Adult Stem cells and Spinal Cord injuries: http://www.webmd.com/alzheimers/news/20040624/paralysis-patients-tout-adult-stem-cells

Adult Stem Cells and Arthritis: http://stemcellresearchnews.net/News/AdultStemCellsHelpEaseArthritis.aspx

Adult Stem Cells and Stroke: http://www.cellmedicine.com/news332.asp

Adult Stem Cells and Cerebral Palsy: http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2010/02/15/Cerebral-palsy-stem-cell-trial-begins/UPI-57571266270159/

Adult Stem Cells and Alzheimer's: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/5873215/Stem-cells-can-rescue-the-memory-from-Alzheimers-disease-claim-scientists.html

Adult Stem Cells and hip replacements: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6118220/New-stem-cell-treatment-being-used-by-patients-to-avoid-hip-replacements.html

Adult Stem Cells and Diabetes: http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2001/08.16/01-stemcells.html

Adult Stem Cells and Macular Degeneration: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/07/020730075401.htm

Adult Stem Cells and Parkinson's: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080606102603.htm

Adult Stem Cells and Liver Disease

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4573453.stm

Adult Stem cells and HIV

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/02/11/health.hiv.stemcell/index.html

Adult Stem Cells and Cancer

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090519172051.htm

Embryonic stem cells are not necessary.

I bet you heard he does what he pleases from Fox news, didn't you? Obama is bound by the laws of our lands just as every other President has. Of course, he hasn't fabricated any evidence to gain world support for an illegal invasion, as stumpy did during his term (I bet you didn't hear that on Fox News, did you?). Get your nose out of the Republican Propaganda machine and actually research on your own. You would be suprised what you find is ACTUALLY going on!

Question: a doctor takes eggs from a woman and sperm from a man mixes in a dish which makes an embroyo and then later freezes for potential future use. So technically isn't the embryo dead? Because an embryo cant live or grow outside the human body and the definition of an embryo is An organism in its early stages of development, especially before it has reached a distinctively recognizable form. And yes i fully support giving up embryos for medical research that can help, cure the sick and the suffering. Because it's not a baby its an embryo and some women don't even know their pregnant miss carry the embryo and not realize it was a miscarriage but a heavy period. So yes help the living or almost dying the people who can survive outside the woman's womb. The people who need help now right now your mom dad brother sister wife and children even yourself would potential benefit from this research if god forbid anyone got sick. And instead of watch your loved one suffer and die and loose the potential benefits of this research all because some people think and embryo is a living breathing baby is messed up. when i give birth I'm donating the umbilical cord and god forbid i struggle to get pregnant and need to use in vitro after i get pregnant any embryos that i didn't use ill be more than happy to donate as well rather than be thrown out because keeping embryos FROZEN is expensive.

How many of those embryos are discarded when the woman decides not to use them?? If you believe using an embryo for research is destroying a life, why don't you go after these people who store their embryos and not use them??? Or for that matter the fertility clinics that play GOD?? Maybe even sue GOD for killing a fetus when a woman has a miscarriage..if most of you had your way, you would prosecute boys for masturbating away a life or a girl for having her menstrual cycle. In both cases an embryo is lost to the world. But my biggest complaint, when you stop research over embryos and you stop abortion, why don't you do the right thing and take care of these children and stop with the welfare and anchor baby BS. We have a Constitution that guarantees freedom of choice, but a population of religious conservatives that put religion before the Constitution. Granted that our framers believed in a supreme being, they also saw just what a government based on a certain religion would do to the freedom of the people. Grow up and stop trying to make this Nation one governed by religious fanatics. And I to believe in God, but I believe we answer to him, not to a congregation or a Preacher who may or may not know as much about GOD as he/she thinks. Throughout the Biblical history whole groups of people were slain in the name of GOD, so don't think for one moment our GOD doesn't support killing. Just selective killing when one of those who are close to him decide to do it. By the way, how many of you have ever heard the actual voice of GOD??

@ Ines

I've been studying human development for a very long time. I've never met anyone who described an embryo as a "living, breathing baby". Although a liberal friend of mine was under the impression that until about 3-4 weeks before delivery the baby "is sort of like a tadpole". But I would never posit that all/most liberals think the very same way, that would be a bit childish on my part.

@ Gene

Last time I checked my tax dollars were not funding fertility clinics, miscarrigaes or masterbation.

