Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 46 to 60 of 60
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    15,568
    vCash
    1500
    Like I said...

    Adult stem cell research has helped human beings. Real people. Actually helped.

    Embryonic stem cell research may one day, possibily, if everything works out well, help mice remember where they left their cheese.
    Last edited by blenderboy5; 07-10-2008 at 02:03 AM.
    "Compromise, hell! That's what has happened to us all down the line -- and that's the very cause of our woes. If freedom is right and tyranny is wrong, why should those who believe in freedom treat it as if it were a roll of bologna to be bartered a slice at a time?"

    RIP Jesse Helms

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Shakedown Street, Japan
    Posts
    30,259
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by blenderboy5 View Post
    Like I said,,,,

    Adult stem cell research has helped human beings. Real people. Actually helped.

    Embryonic stem cell research may one day, possibily, if everything works out well, help mice remember where they left their cheese.
    The same might have been said of pig insulin and dogs, but here I am today alive and (somewhat) well because the scientists doing the research had the foresight not to stop with the dogs, but actually carried it onwards to human application.

    Which, of course, is the plan with embryonic stem cell research, which you're deliberately trying to spin in the most ludicrous way possible, and flippantly dismiss the not-yet-realized but very realistic possibilities/probabilities that that research will deliver some remarkable medical advances in the not-too-distant future.

    Including, I hope, a cure for diabetes.
    I blog basketball at Roundball Mining Company///Twitter: @denbutsu

    Atheists Of PSD

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    15,568
    vCash
    1500
    There's no reason we need to be doing embryonic stem cell research. Not with the moral costs. And not with the incredible benefits of ASCR
    "Compromise, hell! That's what has happened to us all down the line -- and that's the very cause of our woes. If freedom is right and tyranny is wrong, why should those who believe in freedom treat it as if it were a roll of bologna to be bartered a slice at a time?"

    RIP Jesse Helms

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    4,957
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by blenderboy5 View Post
    There's no reason we need to be doing embryonic stem cell research. Not with the moral costs. And not with the incredible benefits of ASCR
    the moral costs are only viewed as such by a minority of this country.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    15,568
    vCash
    1500
    Well yes, potential life has been cheapened.

    But there is absoultely no reason for embryonic stem cell research when the alternatives are better morally, actually helping people, getting investment in private business, productive, showing results, etc.
    "Compromise, hell! That's what has happened to us all down the line -- and that's the very cause of our woes. If freedom is right and tyranny is wrong, why should those who believe in freedom treat it as if it were a roll of bologna to be bartered a slice at a time?"

    RIP Jesse Helms

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    930
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by blenderboy5 View Post
    Well yes, potential life has been cheapened.

    But there is absoultely no reason for embryonic stem cell research when the alternatives are better morally, actually helping people, getting investment in private business, productive, showing results, etc.
    Puh-leeze show me where in 232 years of jurisprudence that "potential life" is protected by some statute, code, case law or qualified theory of constitutional law or legal doctrine.

    Under BB's theory of extending constitutional protection to "potential life" he would make it a criminal offense for a man to have a vasectomy or a woman to have her tubes tied.

    So now the extreme RW position isn't extending civil rights protection to the moment of conception, it is extended beyond to the point of some vague notion as to the potential for life to exist. Incredible.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    15,568
    vCash
    1500
    moonman, honestly?

    Don't be a douchebag to me, don't put words in my mouth, don't slander my positions.

    If you can't do the above, don't respon to my posts.

    It's merely a fact that ASCR has few of the moral implications and slippery slope endings that exist with the wacko, unproven ESCR that can't even help mice remember things.
    "Compromise, hell! That's what has happened to us all down the line -- and that's the very cause of our woes. If freedom is right and tyranny is wrong, why should those who believe in freedom treat it as if it were a roll of bologna to be bartered a slice at a time?"

    RIP Jesse Helms

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    5,225
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by blenderboy5 View Post
    Well yes, potential life has been cheapened.

    But there is absoultely no reason for embryonic stem cell research when the alternatives are better morally, actually helping people, getting investment in private business, productive, showing results, etc.
    Tough to show results when the practice is so restricted.

    I look at this from a REALISTIC point of view. You can argue opinions and morals all day long if you want, but here are the facts:

    -- Outlawing abortion will not stop it from occurring. This is an indisputable fact with plenty of evidence to back it up. Abortion is not an invention of evil 20th century western medicine. People have been practicing abortion for 5,000 or more years. It's almost irrelevant whether it's legal or illegal because it will happen either way.

    -- As long as abortion is legal and safe (which it is), there will be an abundance of available embryonic stem cells.

    -- There is incredible promise in the ability of embryonic stem cells to cure disease and improve quality of life.

