Well duh, everyone knows the Bible has a specific verse that actually defines life, when it truly begins, and differentiates between egg and sperm, embryo and zygote and blastocyst and fetus. And obviously, religion (as long as it's ONLY Christianity) should dictate who gets money for research and decide our laws. It's not like we're just interpreting the Bible (written by GOD) based off our own misinformed assumptions!

Shucks. I so want to be shackled to 1st century mythology, hiding in the shadows, wondering when the sun will rotate back around the earth to light up the sky. Oh wait, perhaps we can dunk a witch and see if she survives. Oops, no, let's move up anther few centuries and put a few leeches on those Parkinson's patients.

. . . . and we mock the Taliban. What's a century or more of ignorance among friends.

Poor pharmaceutical companies... how are they supposed to compete with treatments that actually do more good than harm?

It's just not fair to them.

B - they partner with small biotech, which is what they've done since 2007-2008, because this is a biotechnology not a pharmaceutical drug. at least get your industries right before you start slamming them.

oh and if you really, truly believe the comment you made, please don't take any medication, ever :) not a Tylenol, not a penicillin, nada! see how much "harm" that does.

Good, keep the research going.

even the ignorant get to benefit from science.

The religious right would rather see people continue to suffer, rather than see cures to end suffering, over a CLUSTER OF CELLS. Funny how they "protect" the unborn and nonviable, but refuse to help those who are alive. If you ask me, they are the antithesis of what is truly "Jesus-like".

Those poor Doctors... now it is clear they were NOT sueing based on religious reasons or even ethical standards... they were sueing so they didn't have competition... Gee... is that called "free market"????

StepAce
You're right. It seems nowadays the laws of Christianity applies to everyone but them so long as they claim to be a Christian. I see it every day. I remember all the "thank God bin laden is dead" postings. To ignore the rules of your own religion and keep forcing it upon others is just frustrating to deal with.
I live in the bible belt. Northern Mississippi to be specific. I get it all the time. "you're going to hell for your sins." Am I? Last time I checked, gluttony is a sin. And Mississippi is the fattest state in the union. Guess you could say Mississippi is the most sinful state, eh? Ironic..

mike s, that is true for a lot of the co-called "christians" but there some that I actually respect (Amish and other mennonites), at least they are consistent with a true "pro-life" view and don't get involved with politics.

(ps, I'm atheist myself)

Why do you need a bible to figure out that destroying a human being's life to help another's is wrong when there are other ways to acquire stem cells that don't harm anyone. Basically, all you need is common sense, the ability and willingness to do the research (please don't use the media for all your info!) and a heart.

Why do you need a bible to figure out that destroying a human being's life to help another's is wrong when there are other ways to acquire stem cells that don't harm anyone.

Considering that these cells are not produced specifically to be used as research, your point is moot.

The fetus' are already terminated. They are not being "farmed" for research.

BornAgainCatholic

Why do you need a bible to figure out that destroying a human being's life to help another's is wrong when there are other ways to acquire stem cells that don't harm anyone. Basically, all you need is common sense

"Common sense" informs us that embryos are NOT a "human being;" but unsupported belief pretends otherwise. Dividing cells that contain human DNA have not yet become a human being; Could become a human being is not the same thing as a human being.

BornAgainCatholic

Why do you need a bible to figure out that destroying a human being's life to help another's is wrong when there are other ways to acquire stem cells that don't harm anyone. Basically, all you need is common sense.

Yes, yes... Yahweh is the King of doing no harm to others; either via his own temper tantrum-style actions, or the commandments of his loyal disciples of blood and virgin-looting.

In case you're curious, Yahweh's stance on the matter can be found in Exodus. While I realize creatards have twisted the Hebrew to imply the woman and the child, the Code of Hammurabi, the text Exodus 21 plagiarized without mercy, sheds light on the intent.

That, and Yahweh's utter silence on clarifying the issue, makes the entire passage quite clear. As long as money exchanged hands, all was hunky-dory.

Mixed fabrics and shellfish were literally more important to clarify than the death of a clear-cut future human.

But since when have believers ever bothered with facts?

I hate Christianity!

"Common sense" informs us that embryos are NOT a "human being;" but unsupported belief pretends otherwise. Dividing cells that contain human DNA have not yet become a human being; Could become a human being is not the same thing as a human being.

So if an embryo isn't human, what is it? Are you saying that pregnant woman carry alians or other life-forms? You don't believe humans produce human offspring? If not, what do humans produce? When do you believe you became human and what where you before?

What is the definition of 'being'?

Doesn't anybody take biology these days? Isn't it required even in High School? Scary!

Flex, that's ok, I love you anyway. ; )

Flex-538784 said:

I hate Christianity!

I hate people who hate!

BornAgainCatholic

So if an embryo isn't human, what is it? Are you saying that pregnant woman carry alians or other life-forms? You don't believe humans produce human offspring? If not, what do humans produce? When do you believe you became human and what where you before?

An human embryo is a clump of reproducing cells containing human DNA that if developing to birth will become a human being. Birth is when I became a human being. If that embryo had miscarried or been aborted, it would never become a human being. The egg is not a chicken!

Doesn't anybody take biology these days? Isn't it required even in High School? Scary!

Apparently YOU did not take biology if you can't tell the difference between a human being and embryo. This is because you are not paying any attention to facts, you are paying attention soley to emotional belief.

So if an embryo isn't human, what is it? Are you saying that pregnant woman carry alians or other life-forms? You don't believe humans produce human offspring? If not, what do humans produce? When do you believe you became human and what where you before?

An embryo is a ball of cells that includes human DNA and has the ability to develope into a human. The cells are not differentiated, there are no organs, no nerves. If you split it in half you get identical twins if allowed to implant. In fact you can split it eight times and theoretically get 8 identical individuals before the viability drops off.

No, an embryo is not a person, its an embryo. And since humansare usually considered "human" by virtue of their cognition, I'd even say that a fetus of up to 26 weeks isn't really a person either (once actual neural activity occurs in response to stimulus).

Take away healthcare, social services, "entitlements" (though they still believe you should still pay in for them) and make abortions and fertilisation clinics illegal. Just the tip of those people's iceberg.

Bornagain: So if cells are not human they are "aliens"?? You are a poster child for why religious zealots have to be kept out of all public arenas impacting policy.

Born Again Catholic, Pt. 2

So if an embryo isn't human, what is it?

The above posts answer that one just fine.

Let me also give you an example to consider: Are your skin cells "human"?

Are you saying that pregnant woman carry alians or other life-forms? You don't believe humans produce human offspring? If not, what do humans produce? When do you believe you became human and what where you before?

As much of a Star Trek fan as I may be, I doubt the possibility. That does not alter the fact that you have not grasped the argument.

What is the definition of 'being'?

Sentience.

Doesn't anybody take biology these days? Isn't it required even in High School? Scary!

I'm a scientist, so I suppose I qualify.

As for the 'biology in high school' bit, one thing we never learned, at the high school, collegiate, or grad school level, is how an embryo is sentient. I think the profs must have accidentally spilled coffee on that page... in every school I attended.

But, do feel free to enlighten me with your peer-reviewed paper on how weeks-old embryos are sentient.

So if an embryo isn't human, what is it?

It's a zygote. A collection of cells and nothing more. Humans become humans (according to this bible of Christians) WHEN THE BLOOD FORMS after about 13 weeks of pregnancy. Until that time (again according to that bible) the collection of cells is just that - a collection of cells.

disregard, posted message twice in error--see below

The definition of a human is according to Mirrium-Webster:

The definition of being, same reference source:

Now put the two definitions together.