@jwhite

Thank you for those links. I was already well aware of potency of adult and fetal stem cells, but I don't have any links ready to paste here. As a side note I recently found out that the name Denise Faustman is taboo in the JDRF. Also the JDRF is propably the largest ESC lobbyist. So Igree that it is a tragedy when polotics gets in the way of finding a cure. (Because I really hate have to constantly give injections to my 2 year old)

Also a miscarrage, especially during the first trimester, is often the result of the womans body analyzing the embryo and determining that it is not worth continuance of the pregnancy. This form of natural selection has yet to be duplicated in a lab, meaning that there is no way for a scientist to know if they have a viable embryo before them.

I was Baptized Catholic and i pray every night and so fourth so yes i am Christian,but isn't bone marrow a form of stem cells and can that be used other than embryo's.I am for stem cell research but i feel that much more needs to be done before we can make any real assessments as to what those things are and it would be impossible obviously if we are blocked from doing so.

Hey Patrick, maybe you should look at Arizona....killing must be O.K. if your a right wing NUT BAG...Kill the immigrants??!!

All I can say is I am a recent paraplegic and i would submit to any research using stem cells in the hope that someday I could get back up, get off all the meds I need just so I can get through the day. i pray everyday, so maybe think of all of us.

Gene-340754 i support your idea the government is supposed to separate church and state. And if that was the case this wouldn't be an issues and the gay community would have the right to get married. For once i wish the government would just grow balls and do whats right for the people and not just the conservative religious bible people. The US is a melting pot, all races, all religions, and different moral view so the government should tell the religious people to put a cork in it. I love god but i don't support the church i do obey the law say my prayers and live my life.

Patrick...whats a more honorable way to die for these "people." Would it be contributing to medical research with the possibility of saving lives, or dying slowly in a trash bin somewhere after thawing out? And if neither of these works for you, what do you propose we do with the thousands of embryos left over after invitro works (for a couple that doesnt want nine to twelve kids)?

To all the people crowing about adult stem cells -- they still haven't figured out how to keep them from growing into tumors. So yes, we'd like to continue working with embryonic stem cells, thank you.

Stevedog, don't take this personal I'm not picking on you, but don't you think we should develop cures for diseases even if we have to use tax dollars?? Aren't we all about making life better for all?? You may never think about it, but we spend billions upon billions of dollars each year developing new weapons to destroy ourselves but none on making us healthier. We pass a poor health care bill, mainly because the Republicans in Congress wouldn't try to make the bill better. The insurance industry opposes a single payer approach because it would ruin their hold on how we pay for and receive coverage, not to mention how it would collapse their monopoly over the public. We have deregulated so much that when some CEO decides he needs a new one of a kind toilet seat or a bigger paycheck, he lays off a few hundred or maybe a few thousand employees and improves his bottom line for the moment, while being bailed out by TARP. When are we going to stop gouging our middle class so that the top 3% can live like aristocrats. When is the Republican party going to put us first since we are dumb enough to keep sending them back to Congress. None of you are willing to admit that the actions of the previous Administration and Congress created this mess. I suppose it was fortunate for the GOP that the Democrats took over the House and Senate in 2006 that worked out perfectly for them to pass the blame. Now by all means lets go back to outsourcing our jobs, letting banks, industry, lending institutions, and all business police themselves, that system has worked out perfectly for the wealthy, but has cost over 8 million Americans their jobs. I can see we need more of that kind of leadership!!! Alas, it will all work out, the Conservative Right and GOD will lead us to the poor house, where will we work for penance forever and ever, Amen.

We are killing ourselves over religion, even Christ said give unto Caesar what is his and give unto GOD what is his, no better words to describe the separation of Church and State. Lets use the State to improve our lives and not to form a religious cult or to battle other religions for world dominance.

@ Revelwoodie

I think you got those backwards. When embryonic stem cells were first discovered (years before adult stem cells) they were thought to be the cause of ovarian cancer. When a scientist wanted to know if the cells they had were embryonic stem cells all they had to do was inject some into living tissue, if a tumor developed they were ESC.

@Gene

I want my tax dollars to go to research that might lead somewhere. My beef with ESC has nothing what-so-ever to do with religion, church, God, the GOP, Sarah Palin or any of the other red herrings that people like to throw out. My opinion is based soley on the emperical data. I have not seen one report or study that shows me that ESC will actually produce any type of medical results, we've been "10 years away" from find a cure for decades. I also don't want my tax dollars going to study Cold Fussion or the 100MPG carburetor. (1 gallon of gas has a finite amount of chemical energy, and it is insufficient to move a 2000 pound object the distance of 100 miles.)

Have you tried using your own stem cells? They've already been used to help heal spinal cord injuries in other people. Maybe you could research it.

Screw science, God will save us all!! I mean he's been curing diseases, feeding the poor, and bringing peace to Earth for 1000's of years. Oh wait, people are dying of curable illness's, people are starving, and the earth is littered with military conflict. My bad.

Or how about this take, if God created man - gave him a brain and free will - and man created science - over the course of time man then came up with the processes and cures for disease - one of them using embryonic stem cells to find new ways to prevent and fight diseases that plague mankind - then, God himself is the reason we are now exploring this as a viable option for furthering disease cure and prevention.

its-all-your fault, THANK_YOU!!!! wonderfully said!!!!

While I sympathize with your condition, there is no circumstance when it is ok to do the wrong thing. I'm not saying that anybody is right or wrong in this argument, I'm simply making the philosophical statement.

If you believe, as a Christian, that something is wrong...just because doing it might help someone doesn't make it right. Nothing can make something that is wrong, right. If that was the case then man could somehow do enough good things to get into heaven, and yet the bible is very clear that there is nothing man can do to "earn his way into heaven."

There are a lot of confused people, politicians among the chiefest, who will stand up for something, stand up for it, stand up for it because it is the "Right Thing." And then the second someone gives them a good compromise or convinces them that it's going to "help their district" they decide...., "Well now that's justifiable.

You can't justify a wrong thing and make it right. So if a fertility clinic, or people who use them oppose abortions on the principal that it's morally wrong (as Christians), but turns right around and says it's okay to freeze the embryo's and do the 'reductions' so they can have a baby...then that would be playing God. I think.

That is saying that something is wrong, unless there is good enough reason for it....based on your judgment. Again, if you don't believe in christianity or have any sort of stable moral standars then this doesn't mean anything to you. Your morals change based upon societies views or whenever is convenient for you. If you lived in Germany during the 30's and 40's, you probably would felt "justified to kill jews." If you lived during the slavery years, you may have felt "justified" to own slaves. Or maybe you are a contrarian and your moral standards run opposite of societies or however you feel in the moment. That is a completely different argument.

For those with a set moral standard, such as Christianity, to say something is "wrong" unless it is for a really, really good reason...is arguably playing God. It is either wrong or it isn't. Nothing you can do will justify it into being 'right' except in your own head.

I know that sounds harsh, and I'm sorry I didn't have the time or space to soften it. I'm only bringing it up as something to think about. I seriously am not judging anyone...especially on the issue of embryonic stem cell research. I'm only pointing out the inconsistency I often see with people who justify "wrongs" for some reason they deem worthy.

I don't think the government should fund it...I do believe that is wrong in fact...to force unwilling taxpayers to pay for something they strongly oppose. On any issue. Certainly at the federal level.

What I don't understand is how people can reason that all life on earth started as single celled organisms but then they can turn around and say that a multi-celled embryo is not a life.

Because people are Multi-celled organisms. I have never dated an Amoeba before (or was that my ex-wife?). The question for right to lifers is when does the soul occupy the body? I doubt it is before the brain can host it (granted, I know a few people who act like they only have 1 brain cell, but those people are only able to use 1 brain cell at a time. They still have all the rest, but just don't how to connect the dots).

An embryo is also multicelled. Are you saying that a embryo is therefore a person?

I don't believe in immortal souls being seperate from the body so the question of "When the does the soul occupy the body?" is not one I would personally ask.

I am NOT saying an embryo is a person. I am saying that to answer the question of whether it is taking a "persons life", one has to define when the soul occupies the body. The right to lifers try to claim the soul is there at conception, but there is no proof of that. I was pointing out the only logical conclusion of when the soul could occupy the body is once the brain can accept intellegence, which is the basis of the soul. Of course, that is just my opinion.

Like I said, I'm not a believer in a "soul that occupies the body".

If it is human, which it is, and if it is alive, which it is: This is all that concerns me.

I'll leave the theological arguments out of it.

All I see is a human life in its earliest stages. One that should not be ended in frivolous pursuit of redundant and fruitless research.

"For God shall bring every work into Judgement, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil."

It doesn't matter. Because in the end everything has it's consequence.

This is a fascinating subject for many. We can all agree that the miracle of birth produces a tiny human life fully protected by our laws with individual rights. Most of us agree that an unborn child that is able to survive outside of the womb is also a human life. When we dwell backwords from that point to the time when the human male produces his first seed or the human female produces her first egg, things get really murky. Mix religious or personal moral values with this issue and we have a vigorous debate. That is as it should be and ALL that it should be.

A nation that prides itself on freedom, individual rights , justice and government by the people must never legislate personal religious or moral values. The values dear to you may be popular today and despised tomorrow. Your attempts to subjugate others in today's favorable political climate will assuredly enslave you when the inevitable change in the political climate of tomorrow disagrees with you. Only a fool would dare open that door.

jwhite... what do you suggest we do with the thousands of embryos produced for invitro that wont be used?

My Brother-In-Law is a stanch Republican. For years I have heard him complain about him having to support the fat and lazy on Welfare, Food Stamps, and Government assistance. During the Tech Bubble burst in 2001, he lost his business (writing software) and was out of work for almost 2 years. During that time, he had to go on Food Stamps, lost his house, had to go on Government medical and at one point was receiving housing assitance. He was finally able to get back to work in 2003. Now he is complaining again about having to support the fat and lazy on Welfare, Food Stamps, and Government Assistance. The point is that if he was truely against the programs, he never would have accepted them. They are there to help people in need (granted, there are alot of people taking advantage of the system, but the system needs to be overhauled, not the help removed!). That to me has always been a double standard and one he refuses to talk about now.

Concern in Washington
My Brother-In-Law is a stanch Republican......................

And I would bet, that like most Republicans, your brother in law is talking about the people who live their entire life on the program.

People are not against the saftey net that caught your brother in law. They are against the people who are on teh Gvmnt dime their entire life, then teach their children how to milk the system.

No. The Republican conservative right have been pretty much against even short term welfare.

@ Jeremy -- there is no such thing as permanent welfare anymore, Clinton did away with it. Nobody is out there "milking the system." Do you really think people would choose to live on so little money they still have to collect aluminum cans to pay the rent, if they had any other choice?

I agree that the Clinton ADM changed the rules but that has not stopped the hand wringing by" the let them die in the streets crowd"

To all pugs here if you would take the time to look you would learn that almost all on public roles are children and ill people who can't get the health care of education to become tax payers

Sorry, but I humbly disagree. Life does happen when an embryo is formed. Do you have kids? Would you offer up one of them to be chopped into meat for the advancment of science? Is your childs life any more important than that of a concieved life in a test tube? I think not. If you don't have kids theres no way you would or could understand.

I too know people with ailements. But, they agree with me that the solution to their ailment is not worth the life of another.

Stem cell research is a good thing. However, the destruction of life, using embryonic stem cells is not usefull, not a good thing, and has provided no results anywhere as of yet (not even on animals). While, adult stem cell research has provided hundreds of positive results. Why throw money, time, and life at something that has proven not to work?

I am a mother. I am adopted as well. I beleive in stem cell research as well. Why? My father, my sister, my best friend all have MS. You may know people with ailments but I wonder if you understand what it means to live with one. I dont thank God but I do know what they deal with I see every day and trust me tonight you better thank your good Lord for your health becasue in a blink you might just not have such a low view of the suffering who want want help.

I agree with Saddened to a point. There are alternatives to Embryonic Stem Cells, BUT if a pregnancy is going to be aborted anyway, then it would be a waste to not get any good from it. Of course, Abortion is a whole different subject and not what this story is about.

Veve, Stem Cell Research and Embryonic Stem Cell Research are two totally different things. All people have an abundance of Stem Cells to provide. Embryonic Stem Cells can only come from an Embryo, which is destroyed in the process of extraction.

I hope those who disagree with Stem Cell Research get diagnosed with Parkinson's. I'm 24 and have already been diagnosed with this horrible disease. Thanks for ruining my life you "pro-life" nut jobs. I wish nothing but bad Karma upon you all.

