Stem Cell Research

[invisible trousers]

Oh - I know who to listen to.

which appears to be the word of man.

i never thought christians would be against helping people and curing diseases.

 

[Monica02]

which appears to be the word of man.

i never thought christians would be against helping people and curing diseases.

Christians are not against helping people or curing diseases. However, it is not morally okay to kill another human being for research or therapeutic purposes. You could be killed for your organs in an effort to save the lives of several other people. Are you okay with that? Human life begins at conception and anyone who does not realize this is sadly deficient in their understanding of Christian teaching.

 

[trunks2k]

Christians are not against helping people or curing diseases. However, it is not morally okay to kill another human being for research or therapeutic purposes.

However, in the case of embryonic stem cells we use embryos that are left overs from invitro fertilization, and are just going to be disposed of. Why waste them like that?

 

[Archivist]

Human life begins at conception and anyone who does not realize this is sadly deficient in their understanding of Christian teaching.

There are a great many Christians who would disagree with you on this statement. In any event, trunks2k is correct--we would simply be using cells that would otherwise be destroyed.

 

[Monica02]

However, in the case of embryonic stem cells we use embryos that are left overs from invitro fertilization, and are just going to be disposed of. Why waste them like that?

Invitro has also been condemned by the Church. These embryos should never have been created in the first place. The ones that are here could be adopted or just be allowed to die naturally. In any case, ESCR is not acceptable.

 

[Archivist]

Invitro has also been condemned by the Church. These embryos should never have been created in the first place. The ones that are here could be adopted or just be allowed to die naturally. In any case, ESCR is not acceptable.

First, the Roman Catholic Church doesn't speak for all Christians.

Second, it is too late to say that the embryos should never have created. They were. They exist now. We can't undue what has already happened.

Third, some have already been adopted and I am certain that more will be adopted over time. However, to simply allow them to "die naturally" without making use of the stem cells to further research that could ultimately save millions of lives violates both logic and reason.

Finally, to say that ESCR is "not acceptable" solves nothing. If we don't conduct this research in the US, it will not stop it from happening. It will occur somewhere, perhaps someplace that will be far less ethical than the US.

 

[tcampen]

Every person walking around was an embryo. Human embryos are human beings. Bush, the Senate and House's decision to go to war with Iraq does not make an embryo not human. In some peoples eyes this might make Bush a hypocrite, but embryonic stem cell research is still wrong. If embryonic stem cell research would yield lucrative cures for the pharmecutical industries then they would fund the research themseves, instead of expecting taxpayers to pay for it. Federal or state funding just will allow the drug companies to not pay for the research, and when it proves to be a dismal failure, they will be out less money.

This fails to address the issue that the embryotic stem cells are left over from an in vitro procress, where a number of extra fertilized eggs would otherwise be destroyed. In other words, since they are going to be destroyed anyway, why not put them to good use? These are cells that have just started to divide, and have no determination of what they will become, which is the very reason why they are so valuable.

Are you saying we should prohibit the in vitro fertilization process? (My nephew wouldn't exist today if that were the case.)

And the reason for this research is not just so some pharmacutical companies can have "lucrative" deals - it's to save lives. Like mine, and maybe someday yours. Drug companies are already doing the research, but federally funded research drastically speeds up the process, just as the the federal government subsidizes research on cures and treatments for cancer, HIV, diabetes, and more. These are public health issues, which the government should have some interest in, if it is to serve the public good.

 

[btxman12]

im a doctor ive seen many people come in with illness and injury of every kind and nature and many of these stem cell research can cure. before you think about picking a side or before you denounce stem cell research think about this Some examples of potential treatments include replacing the dopamine-producing cells in the brains of Parkinson's patients developing insulin-producing cells for type I diabetes and repairing damaged heart muscle following a heart attack with cardiac muscle cells. this is only a few of the potential wonders stem cells can preform when its you who has diabete or parkison i think you will sing a different toon a stem cell is taken when its not even remotly close to developing into anything remotly human but what do i know im just a surgeon.

 

[Monica02]

]

First, the Roman Catholic Church doesn't speak for all Christians.

Yes, they do. Other Christians just do not know this.

Second, it is too late to say that the embryos should never have created. They were. They exist now. We can't undue what has already happened.

It is not too late to say they never should have been created. These very small human beings can never be "uncreated" but we can still say that they should not have been created by IVF.

Third, some have already been adopted and I am certain that more will be adopted over time. However, to simply allow them to "die naturally" without making use of e stem cells to further research that could ultimately save millions of lives violates both logic and reason.

