that relationship out of the public sphere (government) and especially out of scientific research.......

it clearly says no morality (that means morals, look it up) in government. No morals in scientific research.

You have no power here, be gone!

fletch 8 years, 6 months ago

For somebody so concerned with fact, you seem to be ignoring/forgetting that the bill before congress was to allow stem-cell research on un-fertilized, harvested embryos that are left over from the proces of artificial insemination. Congress also passed stricter guidelines to prevent harvesting emrbyos from abortions. So i'm not quite sure why you believe this is killing human lives. These emrbyos are the same kind that have been discarded for years by fertility clinics, but I don't seem to hear a peep from the anti-abortion lobby about it. Seems you only have a problem when we talk about exctracting stem-cells. Funny how that works.

xenophonschild 8 years, 6 months ago

Could be wrong, but I read that adult stem cells are not as efficacious as embryos.

Some of us on the left enjoy this "wedge" issue driven into the ranks of the far right looney-tunes. With any luck, they'll be at each other's throats for some time over it.

staff04 8 years, 6 months ago

xeno- Adult stem cells do not hold the promise that embryonic stem cells do.

Flectch has it dead on, but that conflicts with the author's agenda, so that must be ignored.

DuQuesne 8 years, 6 months ago

Research on all types of materials and by all means will proceed, whether or not it's funded or approved by the government.

Do we want to have some standards, or do we want to play catch-up with foreign research? Do we want valid data, or do we want to have to reverse engineer clandestine work?

Stem cell research needs to be brought out into the light and fully supported and it needs to be done now. Science cannot long survive if its practitioners have to be constantly looking over their shoulders for villagers with torches.

-Schuyler DuQuesne

Jamesaust 8 years, 6 months ago

I'm so glad we have this letter's author to set thost stupid scientists straight!

How dare they evaluate what areas show the most promising research!

The author's concern is clear -- abortion. If people begin to question the assertion that "life begins at conception" then who knows where that questioning might stop. Like most extremists, she operates from a strategy of not giving one inch no matter how dubious her facts lest she throw the whole ballgame.

I'm not certain who it is the author believes is attempting "to debunk" adult stem cell research. Only for the author is the matter an either/or choice.

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 6 months ago

It would be benificial if the LJW editorial staff conducted only modest fact-checking in letters to the editor.

"The success of adult stem cells (from umbilical cord or bone marrow transplants), which does not take human life, is rock solid" -True to an extent. Bone marrow transplants work well. However, this treatment works only for bone marrow. What about nervous system disorders, pancreatic disorders, et cetera. Embryonic stem cells hold hope for other diseases.

"There is, however, zero success in humans thus far with embryonic stem cells." -No disease has been cured using ES cells. However, they were first cultured only six years ago. Time is needed to study and develop the potential of these cells. In mice, ES cells have shown much promise in spinal cord injury and other diseases. Research takes time, often years or decades.

"It has become painfully clear that the stem cell issue is not about doing the right thing, which is evident for any rational human being; it is about the conscious decision to destroy unique individual human life." -Prove to me, from the bible or from science, that life begins at fertilization and that a pre-implantation embryo is a human life. There is no proof from either source.

-Also, the letter implies that scientists want to work on these cells not for the good of humanity but for the evil pleasure of killing human life. Ridiculous.

Jeanine, you might personally belive that a fertilized embryo is a human life. Not everyone does. Some might also believe that each time you ovulate and do not fertilize your egg, you are destroying a human life (or the potential for it).

I will quote logicsound04 from above: "Your morality and faith are between you and your God. Please leave that relationship out of the public sphere (government) and especially out of scientific research."

acg 8 years, 6 months ago

I think, from now on, all unused embryos should be fertilized, brought to term and taken to Jeanine Blanck's house. She's so worried about the "precious lives that are wasted" that she can raise them, all of them, and God forbid if any of them get sick.

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 6 months ago

Adult stem cells pass the muster of fundamentalist christian ideology, and it is they who attempt to "debunk" embryonic stem cell research because it does not.

Naturally, they assume that "the other side" behaves as they do and must be attempting to "debunk" adult stem cell research.

Most scientists accept that both have much promise and deserve investigation. There is no false dichotomy in the scientific community about adult versus embryomic stem cell research. This polarized scenario is one dreamed up by fundamentalist christians who see conflict and division everywhere and can only imagine that everyone views the world the way they do.

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 6 months ago

Ah, there it is. Nancy Reagan, Bill Frist, John McCain, Arlen Specter, and anyone who does not follow in mental lock-step with fundamentalist christian ideology is a Nazi.

Your premise is faulty, as Nazi atrocities were driven by christian ideologies as much as by anything else. You might not want to believe that the Nazis were christians, but they were. You might not want to believe that Nazi atrocities were driven by christian ideology, but they were.