No one is denying embryonic stem cell research! Yes there are people morally opposed to it, but no one is stopping it. They are stopping the "FEDERALLY FUNDED EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH." Its simply a matter of not using taxpayer dollars to fund it. Many taxpayers are morally opposed to it.

Is it so wrong to ask that the government to stop using military force to steal money from families to fund something they oppose morally. I mean, if it's okay to use taxpayer dollars to fund embryonic stem cell research, then maybe it should be okay to force all public school students to take a theology class.

For once it would be nice for a msnbc and other major news outlets to post an accurate headline. The court order is not "blocking stem cell research." It's not even blocking embryonic stem cell research. Only federally funded research. It's not judicial activism to accurately interpret the constitution...or to protect the taxpayer from being forced to pay for things they don't believe in.

Mike - The Pro-Life people did not cause your ailment and are not responsible for it. Too bad you are such an unhappy, miserable person to become so vindictive and hateful towards others without just cause. I am sorry you suffer from this disease, but taking out on others is not acceptable. Until you realize that, you are the nut job!

Hooray for the Catholic Church and its stand on birth control and embryonic research. Now let's get rid of the telescopes and go back to believing the earth is the center of the universe!

And while we're at it let's remember that it's OK to abuse altar boys.

Uh, "Heavy Sarcasm" in case you are too dense to recognize it.

Jimbo -- the headline is wrong, as is "I can not understand these people who think that stem-cell research is not a good thing"

Stem cell research is great -- adult, skin, umbilical cord, etc. -- but not embryonic. That clarification is not made by advocates of embryonic stem cell research, but the difference is extremely important to those of us who support all stem cell research -- except embryonic.

Embryos are human. To me its a question of human rights. Same for abortion. DNA tells us this is a unique human, entitled to human rights. If not here, then where?

Many taxpayers are morally opposed to war. Many taxpayers are morally opposed to the death penalty. We, as a nation, pay for both of those things. Those are better analogies than a theology class in public school.

And I'm not sure this case is about interpreting the constitution:

"The judge says a lawsuit claiming the government is violating a law that prohibits use of taxpayer dollars in work that destroys a viable embryo."

The law being referred to is almost certainly not in the constitution.

Greg Smith, if stem cells from an embryo were the only option to save one of your children, would you refuse treatment??? Or would you be like those with "ailments", that the solution is not worth the life of another??? Just curious....

economics is a science: It is true that the order stops the funding, not the research. However, public funding of such research is critical as it was for computers, atomic sciences and other higher sciences in the past century. Stem cell research is very expensive which will require the vast funds necessary to make it viable.

There are many that give religious reasons to stop stem cell research, but that is not a reason to stop the research. The use of adult cell research is very limited as the cells have been imprinted and not viable for extensive purposes in terms of finding cures to genetic diseases and defects. Until the research is completed, we will not know the next best available source of materials. That is why we need to continue with this research.

I am always surprised, and have been surprised over my 65 years of life, the low regard many people have for the sciences. We would still be in the dark ages and not enjoying the fruits of the extensive research done over the past decades. When I was young, people were still dieing of polio, small pox and other diseases that no longer threaten us. Research came up with the preventative measures. When I was young, we were not entering the computer age and now we have a much better life because of the research done. When I was young, cars and trucks were still very unsophisticated and ecologically destructive. Now they are less destructive and research will continue to improve the situation. When I was young, no one even knew what stem cells or DNA/RNA was, only research has led to this tool being available for research and use in preventing/curing terrible conditions. Research is looking into the unknown and developing known quantities. The people that advocate against research seem to fail to recognize the need for research to find solutions to terrible conditions.

I am not for unfettered research. To allow research such as Camp 757 (?) by Japan in WWII or that done by the German scientists in WWII is not acceptable. But we do have guidelines and there should be government/private oversight to assure such experimentation is not done. There is a need for government oversight in many things and this is one.

I do not think the courts are good places to control such scientific efforts. They should be there to determine that controls are followed and that we do not become like the bad guys of yore. There are regulatory agencies in place to follow through with the oversight.

Jon 1321288 is the only one on this blog who has taken the time to actually look at the legal issue in this case.

Most of the rest are simply using the case as a way to assert their personal moral views, or opposition to those views. Similar to the blogs about the so-called Ground Zero Mosque, its just a venting of emotions. The world, on the other hand, turns on REASON.

Why don't the rest of you take a look at the case; all of the information is readily available. The judge was interpreting a law that exists, not deciding the merits of embryonic stem cells.

Then, THINK FOR YOURSELVES!

The law being referred to is almost certainly not in the constitution.

Neither is the speed limit. Lots of laws have been created since the constitution. I'm all for this research but we backers need better and more accurate arguments than this if we are going to be able to further our research.

I'm using "our" in the collective sense not the personal one for those who will take that avenue.....

If embyronic research is so "incredibly promising, " don't you thing some of those "greedy wall street corporations," would be more than willing to fund the research. They do billions of dollars in R&D all the time for all sorts of things. So....to say that this is something that must have government dollars to move forward is...questionably inaccurate.

As for federal taxpayers paying for other things that they oppose...it's true. It happens. It is also possible to argue that it is constitutionally wrong, outside of the expressed powers given to it. I understand it will never be interpreted that way again and I accept that. I also accept that this civilization will fall someday like all those before it. There are a lot of things we all must accept as reality. I just don't understand why some people are so dead set on imposing on their neighbors' freedoms and taking money from them...when it isn't necessary.

This push for government funded embryonic research isn't about a necessity or the advancement of science. There are many ways to achieve those things without it. This is about one side trying to make a religious point and forcing others to abide by it.

When someone calls for less government involvement or funding...they aren't "forcing their beliefs" on anybody. Just simply asking to be left alone. When somebody calls for bigger government or more government funding, they are indirectly (or directly) forcing their beliefs on someone somewhere within that jurisdiction.

What about nuclear research? That's certainly science and certainly shedding "primitive" beliefs.

As for "barbaric" when it comes to fusion weapons, well...

Friend, I'm here to tell you that Jesus is not a myth. If you will do a little internet research, you will find that 100% of scholars believe that he existed. Not all believe that he rose from the grave, but I, for one, do.
And you can be saved by simple repentance and faith. Get out a bible and read Romans chapters 10 and 11. Believe and act on what you read and you will be spared an eternity in hell. God Bless.

God believes in you, even though you don't believe in him.

Greg,

Could you please provide demonstrable evidence that God exists? Quoting Bible passages will do you no good, as you must prove God's existence in order for the Bible to be a valid source of information. Otherwise, you may as well be quoting Lord of the Rings as far as I'm concerned.

I'm interested in why you believe what you believe, and how you came to your conclusions. I also invite you to examine your reasoning behind not believing in other gods such as Zeus, Thor, or Shiva. If you do not believe in other deities, think about why you don't, and then apply that same logic to your own beliefs.

Jesus may have been a real man (although, taking into consideration other texts written at the time, Jesus does not exist outside of the Bible, which is cause for concern), but the supernatural claims are suspicions in that they are so similar to other myths that came before him. Read the stories of Horus, the sun god of Egypt, Attis of Phrygia, the Indian god Krishna, Dionysus of Greece, and Mithra of Persia. All of these myths are incredibly similar to Jesus, and are commonly called "Life-Death-Rebirth Deities".

If Jesus was real, he was most likely a scholar or teacher. The original New Testament texts were written about 50 years after Jesus' death, and the writers assimilated popular myths into the Jesus story to make it more appealing to the masses.

Look, if your religion helps you cope with life, that's perfectly fine, but once you start asserting that your religion is the one and only way to go, you'd better be able to back that assertion up with hard evidence. Otherwise, there is no reason to believe that your beliefs are true.

Greg, watch Religulous, the documentary by Bill Maher. And by telling Geo to read Romans 10/11, really? The dude already stated his case. You think that by reading something he believes to be fiction will help?

I believe in a "higher power", not so much god or allah as others do, but a higher power has to exist. The problem with the bible, koran, tora, book of mormon, etc, is that they are all "translated" by man, and, well, all of those books tell us man errors, so, it goes without saying, there are errors in translation.

A talking snake? A 40 day flood that covered all the land? (really? where did all that water go?) Water into wine (not without fermentation). Parting of the red sea (ok, I saw on Discovery how that could happen). A man swallowed by a whale and lived...yeah, some of those things may have occured...but...nah, I'm not buying all of it.

Christianity is a religion of faith that comes from God. God said that man has no excuse because His creation is visible evidence of His existance. This faith from God is not given to everyone because many choose to ignore every opportunity they have to acquire it. As you consider the earth and the universe, can you see God's creative power or do you see science without intelligent guidance? It is a choice every person must make and assume responsibility for. The Bible is God's testimony about His Son. God allows you decide to believe Him or not.