    Based on those three facts, how can you justify opposing abortion and preventing federal funding of stem cell research? It does not make sense.

    To me, fervent religious belief is the only somewhat "jusifiable" opposition to these things. If you believe that God will punish you in the afterlife because you didn't do anything to stop abortion (not because you had an abortion yourself), then MAYBE I could understand why you'd oppose it.

    It makes me sick that all these good little "conservatives" feel like they're toeing the conservative line to oppose abortion and stem cell research. Opposing abortion and stem cell research is a RELIGIOUS archetype, NOT a conservative one. The republicans abandoned true conservatism and aligned with many religious ideals long ago to corner the religious vote. Over the years, the two have blended to create this "neo-conservatism" that has resulted in many non-religious republicans representing a religious-toned ethos.

    I am not a liberal. I am a conservative, but I am not a republican. It's time for people to distinguish between the two.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    15,568
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Padres Son View Post
    -- Outlawing abortion will not stop it from occurring. This is an indisputable fact with plenty of evidence to back it up. Abortion is not an invention of evil 20th century western medicine. People have been practicing abortion for 5,000 or more years. It's almost irrelevant whether it's legal or illegal because it will happen either way.
    That's a terrible argument.

    Murder has been having since the beginning of time (not saying abortion is murder...)

    So how roberry. Treason has been going on for years. Petty theft has been going over for years.

    In fact, since there have been humans, there has been crime and other things society regulates. The fact that they occur doesn't mean they should be legalized. Quite the opposite in fact

    -- As long as abortion is legal and safe (which it is), there will be an abundance of available embryonic stem cells.
    I'm pretty sure abortion isn't the biggest reason we have ESC. I thought it was the freezing of embryos when people who have trouble having children do to clinics and stuff also

    -- There is incredible promise in the ability of embryonic stem cells to cure disease and improve quality of life.
    There's also promise that one day I may grow wings and learn to fly. I'm not getting rid of my car anytime soon though.

    Based on those three facts, how can you justify opposing abortion and preventing federal funding of stem cell research? It does not make sense.
    They're two different complicated issues.

    Abortion is done by irresponsible women who either didn't take the steps towards safe sex or didn't ask their partners to (or were lied to by their partners/forced, which is sometimes the case).

    ESCR is a pie in the sky thing that is seriously dwarfed by the alternatives


    To me, fervent religious belief is the only somewhat "jusifiable" opposition to these things. If you believe that God will punish you in the afterlife because you didn't do anything to stop abortion (not because you had an abortion yourself), then MAYBE I could understand why you'd oppose it.
    Not really. I just like when sweet innocent girls who were raped by their fathers (cause that's why women have abortions, right?) have to suffer.

    It makes me sick that all these good little "conservatives" feel like they're toeing the conservative line to oppose abortion and stem cell research.
    'Cause that's not demeaning at all.

    Opposing abortion and stem cell research is a RELIGIOUS archetype, NOT a conservative one. The republicans abandoned true conservatism and aligned with many religious ideals long ago to corner the religious vote. Over the years, the two have blended to create this "neo-conservatism" that has resulted in many non-religious republicans representing a religious-toned ethos.
    Hardly. It's a moral issue (though of course morals often equal religion).

    Conservatives are more religious anyway.

    And I'm not against stem cell research. I'm against the harvesting of embryos for embryonic stem cell research.

    And it's not always a moral issue because god says so. Often it's a "wow this could lead to cloning or other genetic issues." It's the same reason some conservatives are against aborting children with the potential to have downsyndrome.
    "Compromise, hell! That's what has happened to us all down the line -- and that's the very cause of our woes. If freedom is right and tyranny is wrong, why should those who believe in freedom treat it as if it were a roll of bologna to be bartered a slice at a time?"

    RIP Jesse Helms

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    5,225
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by blenderboy5 View Post
    That's a terrible argument.

    Murder has been having since the beginning of time (not saying abortion is murder...)

    So how roberry. Treason has been going on for years. Petty theft has been going over for years.

    In fact, since there have been humans, there has been crime and other things society regulates. The fact that they occur doesn't mean they should be legalized. Quite the opposite in fact
    You're missing the obvious point that all of the crimes you mentioned are transgressions against another person or people. Abortion is not. I'm not going to get into an argument with you about when life occurs, because I know your rebuttal to this is going to be "abortion is a transgression against the life of the baby." Abortion only affects the pregnant woman... it is not a crime against another person, and is therefore, nobody else's business.

    I'm pretty sure abortion isn't the biggest reason we have ESC. I thought it was the freezing of embryos when people who have trouble having children do to clinics and stuff also
    Yes, that's the source now... but it's much easier to remove a very, very premature embryo (basically just a clump of cells) that's been naturally incubating in a womb than to artificially inseminate an egg and incubate it in a lab (very expensive).