Please get your facts straight before you start throwing around comparisons to Nazis.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/speeches.htm http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERchristianity.htm http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005206 http://www.nobeliefs.com/nazis.htm http://www.cambridge.org/uk/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=0521603528

The Nazis were christians, and what they did to jews, romas, atheists, socialists, scientists, agnostics, intellectuals had strong roots in christian ideology.

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 6 months ago

Now that the fact that Nazis were christians is established, we can continue with the stem cell debate.

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 6 months ago

There is no consensus on when human life begins, in science or in the bible.

Nowhere in the bible does it state that human life begins at fertilization. In biology, fertilization is but one of the many steps on the progression to human life.

Fundamentalist christians accept on dogma that life begins at fertilization. This is a recent interpretation that has no basis in the bible but suits the needs of modern fundamentalist christians.

Therefore, we cannot base public decisions on personal beliefs of a certain group of people on which there is no solid fact or consensus.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 6 months ago

logicsound:

"I still haven't had ONE stem-cell research opponent explain to me why a POTENTIAL human life holds more value than an existing one."

First of all, who has said that it has "more" value?

Secondly, I have yet to hear ONE stem-cell research proponent explain why a human embryo holds less value than a "viable" human.

Thirdly, what defines "humanity?"

Fourthly, why does the egg of a bald eagle hold the same (or more [whichever you prefer]) value as an "existing" bald eagle?

Lastly, what in science has specifically answered infallibly when humanity is bestowed up that which you refer to as POTENTIAL? What is the magic point of "humanity?"

Lepanto1571 8 years, 6 months ago

nightmare,

"There is no consensus on when human life begins, in science or in the bible."

A great argument to place a moratorium on this line of research until such things are answered. That is, of course, if ethics are still considered more important than expedience.

BTW, doesn't God in the bible somewhere state that before He formed you in the womb He knew you? It would seem the Christian does possess an answer, despite what you claim.

staff04 8 years, 6 months ago

Thank you Sam Brownback. The eagle comparison was stupid when you made it on the Senate floor last week, and it remains stupid when reposted here.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 6 months ago

staff04,

The invocation of "stupid" is usually made by someone who cannot articulate an argument, relies on emotion when debating, or thinks a particular matter resolved beyond reasonable debate.

Please be specific as to what is actually "stupid" in the argument. We are all interested in what makes you so confident as to claim someone "stupid" and feel no need to explain his-herself.

acg 8 years, 6 months ago

How do we know that God stated anything in the bible? Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the bible written by man? The bible says a lot of things. It says I can sell my youngest child into slavery or stone my neighbor to death for working on Sunday. It also says that God has given us all the seed bearing plants and herbs to use (marijuana is still illegal). If we're going to choke on more bible rhetoric, then let's really choke it down. I love how Christians (well, all religions, really) pick and choose whatever parts of the bible that support their current whims but I've yet to meet anyone who follows the good book to the letter of the law, including my oldest sister who lives with a stricter faction of the Amish community.

fletch 8 years, 6 months ago

Lepanto: the only thing is there would never be a concensus on when human life begins. Neither side is willing to compromise.

Also, let's not be looking to the Good Book too much for logical leadership on every issue. Let's look at some classics from the NIV:

-If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death.

-Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.

-When you go to war against your enemies and you see a beautiful woman and find her desirable, you may take her.

-Those who sanctify and purify themselves to go into the gardens, following one in the midst, eating pig's flesh shall come to an end together

-They shall not marry a harlot or a woman who has been defiled; neither shall they marry a woman divorced from her husband.

I can keep going, but my point is made. Now, before people start throwing holy water at me, just know that I'm a Christian and have been raised in the church all my life. The Bible is a great book with many wonderful lessons to teach the world, but it is also written by men and editted heavily over time. It paints what would be considered the best view of morality at the time, but time changes things and we need to be able to look to it not as strict doctrine, but as guidance. Stem cells from these emrbyos are going to waste. The emryos are going to be destroyed (after a woman has been successfully impregnated and will be able to have the joy of a child). We might as well use them to benefit all of humanity and maybe help eliminate suffering from many of our brothers and sisters. But at the same time we have to be careful to look at the science honestly and objectfully, taking care that nobody is being exploited or hurt by this type of research.

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 6 months ago

"BTW, doesn't God in the bible somewhere state that before He formed you in the womb He knew you?"

You take this to mean "life begins at fertilization"? Some pretty liberal interpretation, if you ask me. If this issue was so important to God, why was he not more explicit in the bible as to when life begins?

"A great argument to place a moratorium on this line of research until such things are answered."

Huh? So we should stop all scientific inquiry into stem cells until the question of when life begins is answered? When will this issue be "answered"? Can it be "answered". That makes no sense. This is the argument of the nihilist.

