-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Stem Cell Research
- Thread starter Akasa
- Start date
H
HRE
Guest
Because many believe that it means creating embryos specifically for the purpose of killing them.
Upvote
0
Because John Kerry's plan is to have abortion and stem cell mills so that all of the liberal mad scientists can live forever by feeding on innocent babies. Similar to vampirism, but more scientific.
Upvote
0
Akasa said:
Well, Nazis used to perform experiments on concentration camp victims, a lot of research came out of it. As well, Japanese scientists did the same thing with Americans POWs. They would strap them down and perform medical experiments on them without any painkillers.
It was considered very helpful to the medical community in Japan to have all these gagged Americans POWs they could cut open and examine their organs without the influence of drugs.
What's wrong with that? I guess that depends on your sense of morality.
Regardless in the end, they lost and got their just punishment.
Upvote
0
Beoga
Sola Scriptura
from my understanding, it is the killing of an embryo, which is wrong. The ends don't justify the noblest of deeds (i believe the prez said that).
my friend left his stem cell research paper in my car for me to read, i have read through three pages so far...maybe i should have read all of it
my friend left his stem cell research paper in my car for me to read, i have read through three pages so far...maybe i should have read all of it
Upvote
0
H
HRE
Guest
I hope you won't mind if I re-use a post I made before:
Do you know where they intend to obtain new stem cell lines from?
When a couple chooses to perform in vitro fertilization to produce a child, one embryo is not made. Nay, hundreds, sometimes more, eggs are fertilized. A good portion of those start growing into embryos. When these embryos become blastocysts, the doctors will choose the one that holds the most promise and begin growing it.
What becomes of the other hundred blastocysts? Well, under current laws, they are disposed of. Literally, thrown away. What a waste.
If it became legal to obtain new stem cell lines, those blastocysts will at least be put to a good use helping mankind.
The question is not when life begins, but instead the question is what to do with hundreds of blastocysts that will otherwise go to waste.
The other sources of stem cell lines are umbilical cords and bone marrow. Stem cells do not even always entail the death of anything; it is foolish to think otherwise.
Upvote
0
Very nice question. I would say because turning to God saves more lives then any scientific method known to man. We know that we are becoming selfish when we have to refuse children life to prolong our own. Any yes, I enjoy what Wazoo said... suck blood from the innocent to fulfill the lusts of the flesh. More then transfering these stem cells I would say more people need to be transfering guts- it takes more guts to realize that we all have problems and die sometime then to turn away from God and kill His own creation to make a few live longer... bad news... regardless.... we all die...
In Christs Love,
All4one
PS... Thanks for the topic. It is a very interesting one that needs to be addressed.
Upvote
0
kissybug27
Active Member
Do you know where they intend to obtain new stem cell lines from?
When a couple chooses to perform in vitro fertilization to produce a child, one embryo is not made. Nay, hundreds, sometimes more, eggs are fertilized. A good portion of those start growing into embryos. When these embryos become blastocysts, the doctors will choose the one that holds the most promise and begin growing it.
What becomes of the other hundred blastocysts? Well, under current laws, they are disposed of. Literally, thrown away. What a waste.
If it became legal to obtain new stem cell lines, those blastocysts will at least be put to a good use helping mankind.
The question is not when life begins, but instead the question is what to do with hundreds of blastocysts that will otherwise go to waste.
The other sources of stem cell lines are umbilical cords and bone marrow. Stem cells do not even always entail the death of anything; it is foolish to think otherwise.[/QUOTE]
Now not only am I against stem cell research but also against vitro fertilization, I did'nt know that that happens.
I don't have a problem if they want to use adult cells or what have you, I say if they aren't killing babies more power to them. But they are, and they are wanting to use our tax dollars to do it. That means that we would be paying for the lost of thousands of tiny lives, this is very sad.
Also I personally think this will add another coin to the scales of abortion, it gives woman more of a reason to decide to abort a child. If they don't want to have the child and it may save someones life then why not....they will probably make some money off of it too. It's very sad to me. I have heard that they can do the same thing with adult cells, if they can then why not instead of murdering innocent little children
When a couple chooses to perform in vitro fertilization to produce a child, one embryo is not made. Nay, hundreds, sometimes more, eggs are fertilized. A good portion of those start growing into embryos. When these embryos become blastocysts, the doctors will choose the one that holds the most promise and begin growing it.