If I were seriously ill, I would rather have an atheist doctor caring for than a pedophile priest praying over me.

Flat world believers and bible thumpers should not deside medical research...

Flying Spaghetti Monster lawsuit against Christians to ensue, for trying to put 'Creationism' in school without teaching about FSM. Flying Spaghetti Monster is at least as serious as Creationism, and in fact, may be more so.

Also, Flying Spaghetti Monster may, in fact, not be made of stem cells. Possible, THEREFORE TOTALLY TRUE!

All the id... people bringing religion into this need to do more research. The ones that brought the suit were other stem cell researchers who said the supposedly-illegal funding of this research took money away from funding their non-embryonic stem cell research.

And, as for the justification of the ban, forget religion. Simply look at the fact that non-embryonic stem cell research now shows all the capabilities of embryonic research with almost none of the risks and a fraction of the cost! That's right, we can do this research without destroying embryos, without mostly causing cancer, and without any risk of rejection or Host-vs-Graft syndrome!

Turns out the Christian Right movement was right on this one, and now real science backs it, while the Liberal Left still support a now mostly defunct field of research just so they can keep thumbing their noses at the Christian Right.

Yeah, big win for science here, huh?

The problem with those other non-embryonic researchers is that even after the hundreds of billions we have invested in them over the past fifty years, they are no closer to any breakthroughs now than they were when they began. A pill to mask symptoms and costing the patient hundreds and even thousands of dollars is useless and the real goal of those non-embryonic researchers. They wrok for the pharmaceuticals period and not in the interest of the patient. Stem cell research has proven more promising and simply should be funded in any way they need to help them find the cures for these people today and who will be born with these defects tomorrow.

StephAce

The religious right would rather see people continue to suffer, rather than see cures to end suffering

It's not about the cure; it's about the life long drug dependence; it's not about the cure; it's about the Big Pharma's bottom line. if they allow to cure the repeat drug customer, who will buy they product?

Turns out the Christian Right movement was right on this one, and now real science backs it,

How were they right? All they said was "don't use this." Science doesn't say "don't use this" and in no way backs the disuse of embryos in stem-cell research.

Don't attribute things incorrectly, especially when you have a biased or just incomplete understanding.

That's right, we can do this research without destroying embryos, without mostly causing cancer, and without any risk of rejection or Host-vs-Graft syndrome!

1) The embryos already exist, or will already exist. Not using them will not save them; rather they will either be frozen (for later use when the political climate changes) or disposed of (like trash).

2) Despite your downplaying of it, the method you allude to can damage the DNA and could result in cancerous or otherwise damaged tissue. An issue that does not occur with embryonic stem cells.

Simply look at the fact that non-embryonic stem cell research now shows all the capabilities of embryonic research with almost none of the risks

You really should get your information from someplace other than "Pro-Life" websites, since your facts are either wrong or omit pertinent information. Adult stem cells do not have the range of applications and effectiveness that embryonic stem cells have. Almost none of the risks? It doesn't have the risk of rejection, but it has the risk of cancer.

It looks to me like both have their uses, and that both should be used. Like most things in life, nothing is a black and white "either or" situation.

Certainly Christians don't have to take EVERY aspect of the bible into account through out daily life. I mean, if stem cell research helps people, who are you to say no? Doesn't God want you to help others?
Besides, don't alot of stem cells come from the unbilical cord or something like that now?

Mike, I didn't read every post on this thread, but being a Christian myself, we don't have ANY problem with two out of the three forms of stem cell research. Adult and umbilical cord stem cells have cured many diseases and show promise for many more. There is nothing ethically wrong with adult and umbilical cord stem cells. The problem is with embyonic stem cell research. It's not ethical to use human beings as guinea pigs and with the other two forms, it's really not necessary.

I'm sure there's a reason for it. People themselves certainly aren't just naturally evil enough to use unborn children when it's not necessary. I'll do some research and get back to you on that.

Thought I'd go ahead and tell you what I've found. I've discovered that thanks to the science of cloning, using unborn fetuses is not a very popular practice anymore.. Rather, they make embryonic stem cells in labs using cloning. Most of the eggs actually come out of in-vitro ferilization clinics.

Well, I don't know about you, but I'm not too comfortable with cloning either.

Thankfully!

These guys want us to live like in the 12th century!

Don't worry Atilla the Hun is alive and well today with all the Human Harvesters!

Far South: You do your side no good by being so silly and easy to dismiss.

It boggles the mind and is almost incomprehensible that anyone could or would try to stand in the way of stem cell research based on specious, personal biases and religious prejudices they are want to believe and endorse. Yet, apparently there are no shortage of such cavalier cretins out there.

Well, I suggest we force (as they would like to "force" their idiocy on the rest of us) such fools to have to endure taking care of someone they love who is suffering from a long term, terminal, debilitating disease such as MS, or though not terminal Parkinson's or whatever, and watch this person they love being, for all practical purposes "eaten alive" by the disease and then let's see what self-righteous fools say!

I took care of my late wife, who passed away in a nursing home, for 20 some years on my own of our 22 year, 3 month 17 day marriage; until she died choking to death in the nursing home because she no longer had enough control of her throat muscles to clear her throat. The first ten years of our marriage she was "only" severely, uncontrollably manic depressive; then came her first symptoms of Multiple Sclerosis, which put her in a wheel chair within 4 years and ultimately rendered her incompetent, incontinent and a quadriplegic (can anyone spell "Hoyer Lift"?).

Ultimately, much later than I should have, I realized that no matter how long I held out she wasn't going to get better - apparently God was occupied with more pressing matters! (That's a joke by the way and I truly laugh when I write it - I totally believe in God and am not complaining.)

Anyway, God gave each of us the ability to use our minds to seek solutions to problems and challenges that face us here in "this earthly veil", and he did not intend for us to allow mental pigmies, religious fundamentalist fools to stand in the way of eliminating suffering.

I for one would like nothing more than to see a cure for MS or manic depression - not that it would help me or my wife obviously, but because I would not want to see anyone have to watch someone they love destroyed. Those who fight stem cell research are - excuse my French - heartless, self-righteous bastards to a man and woman.

Watch them change their tunes if they get afflicted.

Far south;

All you frozen embryo protectors refuse to even acknowledge the the humanity of a baby after it is born to an unwealthy or impoverished mother or family.

The moment it becomes a human being, you will vilify it as a freeloading drag on the economy, refuse to offer it any assistance in nutrition or health care and moan and complain about any funding for it's education.

I figure you think you are being logical.. and you think you are on the 'high road' but really....think about that.

Stoops, these people would have stood in the way of flying machines if they would have known about them! Thankfully, the news didn't reach them in time to stop the Wright Bros.

Soooo well put! GuyFromSanDIego

God save us from the do gooders and the religious self-righteous.

Amazing, isn't it, that the human race has actually advance at all with their types doing their damnedest to hold back any and all progress?

Oh well, they can fight progress, but they can't win. Bit by bit, step by step each generation becomes more enlightened (not less) and ultimately in about 2000 years we should "arrive"!

Keep in mind, even in America, until, what was it 1965?, technically it was illegal for a black man or woman to marry a white man or woman. FINALLY, the Supreme Court settled the matter in the absolutely perfectly titled case Loving vs. the State of Virginia, which revolved around the fact that a black woman and white man had had the temerity, the unbridled audacity to marry and, God forbid, have sex! (God does have a hell of a sense of humor when choosing the names of important Supreme Court cases you must agree.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

Anyway, time is on our side, as the idiots, the cretins, the born again fools who think they have the right to inflict their Neanderthal (no disrespect intend to any Neanderthals that may be extant) ideas on us are just as horrid as those who wanted to make it impossible for blacks and whites to marry.