    There's also promise that one day I may grow wings and learn to fly. I'm not getting rid of my car anytime soon though.
    Good argument. Thanks for taking the time to explain to me why embryonic stem cells aren't important.

    Here's a great explanation of why we need ESC. It directly addresses your argument about how "ASC are curing diseases but ESC's haven't cured anything.

    http://sci.rutgers.edu/forum/showthread.php?t=21722


    They're two different complicated issues.

    Abortion is done by irresponsible women who either didn't take the steps towards safe sex or didn't ask their partners to (or were lied to by their partners/forced, which is sometimes the case).
    Or maybe the condom broke, or maybe the pill didn't work... So they should be punished for the rest of their lives, right?

    ESCR is a pie in the sky thing that is seriously dwarfed by the alternatives
    References? Proof? Backup? Because there are thousands upon thousands of scientists who, for some reason, believe it's important.

    Not really. I just like when sweet innocent girls who were raped by their fathers (cause that's why women have abortions, right?) have to suffer.
    I'm so tempted to make this my sig.

    'Cause that's not demeaning at all.
    Don't take it personally. If you just happen to agree with everything the republican party represents, then, congratulations, you've found the perfect party for you. It's just hard to believe that in the span of 50 or so years, the republican party has gone from believing in personal freedoms (including abortion, separation of church and state, not spying on its own citizens) to the opposite. Is it coincidence that everyone in the party has changed their mind, or are they following the lead of a party that's changed it's views to gain votes?

    Hardly. It's a moral issue (though of course morals often equal religion).

    Conservatives are more religious anyway.

    And I'm not against stem cell research. I'm against the harvesting of embryos for embryonic stem cell research.

    And it's not always a moral issue because god says so. Often it's a "wow this could lead to cloning or other genetic issues." It's the same reason some conservatives are against aborting children with the potential to have downsyndrome.
    Morals are fine, but why would you try to push them on other people? That's called evangelism.

    And I agree with you that lines have to be drawn... but not at the expense of millions of people with potentially curable diseases.

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    930
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by blenderboy5 View Post
    moonman, honestly?

    Don't be a douchebag to me, don't put words in my mouth, don't slander my positions.

    If you can't do the above, don't respon to my posts.

    It's merely a fact that ASCR has few of the moral implications and slippery slope endings that exist with the wacko, unproven ESCR that can't even help mice remember things.
    The fact you're missing BB is that religion has been used to stop our pursuit of knowledge and understanding in all the disciplines. We had 500 years known as the Dark Ages for no other reason than religion controlled government and economies.

    The gubment restricts ESCR citing some faith based "Christian" ethical consideration and as a result of those restrictions ESCR hasn't delivered what it had promised. Can we rig the system anymore and juice the science such that we return to the Dark Ages?

    BTW, you used the word slander entirely out of context. I merely pointed the absurdity of your notion by giving it some legal context.
    Last edited by moonman; 07-10-2008 at 05:23 PM.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    21,590
    vCash
    1500
    **** it. Let's harvest those embryos.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    St. Louis, MO / SIUe
    Posts
    35,041
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Padres Son View Post
    Tough to show results when the practice is so restricted.

    I look at this from a REALISTIC point of view. You can argue opinions and morals all day long if you want, but here are the facts:

    -- Outlawing abortion will not stop it from occurring. This is an indisputable fact with plenty of evidence to back it up. Abortion is not an invention of evil 20th century western medicine. People have been practicing abortion for 5,000 or more years. It's almost irrelevant whether it's legal or illegal because it will happen either way.

    -- As long as abortion is legal and safe (which it is), there will be an abundance of available embryonic stem cells.

    -- There is incredible promise in the ability of embryonic stem cells to cure disease and improve quality of life.

    Based on those three facts, how can you justify opposing abortion and preventing federal funding of stem cell research? It does not make sense.

    To me, fervent religious belief is the only somewhat "jusifiable" opposition to these things. If you believe that God will punish you in the afterlife because you didn't do anything to stop abortion (not because you had an abortion yourself), then MAYBE I could understand why you'd oppose it.

    It makes me sick that all these good little "conservatives" feel like they're toeing the conservative line to oppose abortion and stem cell research. Opposing abortion and stem cell research is a RELIGIOUS archetype, NOT a conservative one. The republicans abandoned true conservatism and aligned with many religious ideals long ago to corner the religious vote. Over the years, the two have blended to create this "neo-conservatism" that has resulted in many non-religious republicans representing a religious-toned ethos.