What becomes of the other hundred blastocysts? Well, under current laws, they are disposed of. Literally, thrown away. What a waste.
If it became legal to obtain new stem cell lines, those blastocysts will at least be put to a good use helping mankind.
The question is not when life begins, but instead the question is what to do with hundreds of blastocysts that will otherwise go to waste.
The other sources of stem cell lines are umbilical cords and bone marrow. Stem cells do not even always entail the death of anything; it is foolish to think otherwise.[/QUOTE]
Now not only am I against stem cell research but also against vitro fertilization, I did'nt know that that happens.
I don't have a problem if they want to use adult cells or what have you, I say if they aren't killing babies more power to them. But they are, and they are wanting to use our tax dollars to do it. That means that we would be paying for the lost of thousands of tiny lives, this is very sad.
Also I personally think this will add another coin to the scales of abortion, it gives woman more of a reason to decide to abort a child. If they don't want to have the child and it may save someones life then why not....they will probably make some money off of it too. It's very sad to me. I have heard that they can do the same thing with adult cells, if they can then why not instead of murdering innocent little children
Upvote
0
H
HRE
Guest
OK, let's assume that in vitro fertilization and abortion are morally wrong. I'l take that as a starting stone, though I may personally disagree.
The Nazi's, through horrific experiments, discovered a huge wealth of information about the human body and how it reacts to various things. This information is used almost on a daily basis by modern doctors and researchers.
When we detonated Fat Boy over Japan, we discovered some amazing things about atomic explosions, information that we have put to work not in building bombs but in humanitarian efforts.
Much like the information from the Nazi's experiments and the atomic bomb, we have hundreds of embryos that may or may not have come from sources you consider immoral. Regardless of the source, is it proper to waste that potential that could go to save other lives? Is it moral to throw away what could be used to save your life or the life of a loved one?
God may save more lives, but until that can be shown, I think that doctors are gonna still keep pressing on to save lives themselves. I hope you don't mind their well-meaning contributions too much...
We may all die, but is it any sin to prolong life? Was Jesus doing wrong when he raised Lazarus from the dead if Lazarus was just going to die eventually anyways?
Upvote
0
kissybug27
Active Member
Upvote
0
H
HRE
Guest
I think you missed my point. The Nazis did their 'research'. It was wrong, but should we let the information they gathered go to waste?kissybug27 said:
Similarily, in vitro fertilization may be wrong, but while it does happen, should we let the by-products of it simply go to waste?
Upvote
0
Sanguine
Neutiquam erro
Why the simplification? Many people are quite capable of being against abortion, but at the same time realising that it is sometimes the best option. That is not playing both sides of the fence, that is pragmatism. Jamming up the works with false dichotomies is pointless; it just makes the exercise heated and fruitless. So why bother when all it results in is in-crowd back patting?
Suppose you're walking down the street, bump into someone and fall down. You hit your head and have a concussion. Some of your brain cells die, has the person who bumped into you committed murder? He has ended human life, but I'd wager that not even a Texas jury would convict him. Where we draw the line is somewhat arbitrary and highly variable from person to person. Ideology aside I would hazard to guess that most would probably consider and embryo "human" when anthropomorphosis becomes overt (~48 days into pregnancy). The hardline you take cannot be applied practically. It assumes that all blastocysts are not only viable, but 100% certain to grow into normal humans. This is simply not the case, there are a myriad of things that can go wrong from failed implantation to Anencephaly. Some will retort with "But those are natural" which is a rather puzzling angle of attack for a group of people luxuriating in the most "unnatural" of existences. Others would call it Gods will, whether or not you think that is valid is something Ill let you deal with, as clearly I do not even have the right axiomatic (for lack of a better word) grounding to explore that in anything but a wild musing.
Upvote
0
Until what can be shown- that God saves more lives? It is shown every day when we wake up. Some people may not think so but don't you think that if the devil could ,aside from the grace of God, wouldn't he just demolish everyone? We are given life daily by God and I recall a few times in the bible where he prolonged peoples lives. It should be even moreso today.
As far as Lazarus goes. Jesus was raised from the dead as well. The difference is that it did not take innocent life to do it. It also glorified God. Man would use them stem cell research as a "look what I did" and not look what God did.