Of course, the whole history of the human race has been the story of the constant fight against such narrow minded, nasty types, and frankly will always be so.

The generalizations and name-calling appear to be all that is left to this discussion. If my detractors knew that I am starting an orphanage in Mexico, would probably be of little concern to them. NO ONE answers the question about putting more research dollars in Adult Stem Cell research, a proven winner. No, they want to borrow more money that they don't have any way to repay to go after a dead-end in embryonic research...8+years and counting! They get upset when the term Human-Harvesting is used, because they know it is wrong... Using names and whatever to put down the ones who wish to discuss, not just show their bias for a set of beliefs they created in their own mind. Their God is Self, anything for Self. Someday soon they will meet the real God and will need to give an accounting for their stance / support. Contrary to their opinion, I do care more for them and those they wish to kill, not out of fear but love. Too bad they won't even listen... they just try to drown out a voice of reason.

To argue that one type of stem cell research (adult stem cells) should be pursued and not embryonic is moronic. Research them both. That's how knowledge is gained and science is advanced.

Number of currently successful treatments involving adult stem cells - in the dozens; number of currently successful treatments involving embryonic stem cells - 0.

Better wipe that (hopefully non-fertile) egg off your face.

Node, I would use the science and do some research on this for yourself. Please stop believing everything the media feeds you. There is plenty of scientific evidence that adult & umbilical cord stem cells cure many, many diseases with less detrimental affects than embryonic stem cells.

You all should really educate yourself before making comments.

Far South

Why do you believe that you get to impose your religious belief on other people who don't believe your stories? Why is Islamic Shariah tyrannical but Christian Shariah acceptable

Science 1 - Luddites 0

More like:

Science 189,257 - Luddites 0

@FarSouth

The generalizations and name-calling appear to be all that is left to this discussion. If my detractors knew that I am starting an orphanage in Mexico, would probably be of little concern to them.

Nonsense. Good for you, and good for those kids in Mexico. While I 'personally' would prefer you not pollute their minds with fables, I applaud your actions 100%.

NO ONE answers the question about putting more research dollars in Adult Stem Cell research, a proven winner. No, they want to borrow more money that they don't have any way to repay to go after a dead-end in embryonic research...8+years and counting!

Wow. EIGHT whole years...

Well, less than ONE if you count restrictions... but still a whole year and no results.

I'm just glad you were not Thomas Edison's best friend. The light bulb would never have been invented.

It took over 20 years to cure polio -- just as a baseline for how stupid that remark really was.

Also, if you assume stem cells have had "no results", you're either blissfully ignorant of the facts, or merely ignorant:

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/health/18903485/detail.html
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/02/prweb5090634.htm

I could keep going, but why bore you with facts, eh?

They get upset when the term Human-Harvesting is used, because they know it is wrong...

No, it's because we think people who use the phrase are a few cans shy of a mental six-pack.

Their God is Self, anything for Self. Someday soon they will meet the real God and will need to give an accounting for their stance / support.

Ah, yes. What's a good religitard rant without the old, "One day you're gonna GET IT!" line.

To miss that canard would be like watching "I Love Lucy" without the laugh track.

What a narrow view of reality you have. Do you really believe altruism started with your specific god? Do you even know the history of Yahweh? Probably not -- but know this: The Bible was not the first book of law. Not even close.

Contrary to their opinion, I do care more for them and those they wish to kill, not out of fear but love. Too bad they won't even listen... they just try to drown out a voice of reason.

You speak as if we're gutting pregnant women and stealing their already-named child, for crying out-loud. You DO realize that, until Crazy Lady Bachmann becomes (gasp) President, abortion is legal... right? And stem cells come from other sources than embryonic... right?

Or, how about this: We only use the stem cells from embryos that your God aborts. He does so to the tune of between 25 and 50% of the time.

That's right, boy genius: "God" aborts more children than man ever has or ever will.

But, now you'll claim that it was "his will" and blah, blah, blah...

What a champ.

Here is a fact that deems attention. Nancy Reagan "Came out from the darkness" to back up stem-cell research in hope of one day having a real cure for serious diseases (Alzheimers) ...Stoops2Conquer (above) mentioned something about "fools" and having them watch someone they love eaten alive by a disease, he is dead on, and this is what happened here... Nancy ( good person by the way) watched her beloved husband spiral down the drain with Alzheimers. Nancy is a "pro-life" supporter, and her stance on embryonic stem cell research puzzles me... kind of flies in the face of "pro-life", doesn't it?

To Jon-2730330 and Uthaclena: Please read my posts and quote them, not what you guess I was saying... Just because people do things and want to do things immoral and I voice a different opinion does not make me their moral police or judge. At least you get to hear one voice that differs from the pack. God allows you to do pretty much what you please; However, there are consequences...here and now...for your actions. You both have hearts, consciouses, and souls. I would not wish to sear mine, it removes a lot of what He - God has given us that makes what little good that we do have.

I don't talk about hell-fire and the like, because that is not the point, never has been, never will be... When you have a relationship with God on His terms, you never even think about such things. I say on His terms, because you can be your own god (humanist) if you choose, but you will never get to know Him. He is God and us His creation... He is Sovereign, so He can do or allow as He chooses. How does the created think it can manipulate or control the Creator? Sounds pretty silly to me to think that would be possible. My whole point in all my posts was that ADULT STEM CELLS HAVE LOTS OF GREAT RESULTS, EMBRYONIC HAVE HAD NONE. And Harvesting Humans for some temporal gain is not moral or very wise in the light of my heart, soul, conscious, or Creator...

Far South: All the bible thumping in the world doesn't change the facts. Embryonic stem cells are not themselves embryos. There are specific differences between embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells and that's why both hold promise and research must proceed using both. Embryonic cells are not already differentiated or specialized the way adult cells are. Because of the religious right's misguided war on science during the Bush years, there were severe limits placed on research--a fact you now cite as EVIDENCE for a lack of progress. If you were honest however, you'd admit that you simply don't know what you're talking about when you speak of either kind of cell, but oppose science for as you put it, trying to "manipulate" the Creator, whatever that means. That's the kind of ignorance that put Galileo and Capernicus on the wrong side of the Catholic church for daring to use reason rather than the religious superstition of their day...Unbelievable there are still those living in this very country who make the same absurd arguments against the use of reason--and do it without a shred of evidence or reason themselves--but have the audacity to claim God would have it so.

To Jon-2730330 and Uthaclena: Please read my posts and quote them, not what you guess I was saying...

Oh, I'm sorry... I suppose those entire lines of fully contextual quotes was not "quoting you" enough.

Just because people do things and want to do things immoral and I voice a different opinion does not make me their moral police or judge.

The fact you claim this to be a moral issue is in itself a judgment. You are welcome to your opinion, of course, but you state this as if it were black and white. I'll challenge you to prove it.

At least you get to hear one voice that differs from the pack. God allows you to do pretty much what you please; However, there are consequences...here and now...for your actions.

Wow. "I Love Lucy" just came on the tele...

Seriously: Can you just NOT help yourself with the "He's gonna GIT YA" bulls**t? Do you really think that's going to sway a nonbeliever? Can you at least attempt to be a tad original?

You both have hearts, consciouses, and souls. I would not wish to sear mine, it removes a lot of what He - God has given us that makes what little good that we do have.