    I am not a liberal. I am a conservative, but I am not a republican. It's time for people to distinguish between the two.
    I agree with you completely. If people are so ardently opposed to the lost potential lives then thinking about this logically, at least the embryo could be used to save another life.
    Member of the Owlluminati

    Quote Originally Posted by James Madison
    "Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
    2011 Knicks Salary Cap Information

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    4,514
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by moonman View Post
    The fact you're missing BB is that religion has been used to stop our pursuit of knowledge and understanding in all the disciplines. We had 500 years known as the Dark Ages for no other reason than religion controlled government and economies.

    The gubment restricts ESCR citing some faith based "Christian" ethical consideration and as a result of those restrictions ESCR hasn't delivered what it had promised. Can we rig the system anymore and juice the science such that we return to the Dark Ages?

    BTW, you used the word slander entirely out of context. I merely pointed the absurdity of your notion by giving it some legal context.
    Not really.

    Im against organized religion too, but that state meant is wrong in so many ways.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    15,568
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Padres Son View Post
    You're missing the obvious point that all of the crimes you mentioned are transgressions against another person or people. Abortion is not. I'm not going to get into an argument with you about when life occurs, because I know your rebuttal to this is going to be "abortion is a transgression against the life of the baby." Abortion only affects the pregnant woman... it is not a crime against another person, and is therefore, nobody else's business.

    Not really.

    First, I don't know when life begins. What makes a fully delivered baby more of a person than a baby who will be delivered in 24 hours? And what makes that baby (and I do consider that a baby, not all fetuses but definitely that one) more of a person than the one to be born in 48 hours? I have no idea when life begins really, and what the propers definition of life should be and is. I don't pretend to know that either.

    And abortion affects the father, the mother, and yes, the potential life. But as I said, when that becomes a life...i don't know

    Yes, that's the source now... but it's much easier to remove a very, very premature embryo (basically just a clump of cells) that's been naturally incubating in a womb than to artificially inseminate an egg and incubate it in a lab (very expensive).
    Great. Let's just suck the brains out of that sucker for Fox then!

    Good argument. Thanks for taking the time to explain to me why embryonic stem cells aren't important.
    Read the rest of my posts. It's too complex compared to the alternatives which are really better imo.

    Here's a great explanation of why we need ESC. It directly addresses your argument about how "ASC are curing diseases but ESC's haven't cured anything.

    http://sci.rutgers.edu/forum/showthread.php?t=21722
    You're really gonna use outdated science from 3 years ago? Especially in light of ASCs being able to "morph" like ESCs and in light of non-ESCs being "converted" into ESCs-like cells

    Or maybe the condom broke, or maybe the pill didn't work... So they should be punished for the rest of their lives, right?
    That happens all the time, right?

    I'm against abortion in 90% of call cases. The exceptions being incest or rape (1%), life of the mother being in danger (3%), life of the child/fetus/whatever the pro-abortion lobby prefers is in danger (3%), and accidents like breakage.

    References? Proof? Backup? Because there are thousands upon thousands of scientists who, for some reason, believe it's important.
    Well good for them. But I believe the alternatives are not only more effective (they've actually, you know, helped people without harvesting fetuses) but morally better. If the destruction of embryos is the only possible way to save humans with terrible diseases, I'd consider it. But it obviously isn't.

    I'm so tempted to make this my sig.
    I'd be honored. It's one of my better jokes.

    Don't take it personally. If you just happen to agree with everything the republican party represents, then, congratulations, you've found the perfect party for you.
    Can a person ever really agree 100% with another person?

    Quote Originally Posted by moonman View Post
    The fact you're missing BB is that religion has been used to stop our pursuit of knowledge and understanding in all the disciplines. We had 500 years known as the Dark Ages for no other reason than religion controlled government and economies.
    Not really. The Catholic Church kept Europe together after the Roman Empire fell. In fact, the Christian alliances stopped muslims from invading, which would have drastically altered the future of our society (though thanks to falling birth rates and migration and sharia law in europe, they're invading again). It kept historic records and civilization together

    The gubment
    Seriously? Government is such a hard word to write out?

    [QUOT] restricts ESCR citing some faith based "Christian" ethical consideration and as a result of those restrictions ESCR hasn't delivered what it had promised. Can we rig the system anymore and juice the science such that we return to the Dark Ages?
    If it had any promise, wouldn't private businesses invest?


    BTW, you used the word slander entirely out of context. I merely pointed the absurdity of your notion by giving it some legal context.


    Great spin.

    You equated my position with the traditional/stereotypical catholic church beliefs, said I was opposed to vasectomies, and accused me of being against people getting their tubes tied.
    "Compromise, hell! That's what has happened to us all down the line -- and that's the very cause of our woes. If freedom is right and tyranny is wrong, why should those who believe in freedom treat it as if it were a roll of bologna to be bartered a slice at a time?"

    RIP Jesse Helms

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •