Bush losing Stem Cell battle

Ok - this is going nowhere - you can't argue agains people who throw little evidence up.. So lets kick this up a notch.

Bipper's School of the Unborn:

Week 1: Fertilization
Week 2: Cell formation into three layers - If life does not begin at conception - i belive it does in the next step
week 4: Embryo! - yes virgina - one month after conception is a begining embryo. See it now? Yes embrios have neural activity and do feel to an extent. The line between fetus and embryo is very blurred- I see it defined differently all over.

Now I do not agree that if the embryo will die - to harvest it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vyk

unless someone is against organ doning. Because that's basically what it is. I'm an organ doner. When I die I hope I save a life or two.

---

Oh yeah, by the way we are not gonna wait for you to die to harvest your organs - or better yet - let us speed up the process.. That aint right? now is it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vyk

If I could donate a few skin cells in order for research, I would, because that's basically all this amounts to.

---

What if you had to die to do this?

Also how is pro-choice allowing you to be be pro-stem cell. The stem cell does not have much of a choice :confused: Less your refering to the scintists choice - or the publics choice :rolleyes2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Said embryo is not going to make it's way into an egg. It will NOT ever become a human. If it isn't a human, and can't become a human, how can we still consider it 'human'?

---

An embryo is a fertalized egg- it is a baby... simple as that. I am pretty sure babies are human.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Quote:
you read the post and all you can say is that an embryo is toe nail bacteria as opposed to a leg? hrm.. smurfed. I kinda see what you mean - so babies should die and adults should live - because we are so much better?

---

That was directed towards number 9's comments to a embryo being comparable to a bit of bacteria under your toenail and such :)

And furthermore stemcells can be collected whenever a baby is born - We dont need to harvest people to do this cause its faster... We should realy quit taking these things for granted. I have two kids, and I would NEVER want to see them killed off for science in any part of thier life. With such a disregaurd for life - I wonder why people want to live so much longer...? :confused:

what??

"Yes embrios have neural activity and do feel to an extent." no they don't. they don't have nerve cells, a brain or cortex. in the same way the don't have skin, eyes, heart, lungs or sex.

Most people are unaware that unborn children can actually feel pain. In the 1980's, studies emerged showing that the unborn child is sufficiently developed to feel pain. By the late 1990's, the medical community agreed that a child feels pain at 20 weeks gestation.

20 weeks, and pain is destinguished. yeah then the person is in its fetal stage.

Well look at it this way - pain as we feel it is a negative feeling created by our nervous system - while these cells are alive (duh) we know that they fight for life and have a system of tolerance as well. Though the pain they feel may not be the same as ours, it is very much alike. I admit nerual was the wrong choice of words to use. I was using a metephore (look at the to an extent part...).

That small tid bit aside there is a lot more going on here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by http://texasrighttolife.com/updates/0401.html

Recently, many problems with embryonic stem cells have surfaced, one being that the results from current research have been moderate at best. The leading corporation which funds embryonic stem cell research, The Geron Corporation, reports that embryonic cells might not be easy to manipulate and that these cells may actually produce tumors or other harmful growths when transplanted into patients.

Meanwhile, pro-abortion groups and the medical community have ignored other available sources of stem cells. Acquiring the cells from adult bone marrow, umbilical cord blood, the scalps of living humans, and even stem cells of recently deceased humans provide alternative, life-affirming research options. These adult stem cells can be controlled and directed for long periods of time and can be taken from other parts of the body to produce new nerve cells. The NIH's own researchers have found "an unexpected amount of flexibility in older cells," and are excited because "bone marrow cells taken from a patient's own body would not be rejected by the body's immune system."

Much to the surprise of some scientists, adult stem cells have already shown much more promise than embryonic stem cells. With adult stem cells, scientists can save lives, without compromising their moral integrity. By choosing methods of research which do not rely on the destruction of human lives, we can begin to restore a Culture of Life in our society--one which protects the sanctity of all human life. President Bush and Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson will be determining the fate of government-funded embryonic stem cell research within the next few months.

---

So there you have it. Why do we go on setting embryos up to die?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by http://www.prolife.org.uk/about/keyembryoabuse.htm

Some argue that research on human embryos is harmless because the embryo cannot feel pain at this stage. There is no question of feeling pain so early (though many later abortions are carried out without anaesthetic on babies who can certainly feel pain). But surely it would not be ethical to end the life of a born human being who has been sedated. So the issue is not whether the human embryo can feel pain, but rather, whether the embryo is a human being – that is, a human organism. Since this is scientifically undisputed, we find the “no pain” argument to be fallacious.

Others contend that embryo research is acceptable because it is “in a good cause”. But could we experiment on a born human being at the expense of his/her life if it were for a good cause? The issue is not whether the cause is good, but whether it justifies the means. Experimenters may have good motives, and life-affirming scientific progress is certainly good, but we are not willing to sacrifice the lives of human beings for scientific purposes.

Even with the best intentions and even painlessly, it can never be right to deliberately end an innocent human life, or to use one human being as a guinea pig for the benefit of another.

---

Bipper SMITES! :twak: :hot:

yes we could trial on a human being if he was a mere collection of shapeless cells with thought, mind, pain or emotion and would be dead in 15 days and was made in a petri dish.

You reading any of this?

You are basically saying that an embrio is not human. That is like saying that a child is not human cause the genitaliea has not formed yet, or that they are too short....

Embrios are the begining of a human life - that is UNDENIABLE no matter what you wanna call it. Embryos are not comparable to Toenail fungus, or a pointless glob of emotionless feeling. You can really get into it and compare our emotinos to life events and see where it gets ya - but please read what i type instead of posting a reply seconds after i post. (3 minute difference between our posts)

Bipper

i actually did read it so meh.

"Embryos are not comparable to Toenail fungus" i comapred the amount of human life in them to a toenail. the bacteria thing was about what stage they are in.

i don't think a collection of cells can be called of equal to a human being to which it can save many.

K then that is your perogative. Go kill our race and have a day :mad:
Then you can read my post...
Mabey if we were not busy making these embryo's it wouldnt be a problem. So you are for the cloning/faming of people for organs too huh? must be - or you would be a hypocrate. Its the same thing.. Scientific fact.


Bipper

no because organs are formed in humans that are living.

it is possible to keep any human being alive for ever. you put them on a ventilator or heart and lung machine and they will last forever like that. blood and oxygen continues to pump round the cells and keeps them alive and reproducing. the problem is that the brain is dead. the person is gone and never coming back. they are brain dead. embreyo's don't have brains and so if your brain needs to be alive to classify you as alive then organisms with brains are not.

farming organs would be creating a human with other organs including a brain which would be working. thus making him living.

and i have no problem with killing oher people of my "race" (i'll read it as species to stop any racism problems) if it is embreyo's for human beings not to die.

Quote:

---

and i have no problem with killing oher people of my "race" (i'll read it as species to stop any racism problems) if it is embreyo's for human beings not to die.

---

So humans are magically created huh?
Lets say that you could go back in time and kill my dad so that i was never born and you could think your right... well you kill my father and i am never born.. but minus the killing of my father... you would also be guilty of killing me.

Taking the chance of life away is just as evil as taking the life. Nuff said.

BTW like i say read what i post - educate yourself:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bipper

Originally Posted by http://texasrighttolife.com/updates/0401.html:
Recently, many problems with embryonic stem cells have surfaced, one being that the results from current research have been moderate at best. The leading corporation which funds embryonic stem cell research, The Geron Corporation, reports that embryonic cells might not be easy to manipulate and that these cells may actually produce tumors or other harmful growths when transplanted into patients.

Meanwhile, pro-abortion groups and the medical community have ignored other available sources of stem cells. Acquiring the cells from adult bone marrow, umbilical cord blood, the scalps of living humans, and even stem cells of recently deceased humans provide alternative, life-affirming research options. These adult stem cells can be controlled and directed for long periods of time and can be taken from other parts of the body to produce new nerve cells. The NIH's own researchers have found "an unexpected amount of flexibility in older cells," and are excited because "bone marrow cells taken from a patient's own body would not be rejected by the body's immune system."

Much to the surprise of some scientists, adult stem cells have already shown much more promise than embryonic stem cells. With adult stem cells, scientists can save lives, without compromising their moral integrity. By choosing methods of research which do not rely on the destruction of human lives, we can begin to restore a Culture of Life in our society--one which protects the sanctity of all human life. President Bush and Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson will be determining the fate of government-funded embryonic stem cell research within the next few months.


So there you have it. Why do we go on setting embryos up to die?

---

See it says that A - the sience is not even what it should be for this. and there are a ton of other ways to get it. So it should even be an issue really.

Bipper
Plz read the quote...

"So humans are magically created huh?
Lets say that you could go back in time and kill my dad so that i was never born and you could think your right... well you kill my father and i am never born.. but minus the killing of my father... you would also be guilty of killing me.

Taking the chance of life away is just as evil as taking the life. Nuff said."

so is contraception wrong then?

No - Life was never granted at this point -

but you are taking away the chance of life.

Not chance as in you might impregnate a chick, but if you know that some one was to be born and you stop it.. it is murder. Simple as that.

Now using a condom or other device - i dont think is so bad, as life never could start. The going back it time thing was based onthe fact that you went back and took a life. Time travel is not even feasable anyways. The whole point is if you take a life at anystage - it is murder. no problem there.

If i seen you on the street shot or somthing, I would do everything in my power to help you. I respect you as an individual and a life. I wonder how the scientist can do what they do in the rooms. Like its one thing to say that its ok to kill, but another to do it. I dont think i could kill someone whom i have no quarrel with.

Bipper

the thing with embreyo's is that it has no capability to become life. it is and for 15 days always will be a clump of cells.

I know - but why make them in the first place? Thats what I wanna know. I know for invetro - but that seems selfish to me. Kill three to create one?