I have a heart. I've seen it.

I have a conscious. I feel, use, and (if my neuroscientist pals are right) perhaps even seen it as well.

I have no "soul" that I'm aware of.

But I find your continued judgment (when you claim not to police people) pretty damn funny. "Seared" soul and conscious? Just because we don't buy into your book of fables?

Tell you what: Explain Genesis 1:2 without using circular reasoning.

Do that, and we'll talk.

I don't talk about hell-fire and the like, because that is not the point, never has been, never will be...

Nah. You just talk about paying the price for non-belief and errant actions...

When you have a relationship with God on His terms, you never even think about such things. I say on His terms, because you can be your own god (humanist) if you choose, but you will never get to know Him.

You should consider the possibility that you are merely talking to yourself.

Also, you should consider the fact that billions claim to "know" this same deity, and literally millions among them are as divided as divided gets. Your god is supposed to be exempt from "authoring confusion" -- obviously this is not the case. Your lord prayed that his believers "be as ONE." They are not.

If God cannot answer his own prayers... well, it just gets silly from this point on.

He is God and us His creation... He is Sovereign, so He can do or allow as He chooses. How does the created think it can manipulate or control the Creator? Sounds pretty silly to me to think that would be possible.

You are correct.

Vishnu is God. He said so in a holy book older than The Bible. We are his creation. He is...

Etc., Etc., Etc.

But you are right about one thing:

This sounds pretty silly, indeed.

Thank you for your reference to my post in your post above, Democatthroughandthrough.

" ...Stoops2Conquer (above) mentioned something about "fools" and having them watch someone they love eaten alive by a disease, he is dead on, and this is what happened here... Nancy ( good person by the way) watched her beloved husband spiral down the drain with Alzheimers."

It is truly amazing how harden, self-righteous positions magically change from judgmental to understanding, when those holding them are actually faced with living a horror such as MS, Alzheimers or Lou Gehrig’s disease in reality rather than safely pontificating about it intellectually from afar.

In my opinion, what underlies this conflict, as well as almost all conflicts where others try to force their wills upon others in regard to things that are patently obviously matters of individual free choice, is that you are dealing with people who hate the thought of living in a world where people truly are allowed to think for themselves. Such types, are never happy leading their narrow minded lives all alone or in the company of other "true believers", because it discomfits them to see anyone acting in a way that they do not deem acceptable according to what they have decided God obviously wants.

They want a world where everyone thinks alike and agrees with them. To that end they are perfectly willing, when push comes to shove, to set in motion all manner of even murder and mayhem – if we are talking about countries like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran etc. – to quash differing opinions, or if in America, where it’s getting harder and harder everyday to get together a good old lynch mob of “good old boys”, they find themselves forced to resort to using legal manipulation.

Did you see at the end of the article how they pointed out that the two "researchers", who filed the suit, had done so because they feared competition?

Yeah, that’s the way to advance science and mankind – allow greedy individuals to stop others from pursuing an alternative avenue of investigation - simply because it might make your research outdated and unmarketable, and of course, if at the same time you can get on board to support you a bunch of religious fanatics who can help fund the suit (possibly) and hide behind your lawsuit, so much the better. Kills lots of birds with one stone.

The anti-abortionists, anti-freedom & anti- free choice crowd and such “researchers” will always loose though in the end though, because they are the ones going against the will of God, by not seeking to use the gift of free will God has given us and expects us to use.

I wa talking to God today. He, and his flowing white beard, told me that if stem cell research was evil, he would have never allowed it to exist. To think otherwise was pretty much the sign of the devil. Nevertheless, he would of course forgive the sinners who were against stem cell research and claiming that it was in His name. Because what kind of divine being would he be if he didn't?

All the id... people bringing religion into this need to do more research. The ones that brought the suit were other stem cell researchers who said the supposedly-illegal funding of this research took money away from funding their non-embryonic stem cell research.

And, as for the justification of the ban, forget religion. Simply look at the fact that non-embryonic stem cell research now shows all the capabilities of embryonic research with almost none of the risks and a fraction of the cost! That's right, we can do this research without destroying embryos, without mostly causing cancer, and without any risk of rejection or Host-vs-Graft syndrome!

Turns out the Christian Right movement was right on this one, and now real science backs it, while the Liberal Left still support a now mostly defunct field of research just so they can keep thumbing their noses at the Christian Right.

Yeah, big win for science here, huh?

But Stephen, those Taliban are Muslim. The Christian in America would never, ever, ever allow something like that to happen in US.

Christian taliban? Oh, you mean the Tea Party. The sponsors and supporters of killing and harassing women's health care providers.

If it wasn't for Bush and the whole Christian Coalition, we might still have Christopher Reeve with us and walking. You let him die and let hundreds of thousands of people suffer and die for your stance on stem cells. Thanks......

I was really hoping that this commercial would become real.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFYSUPlZmcg

Actually, Chris, he probably would have just died from brain cancer. That's what embryonic stem cell research usually produces.

On the other hand, non-embryonic stem cell research has shown wonderful results already. In fact, we have had a technique for a few years now that allow us to turn ordinary skin cells into functionally equivalent embryonic stem cells. That means we can safely dodge the whole ethical issue without sacrificing anything, and actually gaining a whole lot, since the patient's own cells can be used for the therapy (thus avoiding rejection issues). Oh, and they're already showing more success in research and therapy than embryonic stem cells have.

Oh, yes, so much greed because:

1.) they want the feds to play by their own rules

2.) they want money to go to research that has already and will almost certainly in the future bring forth amazing results, everything that stem cell research has to promise, as opposed to that money going to dead-end, failed research that causes more problems than solutions.

With this current Congress??? No way that's happening. Unfortunately.

Maybe after 2012.

Guess Al Gore was right in 2000 when he warned us that elections had consquences such as SCOTUS appointments......don't let that happen again and we can keep moving toward the future.

The Supreme Court hears a tiny fraction of the cases sent to them, and this one doesn't sound like one of great Constitutional importance. In any case, it would have to be appealled to the lower appellate court first, if they choose to appeal the dismissal.

I would think it would be of very great constitutional importance since it would give the far right members of the court an excuse to define life itself.

kathryn: Agreed. It is the number one reason I will vote for a second Obama term.

My sister suffers from MS. She was diagnosed at the age of 27. This not only could mean improving her life, it could mean saving it, as well as giving her a chance to have children. For some reason I think whatever God is up there would be happier that you and she, and all of those millions of actual people were cured, then with the saving of non-human embryoes. This is a good day.

Here, here! I'm a type I.

Helping someone walk does not justify the Killing of another human. There have been NO known cures derived from harvesting humans. Adult stem cells have 1000's of KNOWN CURES. I would strongly recommend supporting that than harvesting Humans.

Nobody should be killing humans, but embryos are perfectly fine. They are not human in any possible sense. Since they are being thrown in the trash anyway, we should allow scientists to use the tissue for scientific research. What a waste.

I hope your brother in law is able to walk again. I wish Christopher Reeve had been around long enough to recover the use of his limbs.

What do you think these "embryo things" are? Marshmallows? Just because they throw them in the garbage disposal does not make it right. Adult Stem Cells have PROVEN results and have been studied a lot less. Invest in life, not the taking of it!

Far South, I'm from the south too and you make us both look bad. This is investing in life. Re-read your bible please, theologians for the past two thousand years agree that life begins when the breath is taken, when the organs are formed...they claim this is when the soul enters. The idea that life begins at conception has been around since about 1970.