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 6 months ago

"DNA, that's the distinction. The cell is an individual with distinct characteristics. The cell will attain certain stages of "human" development as part of his/her lifecycle."

Con-man, this is just about the most ignorant thing I have ever heard. Your simplistic understanding of biology does not serve you well. I will simply say that tumor cells also have unique DNA signatures from their "host". Does this make every tumor cell a unique human life? Every sperm and egg has different a different DNA content than the person. Does this make sperm and eggs unique human lives?

Godot 8 years, 6 months ago

To Fletch, who wrote: "For somebody so concerned with fact, you seem to be ignoring/forgetting that the bill before congress was to allow stem-cell research on un-fertilized, harvested embryos that are left over from the proces of artificial insemination."

and to acg, who obviously learned about stem cells from Fletch, who must have been asleep during sex ed in high school: "I think, from now on, all unused embryos should be fertilized, brought to term and taken to Jeanine Blanck's house.

read this:

From the Association for Stem Cell Reserach FAQ: 2. Where do stem cells come from? All human beings start their lives from a single cell, called the zygote, which is formed after fertilization. The zygote divides and forms two cells; each of those cells divides again, and so on. Pretty soon, about five days after conception, there is hollow ball of about 150 cells called the blastocyst. The blastocyst is smaller than a grain of sand and contains two types of cells, the trophoblast and the inner cell mass. Embryonic stem cells are the cells that make up the inner cell mass. As embryonic stem cells can form all cell types in an adult, they are referred to as pluripotent stem cells."

Of course, I would not expect you to take facts into consideration in your arguments.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 6 months ago

acg,

"How do we know that God stated anything in the bible?"

That wasn't nightmare's point. He stated the bible was silent on when life began. I explained that it (the bible)was not silent; that a certain enitity, person, etc., author said something, to the contrary IN THE BIBLE. Please re-read.

fletch:

"...let's not be looking to the Good Book too much for logical leadership on every issue."

Can you demonstrate where I have said so?

"Stem cells from these emrbyos are going to waste. The emryos are going to be destroyed (after a woman has been successfully impregnated and will be able to have the joy of a child)."

Why are these things necessities again? Is their creation in the first place an ethical activity?

nightmare:

"Huh? So we should stop all scientific inquiry into stem cells until the question of when life begins is answered?"

If it means destruction of embryos (that we have yet to determine whether they are human or not--your words, not mine), yes. Logic dictates it a necessity. Restrained research would be ethical. Human life is an unanswered question (according to you) and afterall, prosecution for murder is a possible consequence down the line when, and if, we determine the definition of life?

If I have committed an error of logic, I look forward to your correction.

"When will this issue be "answered"? Can it be "answered". That makes no sense. This is the argument of the nihilist."

And to argue for unrestrained research, without knowing if you are destroying human life or not is the argument of the utilitarian.

You are admitting the lack of knowledge we possess regarding the definition of human life. I fail to see how one can be a "nihilist" by taking a conservative approach to ethics and safeguarding a natural "right to life" and a liberal approach to inquiry that would include everything but destruction of potential life.

acg 8 years, 6 months ago

I'm not a scientist, godot, I never professed to be. Maybe you want to split hairs because I mixed up some language about it, but who cares? I personally don't. The only part of this whole argument that I care about is once again some bible thumping freaks are making rules that all of us have to follow. I'm tired of having other people's god shoved down my throat. If you christians believe in god and all of that happy crappy that's great for you, just shut up about it. Those of us who aren't deluded are tired of hearing it.

Godot 8 years, 6 months ago

acg, I am not a scientist either; however, believing that an embryo is "unfertilized" is missing a major point of the debate and demonstrates a woeful ignorance of the basics of human reproduction.

ksmoderate 8 years, 6 months ago

Here we go, "persecuting" all those poor, poor christians again!

Jamesaust 8 years, 6 months ago

"...while the pro-life group argues scientifically."

So now arguing for death-by-ignorance for the diseased is a "pro-life" position? The Party of Death is dead; Long Live the new Party of Death!

Query: by refusing to loosen research support for more embryonic stem cells but continuing to fully fund those pre-8/9/01, is it your contention that W. is only limiting the gross quantity of murder he has authorized? Or are the pre-8/9/01 "snowflakes" condemned to the theological equivalent of Limbo?

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 6 months ago

con-man,

Like everything else about your intemperate views, you latch onto something and then remain latched despite logic and reasoned assessment:

"Life begins with the single cell". -Really? This is where life begins? You sound awfully sure. Where are you getting your facts?

"DNA identifies that person and remains unique and constant throughout their entire lifespan". -Wrong again, bonehead. DNA can and does change throughout a lifetime. The immune system, cancer, glandular function, etc. Another intemperate, uninformed conclusion that fits with your predetermined dogma.

