Kerry Promotes Expanded Stem Cell Research

Ampmonster · Oct 5, 2004

anti. there are plenty of adoptions for people who cant have kids natually. including my fiancee.

i think artificial baby making when there are perfect good ones being aborted is madness.
but im old fashioned

Nathan Poe · Oct 5, 2004

Ampmonster said:
Does the word "ecosystem" mean anything to you?

first it was eggs and leather. NOW its ecosystem OOOOOOOOOOOK.
huge difference. lets talk about one thing at a time, crow

My point being that if you're going to drag the Bible into this, and claim that we have the God-given right to "have dominion" (read: exploit) other animals, then perhaps you had best ask God why he made those animals (including us) so interdependant on each other.

So if life is sacred, that either includes all life or just humans. "just humans" may sound good Biblically, but it's not backed up by God's second book: creation.

As much as you'd like to talk about "one thing at a time," the point is that they are all connected.... or they're not. Pick one.

Firscherscherling · Oct 5, 2004

Ampmonster said:
anti. there are plenty of adoptions for people who cant have kids natually. including my fiancee.

i think artificial baby making when there are perfect good ones being aborted is madness.
but im old fashioned

Thanks. I disagree with you on the issue, but I appreciate that you are consistent in it. I don't see how anyone can be pro-invetro and anti stem-cell research.

Ave Maria · Oct 5, 2004

Kelly said:
Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you

What does that prove Kelly? Let's look at the verse:

(NKJV) Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you;

Before you were born I sanctified you;
I ordained you a prophet to the nations."

Taken into context the verse simply means that God knew the prophet Jeremiah before he was formed in the womb and that before the prophet Jeremiah was born, God sanctified him and ordained him to be a prophet to the nations. The popular interpretation of this verse is that God knows everyone before he forms us in the womb. What does that prove? It doesn't prove that a days old embryo is a person and it doesn't prove that it feels pain or has emotions either. All that verse is saying is that God knew about us before we were conceived. And since God knows everything, this should come as no surprise to anyone.

Ampmonster said:
anti. there are plenty of adoptions for people who cant have kids natually. including my fiancee.

Ampmonster said:
i think artificial baby making when there are perfect good ones being aborted is madness.
but im old fashioned

I am completely and totally Pro. The reason is because some people want to have a child of their own not someone elses. And personally, I can't blame them for that.

Ampmonster · Oct 5, 2004

Firscherscherling said:
Thanks. I disagree with you on the issue, but I appreciate that you are consistent in it. I don't see how anyone can be pro-invetro and anti stem-cell research.

cool
im am for adult stem cell research. which, like i said, ive heard is just as good

Kelly · Oct 5, 2004

Holly3278 said:
The popular interpretation of this verse is that God knows everyone before he forms us in the womb. What does that prove? It doesn't prove that a days old embryo is a person and it doesn't prove that it feels pain or has emotions either. All that verse is saying is that God knew about us before we were conceived. And since God knows everything, this should come as no surprise to anyone.

So do you think that embryonic stem cell research and abortion is pleasing to God?

Firscherscherling · Oct 5, 2004

Kelly said:
So do you think that embryonic stem cell research and abortion is pleasing to God?

Do yo think that stating what is or isn't pleasing to God is idolatry, blasphemy, or both?

Ampmonster · Oct 5, 2004

well she asked... not stated.

and God's written word is clear on many things. which we have to interpret to modern day goings-on

kermit · Oct 5, 2004

Kelly said:
So do you think that embryonic stem cell research and abortion is pleasing to God?

Abortion and stem cell research are unrelated topics!!

Why is that so hard to understand?

Ave Maria · Oct 5, 2004

Kelly said:
So do you think that embryonic stem cell research and abortion is pleasing to God?

I think that embryonic stem cell research is pleasing to God because it can result in cures for horrible diseases. Besides, the embryos are just going to be thrown away anyway. As for abortion, I don't think it is pleasing to God. But that's not the topic of this thread.

kermit said:
Abortion and stem cell research are unrelated topics!!

Why is that so hard to understand?

Exactly! Why is it so hard to understand?

shprdslamb7 · Oct 5, 2004

I hope you're not trying to imply that I am not a Christian (which is against the rules by the way) because I am the one who made that quote.

This is part of what I wrote.

This post is intended for Christians. I do not plan on getting into a needless debate with non-Christians.

Draw that line and take a stand for life like God wants you to do. There are other ways that those studies can be done.

How you understood me questioning anyone's salvation is beyond me.

shprdslamb7 · Oct 5, 2004

Holly, so the number one reason that you think embryonic stem cell research is ok is because the embryo cannot feel? Is that your reasoning? Anything else?

Ave Maria · Oct 5, 2004

shprdslamb7 said:
This is part of what I wrote.

How you understood me questioning anyone's salvation is beyond me.