In Christs Love,
All4one
Upvote
0
Aimee30
That's Me in the Corner
Because they sometimes will use aborted babies for it. By aborted, I mean a woman decides to have the baby aborted by medical means. Christians generally do not support medical abortions, therefore supporting this would be offensive--as it would mean to them more medical abortions would have to take place.Akasa said:
However, I believe stillborn, babies that died after birth, or naturally aborted babies (naturally means that baby was ejected from the womb on its own and for some reason that it couldn't survive) to can be used for the same purpose, but this should be done with a parent's consent. So I do not think stem cell research personally should be banned, if it is a natural cause the baby died from and there is proper consent. Also, they maybe able to clone genetic material soon--hopefully not entire living beings for the harvest of organs because I don't believe that's completely ethical either--and perhaps could use that for the research.
The matter is where the research comes from. Although, it might be argued with using medically aborted babies that at least something good would come from their death--reasonably I could not support this because it might be the cause for more doctor assisted abortions.
Upvote
0
H
HRE
Guest
Demonstrate this, please. Objectively.All4one said:
Yeah...like that antibiotics stuff...and EKG....and transplants...and chemo...All4one said:
All 'Look what I did!', right?
Upvote
0
I heard an extraordinary explaination Ron Reagan Jr. made in a speech on the subject...
"...Now, imagine going to a doctor who, instead of prescribing drugs, takes a few skin cells from your arm. The nucleus of one of your cells is placed into a donor egg whose own nucleus has been removed. A bit of chemical or electrical stimulation will encourage your cell's nucleus to begin dividing, creating new cells which will then be placed into a tissue culture. Those cells will generate 'embryonic' stem cells containing only your DNA, thereby eliminating the risk of tissue rejection. These stem cells are then driven to become the very neural cells that are defective in Parkinson's patients. And finally, those cells -- with your DNA -- are injected into your brain where they will replace the faulty cells whose failure to produce adequate dopamine led to the Parkinson's disease in the first place.
In other words, you're cured. And another thing, these embryonic stem cells, they could continue to replicate indefinitely and, theoretically, can be induced to recreate virtually any tissue in your body. How'd you like to have your own personal biological repair kit standing by at the hospital?...By the way, no fetal tissue is involved in this process. No fetuses are created, none destroyed. This all happens in the laboratory at the cellular level..."
We are talking about an unfertilized egg, not an embryo; that is misleading. I wish it was called cellular stem cell research, since that is what it is.
"...Now, imagine going to a doctor who, instead of prescribing drugs, takes a few skin cells from your arm. The nucleus of one of your cells is placed into a donor egg whose own nucleus has been removed. A bit of chemical or electrical stimulation will encourage your cell's nucleus to begin dividing, creating new cells which will then be placed into a tissue culture. Those cells will generate 'embryonic' stem cells containing only your DNA, thereby eliminating the risk of tissue rejection. These stem cells are then driven to become the very neural cells that are defective in Parkinson's patients. And finally, those cells -- with your DNA -- are injected into your brain where they will replace the faulty cells whose failure to produce adequate dopamine led to the Parkinson's disease in the first place.
In other words, you're cured. And another thing, these embryonic stem cells, they could continue to replicate indefinitely and, theoretically, can be induced to recreate virtually any tissue in your body. How'd you like to have your own personal biological repair kit standing by at the hospital?...By the way, no fetal tissue is involved in this process. No fetuses are created, none destroyed. This all happens in the laboratory at the cellular level..."
We are talking about an unfertilized egg, not an embryo; that is misleading. I wish it was called cellular stem cell research, since that is what it is.
Upvote
0
Thats very well put...... and also above someone said about fetuses and stuff dying naturally turning a negative in to a positive. Also does anyone have objections about using the umbilical chords? Really when u think about it with all the babies born daily the amount of umbilical chords would surpasss the need for them, and for somethign useless thats going to be thrown away it is such a good source of stuff for our stem cell researchers.....
Upvote
0
trunks2k
Contributor
Aimee30 said:
This is the first time I've ever heard of anything like this. It doesn't make sense that they would use an aborted featus because wouldn't an aborted featus not be stemcells anymore? The objection I hear is that people don't want scientists to create an embryo solely for the purpose of stem cell research. But what they don't realize is that embryos aren't created for that, they use the left over embryos from invitro fertilization.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