"I currently hold that only humans come from humans." -Wow, quite a stretch for you mentally, there, con-man. No sh&^. This is irrelevant. Only humans come from sperm and egg which conjoin which is then implanted into the uterus which then forms a placenta which then induces a nervous system, etc. etc. etc. No one single event defines the start. There are either many starts or no starts.

Crack a book, numbskull, before you go around making a fool of yourself with your ignorance of science.

But then, facts don't matter to you. Dogma and ideology are all that matter.

I look forward to your reply that further confirms your ignorance of human biology and science.

You can believe whatever you wish, but it is pathetic to try to justify your beliefs with a half-baked understanding of facts and science.

Jamesaust 8 years, 6 months ago

"What cures are currently gleened from embryos? None!"

Is there an argument here? What's the point?

If you truly believed what you posted, then I would also expect you to be focusing on three consequencial issues: 1. Prohibition and criminalization of the destruction of any of these zygotes, 2. A pledge to never allow yourself any treatment resulting from such research, 3. A ban on others being treated with the fruits of this research.

charon 8 years, 6 months ago

Conservativeman, you need to learn the difference between fact and belief.

In the first place, science is fact-based; your religion is ignorance-based. You sound very stupid when you compare the two. If you keep this up, I'll have to break out some Stephen King to refute your evidence (Fiction v. Fiction).

Secondly, Conner had a heartbeat. You show me a heartbeat in a stem cell and I'll concede your point. Until you do so, I will stand fast in MY belief that you, sir, are an ignorant person.

The bible is clear, but science is not. Thanks for the good laugh. You zealots are funny.

...........................................

While we're listing stupid bible quotes, how about this one: Exodus. All of it. Let's get this straight; Jews were NEVER slaves in Egypt. NEVER. There is absolutely no evidence of Jewish slaves in Egypt other than the fact that a group of people decided to form a religion and pretend like they were descended from slaves(which was necessary to fit the prophesy). There is absolutely no secular evidence of this monument us event. This is almost a backbone of your religion and it is completely false. If your bible can't even get historical facts straight, what makes it any more of an authority on scientific matters?

Someone here said, "If this issue was so important to God, why was he not more explicit in the bible as to when life begins?" I'd like to take that one step further and say that if your bible really is the word of God why are the concepts all dated. Why is there NOTHING that shows that your God had some type of foresight?

I can see people being fooled by this crap 2000 years ago, but nowadays so much of what was a mystery back then has been answered by science. Anyone still buying this hooey needs to learn how to let go of this crutch and just love life itself. Don't cheat yourself in this life. Have all of the fun you can have now, you will not get another. You will be worm food some day.

I find it interesting that life expectancy in "biblical" times was ~40 years. It still is for some African countries that haven't benefited from science. But, here in the civilized world, through science, not religion your life expectancy now is 77 years. Seems our scientists know how keep a human body alive better than the God you believe made us.

charon 8 years, 6 months ago

To Godot, You make no sense at all. You give the scientific explanation about where the cells come from to argue against the fact that the scientific community gets their supply from fertility clinics and NOT from abortion clinics. You're comparing apples and freight trains.

Side note to logicsound04. Don't let the greenies fool you. The dumpster chickens we know of as bald eagles are in no way in short supply any more.

QUOTE BY Lepanto1571 "Stem cells from these emrbyos are going to waste. The emryos are going to be destroyed (after a woman has been successfully impregnated and will be able to have the joy of a child)."

Why are these things necessities again? Is their creation in the first place an ethical activity? QUOTE

Are you really arguing against fertility clinics? Just want to be sure.

logicsound04, the bible wasn't written by white men, but it was heavily edited by them.

QUOTE Con-man I find it funny that the ones bringing the Bible into the discussion are the pro-death supporters while the pro-life group argues scientifically. QUOTE HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA You are too funny. Science and religion don't mix you guys tried that with ID and it was shot down.

To make my point, someone speak up if you feel the way con-man does and you ARE NOT a Christian. I'm waiting anxiously to hear from all of your secular supporters

Godot 8 years, 6 months ago

"You make no sense at all. You give the scientific explanation about where the cells come from to argue against the fact that the scientific community gets their supply from fertility clinics and NOT from abortion clinics. You're comparing apples and freight trains."

excuse me, I wasn't even addressing the issue you mention. I said absolutely nothing about abortion clinics or fertility clinics.

You read like a freight train.

Godot 8 years, 6 months ago

Well, lookie here. Looks like you university research types are going to have to find jobs in the EU do ride this gravy train:

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/genetics/2006-07-24-eu-stem-cells_x.htm

ksmoderate 8 years, 6 months ago

Yes, let's drive all the intelligent people out of our gosh-dern country! We don't need no smarty-pants college folk! Yee haw!