Anyways, let's invest in life that is already here, hurting, and in need of help, rather than investing in potential for life that may or may not ever be anything. If we protected every cell that could potentially turn into life, then every adolescent male is committing millions of murders every day ;)

So let's say the same for sperm and ova. After all they're potential humans.

Oops. One premature ejaculation and you're a mass murderer.

Dear Severed: If you want to quantify sperm and ova as humans, I would strongly disagree with you. The question on the table is Harvesting Humans.

MmmMmmBeer: 5+ month Fetuses are completely viable outside the womb. They swim, wrestle, laugh, feel pain, move to music, and communicate with other fetuses if they are in there with them. But if you really believe they do not have souls, I think you might want to read Psalm 51. Pretty much black and white, and I would never have any desire to do any interpretation for you.

Far South,

What the hell does that have to do with embryonic stem cells?

If they are not Human, why don't they just harvest lamb or pig stem cells? No, because they are human, no matter how early in their development. My guess is that if you can accept Human Harvesting at the earlier periods, you can justify doing it in later stages of development too! Morals came into the conversations because there is a very severe lack of them as the logical end of this matter. My next guess is that the majority of contributors here would see nothing wrong with the Nazi experimentation because it "benefited" science. Just because someone is ignorant of killing humans does not justify it. There is a lot we still do not know...

Where is all of the talk about promoting ADULT Stem Cell Research? Where can I donate mine?????? Oh, there is not as much profit in that... But if we can harvest humans in a factory setting...

One last talking point: Embryonic Stem Cell Research Results: ZERO!

Adult Human Stem Cell Research: 1000's of KNOWN CURES.

Yes, I can now see why the government would borrow money that cannot be paid back to fund HUMAN HARVESTING!

Far South

Dear Severed: If you want to quantify sperm and ova as humans, I would strongly disagree with you. The question on the table is Harvesting Humans.

No, human beings are people who have been born.

If they are not Human, why don't they just harvest lamb or pig stem cells? No, because they are human, no matter how early in their development.

You have just contradicted yourself : they are not human beings, they are human cells! If you can't tell the difference between a cell and a human being, you really could use a basic biology course.

5+ month Fetuses are completely viable outside the womb. They swim, wrestle, laugh, feel pain, move to music, and communicate with other fetuses if they are in there with them. But if you really believe they do not have souls, I think you might want to read Psalm 51.

This is pretty much nonsense. Most premies before seven months will die without extraordinary medical support and if they survive many of them will struggle with life-long handicaps. And why should we be ruled by your preferred Biblical mythology? It's as believable as Zeus or Odin.

I am one of the few people who doesn't give a crap about abortion as it is. I always figured that if there is a God, he(she) will judge whether or not an abortion is murder and will judge accordingly. It does matter what religion we are born into and happend to be raised to have faith in, 96% (not a factual number just based on people I have known) of people are the religion they were born into, based on most religions, certain people were doomed just by being born into the wrong religion. Yikes that's one evil God!

My concern is federal funding, if by some means a scientist discovers a use for embrionic stem cells (mostly theory now many countries have been doing this all along, and haven't found much use, just a theory that many believe and many don't. But if their a use will the country see revenue from the federal funding or will it be like our funding of prescription drugs where we get nothing but tax revenue. If that is the case no federal funding, and if stem cell research creates anything the private industry can make a fortune off of their discoveries. Federal Funding is for programs that the private industry is unwilling to risk their money since they are only partially sure if it will bring back any money.

Take away federal funding and you take away any hope this science will be productive in the near future--There is no profit in this early research yet and for-profit private enterprises don't pour money into things in the vague hope of cures. This is the kind of empty thinking that has so many willing to slash and burn all federal spending--because they simply don't recognize the results when they see it. It's why space exploration will now belong to the Russians. It's why most Americans will never get beyond 9th grade biology and why we have to import so many of our scientists from elsewhere. It's shortsighted and it's pathetic in a great country like this one to hear people argue we can't do anything but wait on the sidelines hoping someone somewhere is smarter than we are.

Scott,

What I think people are forgetting is that advancing cures for otherwise debilitating diseases will, in the long run, increase the amount of money flowing into the economy. It will enable people, who otherwise could not have, to contribute and remain in the workforce, as well as keep them off long term disability and welfare.

My sister was diagnosed with MS at the age of 27. Without the benefits of this science, within about 10 to 15 years, she could be unable to work, or possibly dead. With this science, she could remain in the workforce and stream of commerce for three times that long.

...and a loss for the Bible as well.

And if you're Buddhist you don't care.

You also don't care if you are an embryo.

Clotho,

I'm glad that your Bible values a clump of cells who lack all ability to think and feel, and are more similar to a wart then a human, more then it does the life of my sister. I'll be sure to pass that loving message on to her. "Sorry sis, you're screwed, but the good knews is that clump that is NOT a human, that was gonna be thrown away anyway, well that will be just fine."

Keep your religion out of our laws and more importantly, keep it out of our bodies.

I do not know how the luddites got so much influence over our government..

Because at first no one could believe that people were capable of being that deluded.

"Because at first no one could believe that people were capable of being that deluded."

Jokes on us apparently....

Just had a couple of preachers knock on my door.

I find it just baffling that these people think that it is somehow acceptable to knock on a strangers door and try to convince them that their god is the best one.

How would they like it if I repeatedly knocked on their door and tried to convince them that reality is better than any religion. I would no doubt have the cops after me.

Funny you should mention that...

One time some Jehovah's Witnesses came to my door and started their spiel.

I asked them if they would come in and say a Rosary with me. They didn't stay long...

LOL

I always find it so presumptous, that they feel like they've got it all right, and know what God thinks. Whatever happened to humility? Isn't there something in the Bible about that?

Embryos are not "humans" yet. They are not even FETUSES yet. In any case, no human lives have been saved YET. Obviously, the research can't progress without funding.

This has been funded for the past 8 years... Adult stem cells have 1000's of known healings/cures. So, when is it exactly you are a human? Note: There are 2 sides to that question...if you think about it.

Excuse me, I can see I have to really clarify myself for you... without *fair access* to funding. I wasn't pretending to know. Do you know?

Well, they certainly aren't cats, dogs, or marshmallows. What would you deduce that they are? I would rather not take the risk, that is if you believe in any form of a Creator.

Far South: your religious definition of "life" is just that--so until your side succeeds in turning the US into a theocracy mandating your religious law in this country, you are simply free to opt out of any scientific advancement you don't approve of. Adult stem cells do NOT have the same uses...read and learn.

Anyone who supports the death penalty in any situation cannot truly be said to be a Christian, and to value the sanctity of life. Otherwise it's pure hypocrisy. I've met a surprising number of so-called "Christians" who are rather bloodthirsty.

I just call them "embryos". Of course I could see where you would confuse them with marshmallows, as they are tiny and squishy and... devoid of anything I would call definitively call "life". And no, I don't believe in any form of Creator with a capital C, nor should that concept even be entertained for scientific research like this.

What is your basis for any form of morality? No God huh? If we are all just chemical reactions, then why care what anyone thinks or does? Nothing else matters anyway then...correct? Why would a bunch of chemical reactions care about "life" or "quality of life" anyway?

How about being a good person just for the sake of being a good person, not just because it's a Commandment? I didn't say we were all just chemical reaction; certainly religion, morality, quality of life, etc are important parts of our culture, but not an important part of scientific research like this. You don't like it? Fine. Be entitled to your religious beliefs. Speak out. Who cares, most people won't listen to you anyway...Just don't try to mandate any laws based off your religion.