Well, first you quoted me and then directly after that you stated that you wasn't here to debate with non-Christians. I assumed that you was implying that I wasn't a Christian by doing this. I apologize for the confusion.

redemption song · Oct 5, 2004

going by the doctrine of natural law of philosophers past both christian and non, we have discovered the wonders of science and the *******izations thereof, but we are also endowed with morals and the limitations that are placed on us by our own collective conscience. the dedication for the advancement of science by man on a quest from a higher calling is too profound not to venture into. natural law dictates that there are laws that have always exists that was given to us by a higher power and as we strive toward achievement of human endeavors, we "discover" in a sense these marvels of human intuition. does god want us to venture where no beings have been capable of before? i would have to argue yes. we were given these wonderful minds to achieve thought and to propel the achievements further and further until we've discovered all there is to discover. where morality may at first appear to be lacking, there an equilibrium is reached between parties where medicinal ethics converges with the idealogies of those whom fear science. would we today have reached the starts ten times over is copernicus or galileo toed the line of the church and forever condemned their minds to early endeavors for the unknown beyond life? probably not. to stifle the will of science has never brought to fruition any advancement in human greatness - instead it has caused humans grief for ourselves. where once the religous fanaticism and critical analysis of biblical text as to only apply bits and pieces as people see fit to apply only to certain situations while ignoring other parts of the text, is entirely disengenuous. human minds weren't meant to be confined to narrow idealogies. when society closes itself to new ventures in achievement through the religious idealogies of a few and their tactics of fear and misinformation, it does human beings everywhere a great disservice.

Ave Maria · Oct 5, 2004

shprdslamb7 said:
Holly, so the number one reason that you think embryonic stem cell research is ok is because the embryo cannot feel? Is that your reasoning? Anything else?

Um no, my main reason for supporting embryonic stem cell research is because of it's potential to bring about cures for devastating diseases. By not supporting such research, we could be missing out on potential cures for things like cancer, Parkinsons Disease, Alzheimers, AIDs, and other diseases.

Kelly · Oct 5, 2004

What if we had the ability to clone humans for body parts and organs, we hindered the development of their nervous system and thought processes so they do not know pain or have cognitive thought, would that be ok too? It's essentially the same thing.

shprdslamb7 · Oct 5, 2004

Well, first you quoted me and then directly after that you stated that you wasn't here to debate with non-Christians. I assumed that you was implying that I wasn't a Christian by doing this. I apologize for the confusion

I see how you saw that. I apologize. What happened is I made my post then decided to write that "I'm not here to debate non-Christians". I didn't realize that is what it sounded like. You will not hear me question someone's salvation. EVER. The fruits maybe but not salvation. And, I am not saying that I am questioning your fruits....I do not know you from Jill. If I were to question someone's fruits it would be someone I knew personally...or famous.

Ok now that we have that cleared up....and, let me stop because I think I am digging a bigger hole.

I guess what I was asking is why you think it is ok to use embryos....how you are justifying it. And, like I asked before, is it because you believe they cannot feel?

My point is that there are babies that are born with part of their brain. They usually don't make it long but they cannot feel. Would it be ok to use them as well?

Ave Maria · Oct 5, 2004

shprdslamb7 said:
I see how you saw that. I apologize. What happened is I made my post then decided to write that "I'm not here to debate non-Christians". I didn't realize that is what it sounded like. You will not hear me question someone's salvation. EVER. The fruits maybe but not salvation. And, I am not saying that I am questioning your fruits....I do not know you from Jill. If I were to question someone's fruits it would be someone I knew personally...or famous.

Ok now that we have that cleared up....and, let me stop because I think I am digging a bigger hole.

I guess what I was asking is why you think it is ok to use embryos....how you are justifying it. And, like I asked before, is it because you believe they cannot feel?

My point is that there are babies that are born with part of their brain. They usually don't make it long but they cannot feel. Would it be ok to use them as well?

Hey no problem!

The reason I am supportive of embryonic stem cell research is because of it's potential to find cures for horrible diseases. Not only that but many of these embryos from invitro fertilization techniques just go to waste anyway so why not use them for something good like trying to find cures for diseases?

kermit · Oct 5, 2004

shprdslamb7 said:
Holly, so the number one reason that you think embryonic stem cell research is ok is because the embryo cannot feel? Is that your reasoning? Anything else?

I realize this this wasn't directed to me.

The embryos that we are talking about are left-overs from IVF. For years these embyos were discarded. If you have a moral problem with that I can completely understand. If not, I don't see how you can have a moral objection to using them for research.

Ave Maria · Oct 5, 2004

kermit said:
I realize this this wasn't directed to me.

The embryos that we are talking about are left-overs from IVF. For years these embyos were discarded. If you have a moral problem with that I can completely understand. If not, I don't see how you can have a moral objection to using them for research.

I agree kermit!

Kerry Promotes Expanded Stem Cell Research

Swords to plowshares

Well-Known Member

Liberal Filthy Hairless Pig-Monkey

Ave Maria Gratia Plena

Swords to plowshares

Dungeon Master

Liberal Filthy Hairless Pig-Monkey

Swords to plowshares

Legend

Ave Maria Gratia Plena

Kooky end-times believer

Kooky end-times believer

Ave Maria Gratia Plena

Active Member

Ave Maria Gratia Plena

Dungeon Master

Kooky end-times believer

Ave Maria Gratia Plena

Legend

Ave Maria Gratia Plena

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency