if an embreyo has no capability to become life. is it true life at all?
if an embreyo has no capability to become life. is it true life at all?
Bipper, I appreciate how adamantly you're fighting this. In fact I'm sorely surprised you're having to do it alone, but I'm glad you're trying to persevere, so really, no hard feelings, before I make another comment.
I think the big problem here is that we as humans value human life above anything else's life. And these things are human cells. Whether or not they can be regarded as a human life is debatable. But I don't think this issue would be even half as sore if we were using something else. Yes it might be able to register pain, but it's not even conciously aware of it at that stage. It can't be. There's no thought process. Its basically the equivalent of an amoeba. And again, if we could use amoebas, we would. But we can't.
And you're right, pro-choice has nothing to do with the subject, which is one of the reasons I flat out said I agree with it instead of labeling myself. But honestly I think in this case pro-choice should be the "parents". Or genetic material donators. I hope they're aware of what their material is being used for anyway.
Honestly I think this is a religious issue as much as it is a moral one. I'm a Christian, but I really don't believe a small cluster of cells has a soul (yet?). And considering their life span, and their life expectancy, I wouldn't be inclined to believe that cluster of cells would, or could ever have a soul. On the other end of the debate: yes, I will agree with you that small cluser of cells is alive. Much like the mice/rats that are tested to benefit us as well. We NEED test subjects to advance medical science. Its just human nature to attempt to defy and/or defend/protect ourselves from our mortality and try to expand and advance as much as we can as long as we can. And thus is the sociality that we can't do our experiments on (fully developed?) humans. But seriously, if that weren't the case, and people volunteered to be tested on, who am I to argue? Again I brush another problem: the embryos never volunteered. Its hard to not be blunt while arguing against this. I respect your stance, but the embryo can't argue against its being used. It can't even comprehend, and I don't believe it has the capacity to even CARE that its being used.
Granted it makes it look like the whole hiding behind the mask thing, where it's not affecting me personally so its easier to shrug it off, but all I can say is that is not it. They're worlds away from each other in my eyes. =/
If someone doesn't have an issue killing someone to save his or her own life, why would he or she have an issue with destroying an embryo to find a cure to save his or her life?
Why have your tax money go towards weapons when you can have it go towards medicine?
Bipper, kudos to you for arguing so galantly. i agree with you on some levels. but not all. i also agree that it is in some ways eiser for me to shrug it off because it doesnt affect me one way or the other.
however i must ask you this: have you ever killed a fly, or spider, or any other "bug?" I can answer this for you because you have and i can be sure of that because you are old enough to have children you have killed at least one "bug" in your life willingly. and that is almost no differnt from what the scientests are doing. in fact, quite bluntly, its worse because the "bug" can fully feel and comprehend pain.
im pro-life in all areas. i dont like that these steam-cells are being killed, but i also dont like that people willfully kill any living thing. but on some levels it is necesary to do. and i cant have any affect over what happens so i just have to have faith that good will come from either side.
These embryos can't and won't ever turn into humans. So what exactly is the problem?
And I'm going to quote peegee's last post because it's good enough to be posted twice:
An embryo has no conscience, no sentience. And besides this isn't even embryos it's stem cells. They fertilise an egg and start harvesting the genetic factory that comes out of that for stem cells (something like that, right?).
Regardless without any sort of moral law we can remotely apply towards it, it is about as morally wrong as throwing a stone. The reason you may think it matters is because you apply too much meaning to humans -- even their individual cells have the equivalent value as the full human being.
That's not consistent.
Excellent point Neel. If, say, you were a soldier in a war, and you had to kill another human being to survive, is that okay? Is that really any different than killing of an embryo to save yourself?If someone doesn't have an issue killing someone to save his or her own life, why would he or she have an issue with destroying an embryo to find a cure to save his or her life?
In Japan, the United States dropped the Bomb, killing countless people, so that it would save countless American lives. (That's not the only reason, but bear with me here.) If you think that is just, as many people on your side of the argument do, how is that any different than killing off a bunch of stem cells to save a bunch of lives?
A few thing to say yet:
Thanks for realizing my stance and commenting on the work. I am glad to see it is getting read and thought over. Lets just say that life is a very personal issue for me.
It seems that the common concensus is that Embryo's cannot become people? That is odd because it is take from a woman who has been pregnant for up to a month to 2.5 months... Thats a pretty large gap. The idea for the embreo is that it can be inserted into a donor, who is willing to host the child. To me that seems very wrong and selfish. Forgive me for being blunt, but there are many kids who need adoption and would love a chance to live in a family willing to go thorugh so many pains to further itself. To me that would be more sencible than "farming children" I think that phrase sums up my feeling on this quite well.
Ontop of the farming of children, using the ones who are not failures in anyway for research is simply wrong. Like vyk said the choice should be the parents'. Well it isn't its the banks.
Also embryo's have a great shot at becoming a full fledged fetus. They can be implanted into donors, but I think the problem should stop before we have embryos lying around and waiting to die. The research isn't so bad and is feasable (though i am not for it) as the embryo's are doomed wrongly anywayse. That is what I do not like. I would like to see people have more of a respect for human life. It is not a resource that we should abuse. Weather it be in war, or in reasearchl it is just not right to take human life.
Grab a gun and shoot me in the chest... If i do not feel the pain, does that make it ok. Wen you KILL you take away my hopes, dreams, love, pain, hobbies, or anything else I might aquire. You take away my story. These people should not live a 15 day story. That is wrong. Because a person does not have an Identity to our prespective does not strip them of rights.
On the christan prespective, I can't really say weather or not there is a soul there or not. I know the bible speaks out against the subject of abortion, but to find exactly where would require the time i dont have right now. I will look at it though. I know the disrespect for life and demoralization is supposed to happen around the end times - and mabey that is why i fight so hard. I have two children, and I don't want it to end yet. I love life here. I know it is unavoidable and profisized, but I keep hope still.
Please don't kill needlessly. The innocent need not die, the deccadent need conversion... not death.
Bipper
EDITED for Nikotin
Yes, that is different. The soilder took his story to that point. Is it fine that he did? The embryo however did not ever get a chance to even make this choice. We had written thier story for em. We should never take such liberties. Just look at the miracle that makes life in the first place... why take such an unknown event for granted?Excellent point Neel. If, say, you were a soldier in a war, and you had to kill another human being to survive, is that okay? Is that really any different than killing of an embryo to save yourself?
The attomic bomb was murder at its worst. Why it was dropped i donot wish to discuss in this thread. Obviously, you can't compare war, with people farming. Nice flow though as both do have such disregaurd for life. War is fighting for somthign you belive in. This research is setting up for slaughter to mabey fill a few years in your life.
EDIT2: Nikotin, you look like you like the music. Would you ever take that from someone? The chance to enjoy such a pleasure. Create embryos to be destroyed with out even hear such a great thing as music? Not being able to show another human the characteristics of classical versus baroque? In setting these embryos up, you tease by giving life and taking it instantly. I know we invetro one may have a chance - but look to adoption as a betteer answer than making three so one can live.
Last edited by bipper; 08-02-2005 at 03:48 AM.
We're talking about lab-made embryos made for the purpose of stem cell research. It is not human life until it can live on its on(sometime around the end of the second trimester). Otherwise, where do you draw the line? Embryos, eggs, sperm? I guess condoms should be illegal since that kills 5983734905873094850 sperm. Or maybe the men should be forced to ejaculate into a tube so that all the sperm can be saved to fertilize the next billion or so eggs(enough to keep a woman busy for a while). The entire argument is baseless and absurd.It seems that the common concensus is that Embryo's cannot become people? That is odd because it is take from a woman who has been pregnant for up to a month to 2.5 months... Thats a pretty large gap. The idea for the embreo is that it can be inserted into a donor, who is willing to host the child. To me that seems very wrong and selfish. Forgive me for being blunt, but there are many kids who need adoption and would love a chance to live in a family willing to go thorugh so many pains to further itself. To me that would be more sencible than "farming children" I think that phrase sums up my feeling on this quite well.
You are the first person at these forums to ever leave me speechless. You've made me question the validity behind what I believe. I don't know my opinion anymore...Nikotin, you look like you like the music. Would you ever take that from someone?
Hahahahahahahaha xD
You can laugh all you want, but it is an excellent point.Originally Posted by Raistlin
Thank you nik0tine. I am glad my words had an impact for sure. That means _A LOT_ to me on this issue.
[quote] We're talking about lab-made embryos made for the purpose of stem cell research. It is not human life until it can live on its on(sometime around the end of the second trimester). Otherwise, where do you draw the line? Embryos, eggs, sperm? I guess condoms should be illegal since that kills 5983734905873094850 sperm. Or maybe the men should be forced to ejaculate into a tube so that all the sperm can be saved to fertilize the next billion or so eggs(enough to keep a woman busy for a while). The entire argument is baseless and absurd.[\quote]
Please read the thread closly, we did cover controseptives earlier. Wehn you say this argument is absurd i hope you meant the one you were posting? Life is life, rasti. If someone is a vegtable and cannot live on thier own; they are still alive. I hope you never see anyone you care about in that situation.
Also, if you read the thread you will notice that I am really pondering on why it is ok for people to make embryos and line them up for death. But if you position on life is so, demining and selfish, then you will never agree with me. And my demeaning and selfish I simply mean that (at least to me) it seems you are saying if you are not self sufficiant - you are not a life form.
Bipper
The embryos that you speak of are months old. The embryos used for actual research are only days old and don't even have chances of becoming fetuses. At this stage, they are just blastocysts; a cell that is just a cluster of different cells. They can't think past breathing. The fact is that they are not humans yet. They have no organs, limbs, eyes, a nose, a mouth, and most importantly, they have no conscience. They have no families.
Fully developed humans take precedence over cells. These people actually had lives and have families. One of the diseases that stem cell research can possibly cure is parkinsons. People can go from blabbering, twitching shells of themselves, to speaking and walking humans. Using your argument of comparing a cell to an actual human, you can't compare 5 years to a few days. 5 years to this human's life is 5 years with their grandson. 5 years to this human's life is 5 years with their husband. 5 years to this human is 5 more years to live. 5 days to an embryo is 5 days until its death.
:monster2: One, AH! AH! Two, AH AH! Three, AH AH!
A: ITs disrepsectful to anyone to rip them apart when they are alive. And when they are made in labritories to be ripped aparot - that is an obomination right there. Farming Embryos is just sick.Also, if you read the thread you will notice that I am really pondering on why it is ok for people to make embryos and line them up for death. But if you position on life is so, demining and selfish, then you will never agree with me. And my demeaning and selfish I simply mean that (at least to me) it seems you are saying if you are not self sufficiant - you are not a life form.
Using this logic then a baby is not as important as an adult. This is really not the common concessus in a women and children first world. Although I see there may be a difference to children vs embryos - by a few years; either way - it is not ok to kill children for you own self gain.
if you read an earlier post you will see actuall supported evidence that stem cell research holds no 100% promices and may just as well cause cancers as the cells are not very controlable.
That seems not only irrelevant but it is cold as well. Here you admit that the embryo is alive - and you just talk of its death like it is nothing because it knows no relationships. So kill it before it gets to know anyone/thing? That really saddens me.
Prehapse the whole post should be read as there are alot of things being said that have been covered.
My main beliefs are:
1: (The hardes to sway) Embryo's that are currently in banks should not be used as they are doomed anyways
2: (Suprisingly blantent) Embryo's should not be made artificially to be killed for research
3: I also disbelive in invetro. Sure it allows those who cant have a child a chance. But at the same time - multiple embryos are made - so that means that more will die than are born (in most cases). IF all the embryos are given a chance and not wasted it isnt as bad imo.
4: I also belive that when a baby is born, or adult dies - they should be able to harves those stemcells as they are actually better - you just cant farm them the way you do embryos.
5: Embryos are life too. I belive that this is on is more widley supported. I belive that all human life deserves respect above all else.
I hope i covered all the bases hereThanks for your time. And if you are new to the thread please read the whole thing - there has been a lot of information, and opinions stated here.
Sincerly,
Bipper
"it is not ok to kill children for you own self gain."
this is the main point. these are not children. these are a few cells in pretty much the same form as flu. no shape or form. just a batch of cells. not a child. not with thought or feeling. bacteria don't scream when you bleach the toilet.
they have no chance of ever becoming children either.
they're equavilent is a brain dead human on life support. technically alive. but not really alive in the common sense. no brain function. no pain, emotion or thought. breathes and has a heart beat but isn't really alive.
Posting Permissions