An embryo doesn't have a heart beat until week 6. It's not called a "fetus" until week 11. It's not viable until at least week 24, and even then won't survive more than 50% of the time. Miscarriages happen all the time, often before the mother even knows she's pregnant. Why would any God create life like this, just to be wasted so frequently? Of course, you'll just account for all of this as "God's plan", too obtuse for us mere mortals to fathom. Never answering any questions. Well guess what? That answer doesn't cut it in the scientific community.

Far South: Religion is not the only basis of morality and a good portion of people believe it's not even a superior basis for determining morality (depending on whose religion one is speaking of). Behaving in a moral way is completely separate from basing one's morals on one's particular religious beliefs. That's not really all that difficult a concept, especially when you consider this nation was founded very purposefully on the belief that individuals, not the church or the state, shall define the laws we live by.

Far South...some food for thought:

Unbeknownst to most lay Christians, the vast majority of Christian theologians and saints throughout history have not believed life begins at conception.

Although he admitted some uncertainty on the matter, the hugely influential 4th and 5th century Christian thinker Saint Augustine wrote, “it could not be said that there was a living soul in [a] body” if it is “not yet endowed with senses.”

Thomas Aquinas, a Catholic saint and a giant of mediaeval theology, argued: “before the body has organs in any way whatever, it cannot be receptive of the soul.”

American evangelicals, meanwhile, widely opposed the idea that life begins at conception until the 1970s, with some even advocating looser abortion laws based on their reading of the Bible before then.

As I stated earlier, if there is nothing for a moral basis for anything...why is there even such a thing as a "good person". It is all relative, just to state that there is no Creator and you can justify what you do and what others feel is "right". By your definition, right is a very temporal item. Changes everyday with the wind. Using this moral logic, why stop at embryos? Let's start harvesting babies, poor children and adults who do not contribute so much to MY LIFE... They are such a drain on society and could be put to good use benefitting my life. I have not gone off the deep-end, just taken your arguement to its logical conclusion.

Far South

Philosophical question: who is more moral?

A. a person who performs good acts because it is the right thing to do.

B. a person who performs good acts because he/she lives in fear of an all-powerful omnipotent Supreme Being who will punish them with eternal torment if they don't.

Since the Bible, Koran and every other religious text are inventions of humans, it is obvious that humans have a strong moral sense without religion.

I would argue that humanistic morality is more pure because it doesn't require dogmatic obeisance to some mythical deity. How many of the 10 commands are left when you leave out those referring to worshiping a god?

SEVERED: Your question about a person who performs good acts and understanding of "an All Powerful, Omnipotent, Supreme Being" does not consider a lot of things to be correctly answered. The correct answer is both, but there is not enough room here to explain that there is not much difference. The Fear of the Creator is the beginning of wisdom. It is like the question of who is more law-abiding / less criminal: a person who doesn't break the law because they like the law or person who is afraid of being punished if they break it?

Jon-1321288: The difference is that the Bible is not man's words. To answer your question, 5 of the 10. But, just to go along with your discussion, humanistic morality is the God of Me, My, and Mine. Unfortunately your god dies within the next 100-years or less (even with Harvesting Humans). So, in practicing your religion, you come first above all else. If you really practiced your belief you should be out making your god fully satisfied...which we know will never happen. And Humanistic Morality is an Oxymoran...It is all about self and I can name you several very famous Humanists that had much more power than you currently have to pay homage to their god. You would call them Monsters, but they were serving their god very well.

The Bible is not the word of God. It is the word of man about God. The idea that God should create man in His image, that His words are the words of the Bible is the greatest human conceit. Conceived to honor the ego of man not God's.

Far South said:

As I stated earlier, if there is nothing for a moral basis for anything...why is there even such a thing as a "good person".

Morality is determined by culture and society. Compare US law and cultural practice to what the Bible says.

Thou Shalt Not Kill. That is an absolute from God, if you are so inclined, that has been "adapted" by the church in collaboration with governments to include exceptions such as war or criminals.

Jesus says to give away everything you own to the poor. Everything.

Jesus says to love everyone. Everyone.

There are many other examples that show the incongruity between what the Bible says and what is practiced.

There are logical reasons not to kill or steal, and to work together in harmony, and you find this throughout history as a common cultural practice -- even between groups with different gods.

The idea that without religion there is no morality is absurd, and outdated by a few hundred years. After all, if there was no morality without religion you would expect every atheist to kill and steal from whomever they please, but you don't particularly see that. Check what percent of the prison population are atheist, and what percent is religious (of course, by percent of their respective "population," rather than total numbers).

Far South

As I stated earlier, if there is nothing for a moral basis for anything...why is there even such a thing as a "good person". It is all relative, just to state that there is no Creator and you can justify what you do and what others feel is "right".

It's very simple: morality is what evolved that allowed civilization to occur. If it hadn't we would be much simpler animals - yes, that's right, we're animals. A very special sort of animal, but animals nonetheless. Are you afraid you won't be special without a supernatural power giving you approval?

Maybe YOU would lose all moral self-control without fear of a Big Sky Daddy, but most of us would continue to behave in the same manner we have been for thousands of years, because it's bred into us.

I never talked about religion...Religion is something men make up about God and think that they can pick up and leave off with their choosing...or make new rules that please themselves more than Him. What I have been referring to is a real relationship with our Creator. This is completely different. The Bible is not a religion but demonstrates God's relationship with men. It is gives us insight into who He really is and what kind of relationship He wants with us. Morality does come from Him, he built us and gave us a concious... All original laws came from Him. Nature teaches us these too. Nature He created...

I like the fact that you can quote some of it, but like any book, you have to understand the whole thing, not just pull out the lines you hear or someone else read and say that is the end of the matter. Yes, it takes time and a lot of study to start to comprehend the Infinite. Even then, it is only a glimpse. Like in college, you have to study a single subject a long time to become a master at it, you cannot pick up a chemistry book and in 3 weeks really have any profound ideas about chemistry. Because it is about relationships, it can be a little more deep than just the surface scan. I don't care to debate Bible in this forum, it is not the proper place or audience. Psalm 51 talks about developed embryos...and yes they have a soul.

Far South believes that embryos are human beings and nothing we say to the contrary will change his (her?) belief.

I believe that life begins when the dog dies and the kids leave home...

Um, Tina, did you take Biology when you were in High School? If pregnant women (female human beings) aren't carrying human offspring, than what are they pregnant with? If an embryo of a human being isn't human, than what is it?

What do you believe a 'being' is?

I think your last sentence says it all..... Shoot the dog, kick the kids out, and crack open a beer--it's time to celebrate!

LOL!! Thanks for the laugh, Tina.

Far South

The Bible is not a religion but demonstrates God's relationship with men.

You're playing nonsensical word games: the Bible isn't religious, but an embryo is a human being? You people will twist and turn and distort and contradict anything to pretend that you have some sort of sensible position, but you just make up any excuse to justify your beliefs.

"Belief" is the opposite of "Thinking."

Good lord, fanatical religious people are stupid.

Far south thinks the only other morality is Hobbsian morality. Ignore consequentialism, utilitrainism, objectivism, golden rule, biological morality, etc. Modern morality kicks the crap out of the bible's version of morality.

And generally, the athiests I know are kinder and more "good" than any christian.

Uthaclena, I wasn't and refuse to play word games. I have studied the Bible quite a bit and feel extremely certain that what I told you was 100% the truth...no games. You might know this one yourself: Jesus' relationship with the Scribes and Pharisees...not very cordial, huh? They were all about religion, not about relationship... You were once an embryo...you now have developed a little further than that. Was that not you...who once was an embryo?

Far South

You might know this one yourself: Jesus' relationship with the Scribes and Pharisees...not very cordial, huh? They were all about religion, not about relationship...

Yes I know that one; but regardless of how you parse it, people who take the Bible as "The Word" take its outlook as THE Way and THE Truth as to how to behave - rules - and then those believers take the next step and tell the rest of us how we should behave. The Rules are the Religion. After all, I don't expect you would consider me to have the "correct" relationship with "a Higher Power" thru meditation and chanting and calling upon Krishna, now, would you?

You were once an embryo...you now have developed a little further than that. Was that not you...who once was an embryo?

No more than the seeds I planted in my garden this Spring are the cucumbers I ate at dinner tonight. There is a difference between "potential" and "the result." And, in fact, pretty much all of the cells I was made up of at age one are gone and have been replaced. It is the sensing, reacting personality that is the person, not the body. A body born without a brain is not a person. A person who becomes brain-dead is no longer a person, even if the body has not died.

It is not the intention of Christians (I will qualify that) who have a "real relationship with God" to condemn or think that should impose their morals on others...forcefully. However, they do live in the same country as those who do not believe the way they do. God, however, does judge nations for the things they do and has hysterically (historically) imposed real-time judgements on them for the things they do. These qualified Christians I am talking about would prefer to avoid these real-time judgements for them and their children. It would be an overt error on their part not to warn and vote to prevent this. From the qualified Christians point of view, the world does what it does...(just as qualified Christians do what they are supposed to do) Jesus never condemned them, but attempted to point it out... Commiting a grevious error of Harvesting Humans for profit or gain or a better quality of life will have its consequences on the nations that promote this. Next on the list is those others in our society who are weak and have little or no say in the choices made for them. Look, if you really feel certain that something is wrong, wouldn't you speak up? The media has always been lopsided on this issue, so what about a dissenting opinion, is that so Awful? Seeing how things are developing, it seems a waste of my time to warn, but that does not take my responsibility away.

You're kidding right? You lecture in post after post that one cannot base moral decisions on anything but religion and you're NOT lecturing about your religious morals? Of course there's nothing wrong with a dissenting opinion but shouldn't you at least be logical when trying to express it?

What part was illogical or maybe I misinterpreted your meaning of lecturing. I have never pounced on opposing views, at least without some facts that tend to contradict their dicussion...That is unless they believe there is no Creator, that everything is a big accident or convenient coincidence. Then, I have a lot of statistics, nature, universe, and DNA to say otherwise.

Harvesting Humans is an organization with a specific agenda to impose it's religiously based existential morality on a specific community doing scientific research for the larger community. None of it's claims against using embryos for research are rational, they are emotional.

Politics is mathematical and religion is emotional...mixing them always leads to bad, often lethal, forms of each.

I no more trust political solutions based on joy than I trust those based on fear.

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" may "feel good" as a thought form, does not require a religious or even moral rationalization, it's simply the idea of using round pegs to fill round holes.

Hey Far South,

And on the 8th day God made science, because he was already sick of people putting words in his mouth, so he decided to give them a way to figure sh($*% out themselves.

Of course that didn't make it into your Bible, because feeding peoples egos by tellling them they speak for God, while simultaneously keeping them in fear pays big bucks.

Oh, you say YOU aren't doing this? So far you've threantened us with eternal damnation, because we aren't doing what God says to do. That directly implies YOU speak for God.

Listen, I could get into the philosophical, scientific, legal, argument with you here, but I'm too busy celebrating with my sister who suffers from MS, seeing as she might now NOT DIE YOUNG. So I'll leave that in the capable hands of those who have already made mincemeat out of you, i.e. Ultha, AP, EngEsq, and the crew.

Viva La Sciencia!

Far South:

"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that Faith does not prove anything." — friedrich nietzsche

Humanistic morality is not "the God of Me, My, and Mine".

Humanistic morality incorporates all morality of all of humanity throughout history, tempored by reason, in a completely unselfish way. It is the morality of humanity as a whole, not simply an individual. A part of it is what we know as common law, and as Thomas Jefferson so correctly points out, the Bible has contributed nothing to common law.

Since humanity does not need a god, it does not die out as humans invent new gods.

And there is not one shread of evidence that the bible was written by anyone other than men (and maybe some women).

It is the morality of humanity as a whole, not simply an individual

Sounds like Asimov's phychohistory project in the "Foundation" series.

You're very welcome!

God also gave us a concious too! Why is it even a question in the minds of the so-called "Right-Wing Luddite / Neanderthals or Christians" or whatever derogatory terms that can be used? The Embryos are clearly Human... They have new clinics that are established for creating millions of Human Embryos, not for their stated purpose of "fertitility clinics". Europe has no issue with doing this, neither does Mexico now. They are passed laws allowing the import and export (international marketing) of Embryos. Even if you don't believe anything, there is still something inside that tells you Harvesting Humans is awful...but we can always silence our concious for the "better good". Call it what it is: Harvesting Humans. Results for Harvesting Humans?: ZERO. Adult stem cells results: Thousands of CURES. But we don't see anyone pushing, lining up, or opening up clinics to Harvest these do we? THE BIG QUESTION YOU SHOULD ASK YOURSELF...WHY?

we are mammals....just like the cows, pigs, goats, lambs, that we currently harvest and slaughter for food. big question you should ask yourself....why are you not crying about that?

Mainly because I am not a cow, pig, goat, or a lamb. And they are tasty too!

You do know the Bible tells you not to eat pig, right? Funny how little Christians know about their own bloody religion. Just keep it in church and out of the science labs, mkay?

"The Embryos are clearly Human"

Prove it. There's plenty of evidence to the contrary... show me something that definitively proves, or even suggests... that an embryo is viable and human. All mammal embryos, even reptilian and bird embryos, looks shockingly similar at this stage.

There are approximately 6.7-Billion peices of evidence walking around the earth to prove that Human Embryos are Human. I believe that you might want to look in the Bible at Acts Chapter 10. Peter has a little discussion with...God about that food subject.

If I were to show you a chicken embryo and a human embryo side by side, you would not be able to tell the difference.

Human embryos are just that... embryos. Not humans yet. Not viable. Not alive.

Feel free to name one, FS.

Far South

There are approximately 6.7-Billion peices of evidence walking around the earth to prove that Human Embryos are Human.

I've never seen an embryo walking around. They don't do that until they're born.

Do you hold funerals every time a woman miscarries? which is nearly a third of all pregnancies, you know.

Um, how many newborns have you seen walking around?! LOL!

So a miscarriage isn't a loss to you because there isn't a funeral? I wouldn't say that to anyone who has actually been through a miscarriage--I can testify that it's DEVISTATING!

Please try to be at least a little bit sensitive to others.

BornAgainCatholic

So a miscarriage isn't a loss to you because there isn't a funeral? I wouldn't say that to anyone who has actually been through a miscarriage--I can testify that it's DEVISTATING!

Please try to be at least a little bit sensitive to others.

I know women who have been devastated; I also know women who have been disappointed. I also know women who have been thankful, because a pregnancy wasn't in the plans. One size does not fit all.

My point is, if you consider an embryo or fetus a human being, why aren't you according it the rites that you would give a human being when they die, hmm?

BornAgain: you seem pretty confused. These are CELLS we're speaking of.

Uthaclena, some women may be relieved when they found out they lost a child or had an abortion because it wasn't wanted, but doesn't that strike you as a bit sad?

AP, clearly it's not me that's confused about what we are--at all stages of life. I'm just trying to figure out how extreme liberals can twist reality so much and still believe it to be true. But I guess if you keep saying something over and over again, you start to believe it.

BornAgainCatholic

some women may be relieved when they found out they lost a child or had an abortion because it wasn't wanted, but doesn't that strike you as a bit sad?

It's certainly sad if the pregnancy was desired, yes; not at all if it was not wanted.

clearly it's not me that's confused about what we are--at all stages of life. I'm just trying to figure out how extreme liberals can twist reality so much and still believe it to be true. But I guess if you keep saying something over and over again, you start to believe it.

In psychology we call this projection; or as kids taunt "I know you are, but what am I?"

Most of us can make distinctions; iron ore can become steel, but it is not yet steel; a seed can become a tree, but it is not yet a tree. Likewise, an embryo can become a person, but it is not yet a person. YOU can repeat that there's no meaningful difference over and over, but that does not change the reality that they are not the same thing. It is only the emotional investment you have in your BELIEF that allows yourself the delusion that they are the same.

And your belief is just fine for yourself and fellow believers; but that fact is, you are insisting that you have the right to impose your beliefs on everyone else. No. You. Don't.

Very true. I work with cells everyday in a lab, and they aren't very sentient. They're just cells...

They are as you were...

They are cells, and they will always be cells, nothing more.

FS does not understand that concept. He's just sure if there were a magic wand somewhere, poof...you'd have a baby.

You are cells, nothing but cells, nothing more?

You are cells, nothing but cells, nothing more?

Here are 100 snowflakes, now go build me an igloo.

A human has trillions of cells organized in ridiculously complex patterns. I don't consider an embryo a human any more than I consider 100 snowflakes capable of constructing an igloo.

Human is a quality that arises from complexity over time. An embryo is not a human.

Clearly, you're just going to keep relying on Biblical drivel instead of scientific, fact-based evidence to make your point on an article about RESEARCH. Think whatever you want to think, but keep it out of our laws and science labs. Until you can point to one Bible verse that defines where life begins, or even addresses the subject of fetuses and embryos, then STFU.

It is normally against my rules to reply to derrogatory and stuff like "STFU", but if you read further up in this Scientific... conversation? I had already pointed out in Psalm 51, that the point is clear. David was a prophet as well as a king. I am well studied in Math, Science, Physics, and the Bible. There is no contradiction between any of them. Only humans bent on trying to deny their very creation or the fact that the world around them has an infinite variety of laws and principals that they cannot comprehend, hence they make their own rules and laws that are meaningless. To deny the intelligence or creative hand in any or all of this really is... incredible (Just from a statistical point of view). Takes a lot more faith to not believe in a Creator than to believe in One. Either way: Harvesting Humans is Wrong.

FS, you can't claim to be in a scientific conversation when your only evidence is from a bronze age fairy tale.

wow FS you proved his point, You are going to keep using religion as the basis of your arguments.

Far South

You really love your "Harvesting Humans" cliche, don't you? But that's okay; I like "Christian Shariah," myself.

Far South -

I may be missing something here.

I had already pointed out in Psalm 51, that the point is clear.

Well maybe you get it but I don't. Which verses in particular support your point? Be specific.

I am well studied in Math, Science, Physics, and the Bible. There is no contradiction between any of them.

So you have been "studied" by 3 academic disciplines and the Bible. Did it hurt? Did they draw blood or do X-rays? Were you ever written up in a journal article? I believe what you are looking for is "well read".

One last talking point:

Embryonic Stem Cell Research Results: ZERO!

Adult Human Stem Cell Research: 1000's of KNOWN CURES.

Okay - now moving beyond the "talking points", you claim you are "well studied". I assume you know how to do a literature search to prove your points with citations. Here's a head start, don't use Google, use Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com)

I try to look at both sides of an argument. Far South seems to insist that adult stem cells are superior to embryonic because adult stem cells have already yielded cures. I did a bit of research just to verify that I'm remembering correctly, and Far South's reasoning appears highly selective. Embryonic stem cell research is being pursued because adult stem cells are limited in their scope. It is believed that embryonic stem cells will have greater range and will be able to provide cures that adult cells cannot. To throw out embryonic stem cell research is akin to throwing out a potential medication in the test tube stage because it hasn't reached the point of human testing.

I am well studied in Math, Science, Physics, and the Bible. There is no contradiction between any of them.

Don't be silly. Physics is a subset of science, and math is the language of science. There are many contradictions within each of them, and those of us who acknowledge that understand that those apparent contradictions arise from knowledge that we do not yet possess. To look for contradictions between science and the Bible is like looking for contradictions between apples and oranges: this is not a concept that makes sense. They are two entirely different topics, and should not be confused with each other.

God also gave us a concious too!

I believe the word you are looking for is 'conscience', and mine is quite comfortable with the idea of using embryonic stem cells for testing that has a very good chance to lead to treatments and cures of devastating illnesses. These cells were never intended to become viable human beings. You are welcome to impose your narrow definition of human on your own behavior and choices and forego any results of this research. You are not welcome to impose your will upon others.

Europe has no issue with doing this,

Not according to the research that I just did. Germany in particular is sensitive to allegations of manipulating human stock. Singapore, China, and Korea appear to be making some of the greatest strides in this research.

The difference is that the Bible is not man's words

You are certainly entitled to your belief, just as I am entitled to disagree. There is no science in this argument, only a belief structure, and therefore no benefit in discussing the issue. As the old saying goes: My mind is made up. Don't confuse me with facts.

From ProceededByNone: Of course, you'll just account for all of this as "God's plan", too obtuse for us mere mortals to fathom. Never answering any questions. Well guess what? That answer doesn't cut it in the scientific community.

Amen! (Pun intended)

Baby Jesus getting angry...

Prove it.

Really? And how would you know that unless you have been dead? And just how could you be conscious of the fact without a brain?

I have a genetic immune system disorder and have already almost died once from it. Every time I get sick, my husband and I are on eggshells in hope it isn't the flu.

Common sense - 1 religion based arguments - 0

American Taliban: 0

Americans: 1

As opposed to all those people who were murdered in the name of your religion?

Think of it as harvesting the less fortunate; nothing goes to waste in nature.

Then you are fine with humans being no better than a hamster that eats it's young?

Nothing goes to waste...

Humans using cells, that would otherwise be thrown away, for medical research to help millions of people with dibilitating illnesses, possibly even cure them, are no better than hamsters eating their young?

You do know the episode of south park with Christopher Reeve cracking open a fetus and sucking out it's juices was a parody, right? And we don't actually eat our young with stem cell research?

You do know the episode of south park with Christopher Reeve cracking open a fetus and sucking out it's juices was a parody, right? And we don't actually eat our young with stem cell research?

Humor? Gasp! South Park is a parody? Gasp! We don't eat our young? GASP! What am I going to do now? I based my entire religion on demonizing humor and South Park parodies. It's called the Church of the Holy Parodies and we meet every Tuesday (the real day of rest) and watch NCIS on our blessed 60" LCD 1080P HD TV. Oui Oui!

My son lives in Germany and can back up everything you say.

Certainly the future belongs to those who embrace science over Bronze-age myth...but old beliefs fade slowly.

I agree - thank goodness you live in Europe.

chienetchats

Tell that to the people that live in the London neighborhoods where it has now been declared by the radical Muslims that Sharia law controls. Europe has its fair share of religious zealots just like every other continent.