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 6 months ago

We must remember that idiot et al. view as a success that which has been happening for the past three years in Iraq.

Godot, let me correct you. The EU government agreed to continue funding research on ES cells (much to the chagrin of Poland). ES cell research is happening in the US right now, in states with donors wealthy enough to fund it or legislatures wise enough to support it, such as California, Minnesota, and Massachusetts.

The loser in this will be states like Kansas, and indeed, there may well be a "brain-drain" to these more forward-minded states. Yet another example of ideology trumping reality in good old Kansas. We may be poor and have no economy or prospects, but by God we have our ideals.

Godot 8 years, 6 months ago

ksmoderate, I refer to the fact that the main reason the university folk give for being angry about the funding veto, the one to which they unwittingly admit in the heat of debate, is that they won't get the money to do the research, not that the research won't be done at all. They admit, indeed, they fear, that the private sector will move forward with the research. They just don't want to be left out of the game.

So, if the university researchers want to stay in the stem cell game, they should either go to work in the private sector, or, now, apparently, they should apply to the EU, either for funding, or for work.

You know, when you come to think about it, it is quite hegemonic of the US research community to think that they, and only they, are qualified to do this research. It is cruel to scare grandmothers and sick children into believing that they will suffer and/or die because the Bush did not provide the university community with the funds to do embryonic stem cell research, when, in reality, this has been funded in huge sums for the past seven years by the EU and the research has been ongoing...in Europe.

It is also enlightening that even the EU agreed to limit funding to only that research that does not destroy the embryo.

Seems the Europeans must have found a way to do their research without destroying the embryos.

Of course, the science types on this board wouldn't try to do that, because they do not believe that the embryos are anything more than excess body parts.

Amazing. Simply amazing.

All this ballyhoo, and it really has not been about finding a cure for MS, or Parkinsons, or repairing spinal cord injuries; it has been about who would do it FIRST.

Godot 8 years, 6 months ago

"Godot:

You are absolutely correct. Stem Cell research doesn't stop with a veto from George W. Bush.

Think about that when you are paying through the nose in ten years time for your new heart / lung / liver / pancreas / skin / eye."

Oh, I get it, now your argument has changed; now it is all about making the new body parts more affordable.

Gee, I didn't hear that reason given before. I really appreciate that.

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 6 months ago

Godot,

Your disdain for research and researchers is apparent. The fact is, the "private sector" relies heavily on government-funded science, which is freely available to them. Without government support, private enterprise will not be as efficient as it has been in the past. They will not be able to utilize the vast amounts of freely-available government research. You want to see it as a competition. It is not. But this view does typify your outlook.

You are ideologically-inclined to be opposed to ES cell research. This is your option. Fortunately for you, there will be no ideological litmus test when the medicines discovered through this research are administered.

However, you are a morally-superior individual. You will police yourself. In the future, Godot, you had better do careful research on your mediciations to make sure they weren't derived from, tested on, produced in, or inspired by human ES cell research. I know that you as a moral idealogue would be horrified if you benefited from the destruction of an embryo. Have fun with that.

xenophonschild 8 years, 6 months ago

HGA:

Your post of 5:10 was, to paraphrase a local twit: "Smokin!"

Keep up the good work. I have to genuflect to publishers or I'd join you.

yourworstnightmare 8 years, 6 months ago

"All this ballyhoo, and it really has not been about finding a cure for MS, or Parkinsons, or repairing spinal cord injuries; it has been about who would do it FIRST."

Wrong, Godot. It is about doing it as efficiently, carefully, and quickly as possible. The more people studying them the better. But again, you are inclined to view research and researchers negatively, so you are entitled to your negative views.

Also, there would be a benefit to the US economy and corporations to be the first to market a product. Godot, this is called capitalism, C-A-P-I-T-A-L-I-S-M. It's what the private sector is good at and what they do. We can argue the merits of the market economy when it comes to things like health care and drug development, but that's another issue. We have a market-driven economy, and being first would indeed benefit that economy and the players therein.

xenophonschild 8 years, 6 months ago

The xtian bible is a gaggle of Jewish drivel. For anyone to look to it as a moral arbiter in a question about stem-cell research is ridiculous.

"Ethics"? Oh please. Who's ethics? Retrograde religious fruitcakes who worry about their "immortal souls"? Dumb and dumber.

Get rid of the ruling idiots and elect progressives who understand that societies evolve and that we should emphasize public funding of stem-cell research from embryos.