Man created god and multiple gods as a way of answering questions for which no human had an answer. Different cultures created different gods. It's not a big mystery.

Thor's hammer is as good an explanation for thunder and lightning as is any explanation in the bible.

Science explaining how it could actually work would seem to have an upper hand, though.

I don't mean to belittle your belief in god. Just to state that I prefer science and human rational thought.

By (my belief in) God, I am strongly opposed to the state killing a convicted criminal in the name of justice or punishment(it's simply revenge killing). I am strongly opposed to the USSC ruling a corporation has individual rights(it's illogical and absurd). I am strongly opposed to my government initiating a pre-emptive war (it allows our political leaders to make new enemies instead of defending us from our present enemies). Yet, I must support all of this with my tax dollars.

Would I drop my opposition to all of these things if I were exempt from paying for them? Absolutely not! That would put a price tag on my principles. That is exactly what all of you are doing with claims that embryonic cell research is okay as long as it is not taxpayer funded. Bring it on with all of the wonderfful medical advances as long as you don't have to pay for it! Your "moral" objections are nothing more than a smokescreen to disguise your unadulterated greed. Shame on you.

http://www.medpagetoday.com/Neurology/MultipleSclerosis/13888

Please see the above link.

"

The first was a 50-year-old man with relapsing-remitting disease who suffered from frequent painful tonic flexion spasms. He had a partial response to other multiple sclerosis treatments, but the seizures persisted at a rate of about 30 to 40 a month.

He received two IV infusions of autologous stromal vascular fraction cells and multiple infusions of allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells and CD34+ cells.

Within months, his seizures stopped and he reported improvements in cognition, memory, hearing, sexual function, energy, and generalized pain. He had almost complete reduction of spasticity in his arms and legs."

I wish the best to your family and the families of others with MS.

Sorry for your situation, but its not worth the wholesale slaughter of the innocents.

Greg Smith-1341151

Sorry for your situation, but its not worth the wholesale slaughter of the innocents.

There are no innocents here. Just embryos.

This is a prime example of how religion can be responsible for inflicting immeasurable suffering among real, live people for the sake of myth and dogma.

There's no excuse for it except pure, unadulterated ignorance and superstition. Even that isn't an excuse. It's just a reason.

gregg smith you are warping the teaching of Jesus to suit your own twisted views of christianity

You need to study the words and works of Jesus and stay out of the old testament as that is reserved for the Jews (see the book of Hebrews)

Hey, lets just send the embryos to Afghanistan, drop bombs on them and call them "collateral damage"!

bopdaddytoo,

What is your understanding of the teaching of Jesus? And how could you know about my views of christianity, friend. I'll tell you. I'm against abortion and/or anything that supports or relies on it. I believe and being saved by Grace through Faith. And, for your information, the Old testament is not only for the Jews since they reject the very one who is prophesied over and over again in the old testament. That would be Jesus Christ. Is my view warped? Please tell me if it is. I think any christian would be against abortion. If they're not, I'd have to question their salvation.

Yes, your view is warped according to the Bible. To question another's salvation is to sit in judgement. A mortal sin.

Amen.

Why are so many embryos being created in the first place? Especially since it is known that several will be "thrown out." Personally, I don't like to play God. Other, natural, techniques are quite less wasteful, when it comes to infertility. Therefore, the issue of "unused" embryos is not even an issue in cases where embryos are not "created" outside of natural circumstances. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Do YOU even know the difference between adult and embryonic stem cells (other than that silly matter of oh, proven results from adult stem cell therapies vs abysmal failure from embryonic attempts.... :-P ) I suppose you are a devoted sycophant of the lamestream media and a dedicated regurgitator and spewer of the eternal truths of liberalism. By the by, I have no significant admiration for any brainwashed terds from the right- or left-wing or the lying demagogues they worship at the feet of.... Just one question for you, nurseypoo; If we are supposed to give the 'benefit of the doubt' to an accused criminal, don't you believe it would be just and appropriate to give an innocent 'whatever' (I believe it is a human being, but that's just me...) the same 'benefit of the doubt'? Unless, of course, you already know when Life begins....