By this logic all people should be used for research, because we all will die.
Someone will just decide when the time is right to do research on our live bodies because someone else will benifit from it. IVF has opened up a very nasty can of worms.

Finally, to say that ESCR is "not acceptable" solves nothing. If we don't conduct this research in the US, it will not stop it from happening. It will occur somewhere, perhaps someplace that will be far less ethical than the US.

Just because other places will conduct ESCR does not make it moral nor is that a good reason for the US to do it. I have very little control, other than prayer, over what goes on outside of my country. I can however exercise my freespeech rights and my voting rights in the US.

 

[Monica02]

Are you saying we should prohibit the in vitro fertilization process? (My nephew wouldn't exist today if that were the case.)

Yes, IVF should be prohibited.

And the reason for this research is not just so some pharmacutical companies can have "lucrative" deals - it's to save lives. Like mine, and maybe someday yours. Drug companies are already doing the research, but federally funded research drastically speeds up the process, just as the the federal government subsidizes research on cures and treatments for cancer, HIV, diabetes, and more. These are public health issues, which the government should have some interest in, if it is to serve the public good

Killing human beings for research purposes does not serve the public good. Are you willing to be killed so that your vital organs could be given to several other people who have been deemed more benificial to society?

 

[Monica02]

im a doctor ive seen many people come in with illness and injury of every kind and nature and many of these stem cell research can cure. before you think about picking a side or before you denounce stem cell research think about this Some examples of potential treatments include replacing the dopamine-producing cells in the brains of Parkinson's patients developing insulin-producing cells for type I diabetes and repairing damaged heart muscle following a heart attack with cardiac muscle cells. this is only a few of the potential wonders stem cells can preform when its you who has diabete or parkison i think you will sing a different toon a stem cell is taken when its not even remotly close to developing into anything remotly human but what do i know im just a surgeon.

You are ONLY a surgeon. You are not God. John Paul 2 had Parkinson's and he did not sing a different toon.

 

[Phred]

You are ONLY a surgeon. You are not God. John Paul 2 had Parkinson's and he did not sing a different toon.

You seem to forget you are not God either.

 

[Monica02]

You seem to forget you are not God either.

I know that I am not God, but I do know what His Church teaches.

 

[Seaside Mists]

Invitro has also been condemned by the Church.

Which has always been proof positive to me of how sometimes man can be so backwards from what God believes.

The Church's official position is that people should only get pregnant through consentual sex within the confines of the marriage, and any conception that isn't the direct result of sex is not approved by the Church.

That, of course, is in DIRECT conflict with one of the main beliefs of the church.

The immaculate conception of Jesus to Mary.

So, in theory by the Church's own decree, the conception of Jesus was not in line with the Church.

 

[Archivist]

I know that I am not God, but I do know what His Church teaches.

No, you know what the Roman Catholic Church teaches. As I have said before, the Roman Catholic Church does not speak for all Christians. My denomination hasn't officially taken a position on the issue.

 

[Archivist]

You are ONLY a surgeon. You are not God. John Paul 2 had Parkinson's and he did not sing a different toon.

How does a person sing a "toon?"

 

[Seaside Mists]

Are you willing to be killed so that your vital organs could be given to several other people who have been deemed more benificial to society?

Being a organ donor, yes, I give permission to doctors to remove my organs to give to other members of society who are more beneficial to society than I am in whatever condition I'm in to warrant my organs being donated.

Stem cell donation is not any different than a person agreeing to be an organ donor. You are, of course, aware that people who's organs are donated are alive at the time their organs are harvested, right?

 

[butterfoot]

]
By this logic all people should be used for research, because we all will die.
Someone will just decide when the time is right to do research on our live bodies because someone else will benifit from it. IVF has opened up a very nasty can of worms.

Oh great now eminent domain doesn't just exists for my house I have to worry about my life too. Dang just because Joe Blow makes more money than I do he gets my healthy heart.



-cw

 

[butterfoot]

Being a organ donor, yes, I give permission to doctors to remove my organs to give to other members of society who are more beneficial to society than I am in whatever condition I'm in to warrant my organs being donated.

Stem cell donation is not any different than a person agreeing to be an organ donor. You are, of course, aware that people who's organs are donated are alive at the time their organs are harvested, right?

Difference is that the person agreeing to be an organ donor is dying or will be dead regardless if they take their organs or not.


-cw

 

[Seaside Mists]

Difference is that the person agreeing to be an organ donor is dying or will be dead regardless if they take their organs or not.


-cw

And the embryo in question would not have been used for a pregnancy, regardless if it is used for stem cell research or not.