Godot 8 years, 6 months ago

HGA, if you and your buds had made a reasoned argument, had come to the public saying things like, "The Europeans are doing the research, and we would like to join them; we think we can find a way to not destroy embryos, as we respect the life that they represent; our goal is not to use embryos for cloning; our goal is not to use embryos to perfect a way to ultimately create perfect human beings without needing a mother and a father at all; we respect life at all stages. We know that, if there is a cure for maladies such as altzheimers and MS and Parkinsons in embryonic stem cell research, that it will be found because people all over the world are working on it and will continue to. However, even though scientists all over the world have been working on it for over seven years, there has been no success, we believe that there might be a chance. There is no stopping the research; we believe that we can do a better job. We promise to respect life."

Then maybe, maybe.

But no. You choose to attack people who question you as idiots; you attack them for their religious beliefs; you attack their religion; you lie; you create fear; you denigrate people who have a respect for life, and demonstrate that you see life as nothing more than a commodity, and that you are willing to sacrifice new life to relieve the ailing. You turned stem cell research into a political tool.

And you revealed yourselves. All you care about is the money.

That is why you lost. That is why you will lose. Your arrogance knows no bounds.

ksmoderate 8 years, 6 months ago

OK Godot. If all the researchers, U.S. representatives, U.S. senators, doctors, and lay people ask politely, then "maybe" ES cell research is alright. Gotcha.

They don't ask nicely = murdering potential humans They ask nicely = it's OK.

Sheesh. I'm going home.

Jamesaust 8 years, 6 months ago

Godot -

No embryos (Dan Quayle - embryoes) are being destroyed for this purpose than would be destroyed for no purpose at all.

You know it. You just refuse to admit that.

Banning government money for 8/10/2001 embryos but not 8/09/2001 embryos is absurd. Banning government money for research creates an aura of immorality around the embryos destruction that apparently no one believes really exists and that no one (tmk) has any plan to regulate or ban.

We have left in Kansas several Congressman who, on one hand, decry the lack of government funding given to Kansas universities, but then, in insisting upon denying government funding in lieu of more limited private money, push that funding and research toward "elite" universities already at the top of the heap as well as to foreign researchers who will have an open playing field to dominate not merely the narrow area of this topic but all science proximate to it.

If that wasn't bad enough, in 2020 when the treatment for Alzheimers is ready, you'll be shoving your place at the front of that line to get yours - morality be damned (no doubt, on the public dime to boot).

Godot 8 years, 6 months ago

HGA wrote: "Gee, Godot, if I turn out to be a nurse, I bet you'll feel awfully stupid:

Perhaps that explains your viewpoint. Perhaps you are still just a child.

Or, perhaps I should make plans to have a family member at my side, at all times, if I am a patient a KUMC.

Godot 8 years, 6 months ago

Thanks, Jamesaust, you just confirmed my theory that the attack on people who question the necessity of destroying living embryos for the sake of research is not about religion, it is about MONEY. KUDOS to you, Jamesaust.

By the way, it is not about BANNING GOVERNMENT MONEY, poor baby, you don't want to lose your grant, do you? It is about NOT FUNDING WITH TAXPAYER DOLLARS a procedure that makes the majority of humans GAG!!!!!!!

Let us hear it from all you 30 and 40 something women who cannot conceive. How insignificant is that viable zygote that you produce? How saleable is it? If you pay $25,000 to have your eggs extracted and put into a petry dish, how valuable are the 5 or 6 zygotes that you choose not to implant in your womb?

Why are you PAYING to undergo this excrutiatingly painful experience? They should pay you for the zygotes you leave behind. Consider the child you finally manage to conceive to be a "fringe benefit."

Godot 8 years, 6 months ago

Correction. Should read, " Consider the child you finally manage to BEAR to be a "fringe benefit."

Godot 8 years, 6 months ago

2006 - the most precious commodity is oil.

2020 - the most precious commodity is human zygotes.

Thanks for that eye to the future, Jamesaust.

lunacydetector 8 years, 6 months ago

why is EVERYTHING an oxymoron when dealing with "liberals?" liberals = fascists. open your minds people on the left!

the debate today clearly goes to the conservatives. it is great to see you Lepanto. thanks to all the conservatives who stand up for freedom and individual rights.

this whole debate boils down to selfishness. who is more selfish than a person who takes an innocent life in order to live?

it's nice to see Ted "CYA" Kennedy got mentioned in the debate. i couldn't think of a more selfish person. innocent/not-so-innocent lives do not matter to him, it's all about the taking of them.

lunacydetector 8 years, 6 months ago

"it's all about the taking of them".....and getting away with it.

charon 8 years, 6 months ago

Godot, you got me. I misread your statements. You were saying that an embryo by deffinition is fertilized and therfore the other person wasn't making sense when they refered to unfertilized embryos.

In the future, if you don't want to be misunderstood, I'd suggest you include a little more content and a lot less sarcasm in your posts.

As far as your insult, you can kiss my a$$ church boy.