You're welcome! :)

The reason that some scientists keep pushing embryonic stem cell research is because stem cells have more applications than just medicine. "Embryo research" could be used for anything, even for pure curiosity. I believe pure curiosity does drive some scientists. After all, the development of the embryo is shrouded in mystery.

But for the medical field embryos are a dead end.

Hmmm... up till now, outside of medical (and I include cloning and 'body shop' or cyborg activities in that), I didn't think there were any real alternative applications outside of the pure curiosity you mentioned.... But, thanks, you've lit a new fuse! Let's see what I can learn about this!! :-)

Self fullfilling prophecy: Make embryonic stem cell research illegal and then tout how no research has found any use for embryonic stem cells.

Incidentally, it isn't illegal everywhere. And in places where it is legal, they have learned a great deal from that research.

I think its great that adult stem cells have so many uses, but I'd like to see some research IN THIS COUNTRY to see if embryonic stem cells have medical uses as well. Keep your religion off of my freedom...

Walt in AZ:

Embryonic stem cell research is not illegal in the US. In fact, more money funds the research here than anywhere else in the world.

"California by itself has already obligated more than $200 million to hESC research, making it the largest hESC funder in the world. The California Institute of Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), the state agency which manages the stem cell program, is spending more than five times what NIH is spending on hESC research. Other states are spending smaller amounts, but sizeable programs are currently under consideration in New Jersey, New York, and Massachusetts."

http://blog.bioethics.net/2007/08/whos-funding-stem-cell-research/

And yet, no cures have come about using Human Embryonic Stem Cells (hESC).

Innocent people have received death sentences. If you see how many people have been freed after new evidence was discovered, then it only stands to reason that the result of incarcerating the wrong person would be occasionally executing the wrong person.

You are 100 percent right on.

Following that reasoning, then would it be okay to kill massive amounts of people, or destroy large portions of the environment, or do anything at all in the name of eliminating pain and suffering of another human?

In someone else's opinion...including all but 5 members of Congress, going to Iraq and killing people was worth it to spare Americans. You are entitled to your opinion, but that means others are entitled to theirs which may be directly opposed to your opinions. Of course, in a world of no "right and wrong" then nobody's opinion is right and nobody's is wrong. Therefore, survival of the fittest is all that matters. Anything is "right" if the reason is good enough. After all, who is going to judge someone for nuking an entire country if they really felt it might save more lives .

I'm not picking on you, just making the point, that there just because something is for a "good reason" doesn't make it right. Except that society says it is right. Society has said lots of things were right at different times in history. Nazi situation is one example when a society suddenly backed a horrible thing. Slavery is another. Watching gladiators kill each other in a stadium for fun was once acceptable by society. So, in a world where society chooses "right and wrong" then no-one is ever truly wrong...they are simply revolutionaries before their time. I won't get into all the perverted things that have been accepted in past civilizations and cultures and will be acceptable again in time.

If however, there is a set "right and wrong" then doing the wrong thing can never be made right...no matter how good the reason may be. I'm not judging embryonic stem cell research or IVF procedures, because personally I'm not sure where I stand on the issue. Didn't really think much about it until the last year...and I can't say I have an answer yet. However, as for "taxpayer funded embryonic stem cell research," ....well as a constitutional conservative :-) I'm pretty well always for letting the taxpayer have their money back and letting them decide individually what sorts of research they wish to support. I think that's a fair way to resolve religious issues like this especially...that don't involve national security or expressed federal powers.

you do know that immigration has not changed at all since the 1960's it is because of fox news that people believe there is an actual problem. it is our faults in the first place that it has become like this. its called capitalism. why wouldn't a company want to hire someone willing to work harder and longer for less money. get your facts straight.

buffalo bob-937857

maybe they could just enforce the immigration laws instead...

See, that's the problem with a lot of you yahoos. It's either one or the other.

How about:

Instead of fighting in Afghanistan, maybe they could just enforce the immigration laws instead.

Without a war, we'd have plenty of troops and money, more than enough to seal the border from illegal crossings.

Maybe they should do as the previous administration did and instead of challenging the laws simply ignore them!

I think the question is what is a "viable embryo". When a woman goes to a fertility clinic, she routinely gets far more eggs fertilized than are ever emplanted. The rest are discarded. Are those "viable embryos"? Do they grow into babies outside of the womb?

No - the real question is why is AP including a meaningless sentence fragment in a news report