Jamesaust 8 years, 6 months ago

Godot -

What is clear is that you know you're wrong and that you refuse to admit it. Indeed, you refuse to even discuss the matter because you know quite well you're boxed in by your own contradictions.

Nonetheless, I'm not concerned about converting every random wild-eyed zealot. Luckily, the world at large can weigh irrational rantings that avoid the substance of discussion and draw their own conclusions.

As I've already noted, in 2020 when the embyronic stem-cell treatment for Alzheimers is ready, you will be shoving your place at the front of that line to get yours with no thought for your false morality.

Linda Endicott 8 years, 6 months ago

Then why are none of you conservatives protesting the destruction of the thousands of unused embryos not used in IVF? Aren't they lives, too? Is it more acceptable to you to have them thrown in the trash than used for stem cell research?

Lepanto1571 8 years, 6 months ago

grail, yet another misrepresentation and proof positive (again) that you suffer a serious credibility problem.

grail: "At least you didn't fabricate new branches of philosophy and theological problems like your buddy Lepanto1571 has done in the past."

"Triad Objectivism"!!! "The Problem of Good" !!!!

The problem of good is not a branch of philosophy. Interesting you would think so, as I most certainly never claimed. It is a "problem" grail for the naturalist. If it is not, then I await your correction. As far as it being a "philosophy," perhaps you should re-enter PHI 100 or take a reading comprehension course Mz published person. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Triad objectivism? When did I say that? Oh I forget, with you details are optional.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You have shown yourself (yet again) a disingenuous and shameless harlot of a poster with little credibility or trustworthiness in anything you say.

This is yet another false and purposely misleading claim (sort of like when I - supposedly - ceded you victory (SARCASM ).

Keep it up grail, you obviously fail to see that you are one of the few who actually take you serious. This is why.

You post shamelss and false idiocy like this, and you wonder why we think you're full of $hit regarding you supposed credentials.

Hmmmm

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Lepanto1571 8 years, 6 months ago

grail, you're officially an insipid and fraudulent poster.

Let's review my supposed resignation (I'll continue to post it as long as you wish to indulge fraud.

grail quoting Lepanto:

"It's best to let them claim their little victory."

Lepanto's full quote was as follows:

"It's best to let them claim their little victory (as their whole identity is tied to it) and live in their self-delusion; as pulling them out of a false sense of superiority would be like trying to make a street-walker on crack, turn straight."

Obviously you are a street walker if you believe this a resignation.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

There is little compelling reason for anyone to believe anything you say based upon that type of dishonesty.

Only a shamelessly desperate triumphalist attempting to salvage a fragile self-esteem and eek out some sort of face saving victory would think that a resignation. But then agian, your penchant for hyping posts and derailing from the topic, not to mention your lack of seriouness, is well established.

If there is no problem of good associated with naturalism, then you should make easy work out of explaining yourself out of it. All you do is duck the question, and we all see it.

Yeah, I bet you're published (note to grail: that was SARCASM). If you are, I can only hope that you exhibited more intellectual integrity in your citations than you do here.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

It's impossible to take you serious anymore.

Let's see, I predict you will shotgun blast your typical diversionary, irrelevant tripe (commenting on my supposed comrades comments as if it had to do anything with you and I), all the while ducking questions, as opposed to answering my challenges.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You are a laugh riot!

Lepanto1571 8 years, 6 months ago

grail:

"I'm sure that, among your yahoo friends, you are some kind of intellectual giant, but when in debate with people outside your circle of friends, people who read a book every decade or so, you fall flat on your face."

Oh, and I suppose you maintain yourself quite a giant on this board. Oh yeah, you prove that daily. (note to grail, this is SARCASM)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Your shamelessness and delusion "crack" me up. Oh yeah, and you're published! (wink, wink) If we don't believe you, we should just take your (or a convicted murderer's) word for it.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Keep 'em coming grail. I can't stop laughing.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Lepanto1571 8 years, 6 months ago

grail:

You're running out of material dear. Rule number one, when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

Move on, it's not working for you.

as_I_live_and_breathe 8 years, 6 months ago

Posted by logicsound04 (anonymous) on July 24, 2006 at 9 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Your morality and faith are between you and your God. Please leave that relationship out of the public sphere (government) and especially out of scientific research.


I think that's what Mengela said wasn't it?

Linda Endicott 8 years, 6 months ago

And once again, the original topic is totally lost...

Lepanto1571 8 years, 6 months ago

logicsound,

I just realized you answered my post and also considered me "ill-informed." Not to worry I'm used to being caricatured as opposed to actually answered; but that's another subject.

logicsound: "If you can't define humanity, then how are you so sure of when it starts? If you don't know, then I would stay away from restricting the rights of others, especially if you're going to base it on a definition that you don't know."

May I assume that you have found an infallible declaration for all of humanity of when human life begins?

Please share that with us.

BTW, if YOU don't know or if it is an undecided issue, then how do YOU make decisions regarding the extension or the withholding of rights to it.

Being so "ill-informed," I assume you will "informed" me. I look forward to it.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 6 months ago

grail, nice try. Sounds extremely "fallible."

So when does human life begin grail?

Nice attempt at the end to derail from a question you have failed to answer. Typical. You poor thing, you are obsessed with God. I know it's a challenge for you, but try to stay on topic.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 6 months ago

grail,

Do you support stem cell research and embryonic destruction?

Lepanto1571 8 years, 6 months ago

C-man, my God. That was hilarious. Of course grail, being the brunt of the humor (and understanding sarcasm, about as well as a lump of goat cheese), I don't think she'll appreciate it.

I'm still laughing. Thanks.

Lepanto1571 8 years, 6 months ago

grail,

I'm glad your getting the opportunity to vent and relieve some stress here. I am always glad to help.

Now would you mind answering the question of when human life begins?

Lepanto1571 8 years, 6 months ago

grail,

Nice attempt at diversion. Attempting to assume some sort of intellectual highground by claiming to have provided something germane to the conversation (which you have not) only makes you look like the partisan fool we all know you to be.

What you have "provided" is irrelevant to the topic. I have offerred no definition of life, but in your attempt to hide the weakness of your position, you not only fail in answering the most important question associated with this subject, but dance around it and offer nothing but vitriole and tangential commentary, seeking only to falsely posture yourself and marginalize your opponent, as opposed to actually defending your position.

Again, the most relevant question in this particular conversation is when does human life begin?

If you cannot answer it scientifically grail, then you should have the integrity to say so (I apologize to all readers for using the terms "grail" and "integrity" in the same sentence.)

Once established then I will systematically obliterate the ASSumptions your weak position relies upon.

By falling back on your predictable position of painting your opposition as stupid and dim, in the end, only serves to make you look like even more of an imbecile, when they expose the flaws associated with your argument.

as_I_live_and_breathe 8 years, 6 months ago

Posted by logicsound04 (anonymous) on July 26, 2006 at 10:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"I think that's what Mengela said wasn't it?"

=====================================

What the hell does that have to do with anything? The only thing that your statement proves is that not EVERY idea that Hitler's Nazi doctor thought was hanus and inhumane. It does not, however, imply anything about me for supposedly saying the same thing.

Leave it to the conservatives to subtly imply that someone who demands that religion and government remain separate is a Nazi. Wow, you guys sure know how to end a debate--someone ought to tell you that the goal is to convince others of your point, not to infuriate them and insult them to the point where they stop responding. That doesn't count as winning the debate, in case you were wondering.

**LMAO**

Um...I think you are insulting and infuriating me... and I don't know for sure that I'm even a conservative!!!! I do know several declared democrats and avowed liberals that tell me GWB = Hitler.... is that the sort of crazy statements you're talking about????

Sorry for thinking that the Government should have morals.... what a douche I am..... You're absolutly right, Morals have no place in government. now where are those battery cables, let's all go to Gitmo!!!!!

as_I_live_and_breathe 8 years, 6 months ago

Holy Grail? Do you laugh in real life like you do online ???

every time i read one of your posts, i imaging a big ol braying donkey.... no offence... i like donkeys....but that AHAHAHA thing..... well it does make it easy to identify your posts.....

as_I_live_and_breathe 8 years, 6 months ago

Ok, well there must be work for me still because naming my favorite ANY thing is nearly impossible, I keep changing my mind..... well except for my favorite president of course Love your list of comics... Cobert is King! Did you see the Washington dinner thing? I thought I would pee my pants. And the best part was the look on George's face. He really didn't quite grasp it at first and when it sunk in....OMG.... I am a crazed fan of laughter. I've made a career out of it.

I don't know if there is such a thing as a "normal" laugh. one of my dearest friends in the world was critisized in a review of a local play as being " an obnoxious drunk or off thier meds" because of the way they laughed during the show. Not true at all, He just has a hearty sense of funny and is not ashamed to use it. Someone a comic wants in the audience.

I snort... just don't know how to spell it for a post. so I go with the lol......

charon 8 years, 6 months ago

Um...I think you are insulting and infuriating me... and I don't know for sure that I'm even a conservative!!!! I do know several declared democrats and avowed liberals that tell me GWB = Hitler.... is that the sort of crazy statements you're talking about????

Sorry for thinking that the Government should have morals.... what a douche I am..... You're absolutly right, Morals have no place in government. now where are those battery cables, let's all go to Gitmo!!!!!


I declare thee a straw man!!! He never said government should be without morals, he said government and religion should not be mixed.

And, for what it's worth, I agree with you... you are a douche.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.