George Will: McCain Loses His Head

#101
#101
KB5252 said:
Why does it have to be a better (or implied different) answer? The answer could very well be one in the same.

You look at it through a "the bible is wrong" mindset, I happen to think science is just starting to peel back the many layers of of something which is completely unfathomable by man, which would be by the name I know God. To believe in God does not make my thoughts any less valid than yours.
Click to expand...

Of course it does!

:neener2:
 
#102
#102
rjd970 said:
I was just trying to give an example of someone that had no previous record of religious ideology driving policy, yet made decisions based on personaly religous faith after taking office that impacted policy...since this is the percieved weakness of my argument.
Click to expand...

The weakness is not perceived - it is real.
 
#103
#103
therealUT said:
In this respect, I will side with God. Embryonic stem-cell research is absolutely horrific. What is the difference between harvesting embryonic stem cells (killing babies) and using concentration camp prisoners as guinea pigs for science???
Click to expand...

Well, first off, the fact that you are comparing a collection of cells to that of a baby and holocaust victims is one problem. I find this line of argument hopelessly short-sighted and blinded by religious dogmatism.

These are the facts. Stem cells are harvested from a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst (for the sake of comparison, there on 100,000 cells in the brain of a fly). These cells have no brains, neurons, feelings, life functions, or even conciousness. There is no reason whatsoever to believe they suffer their destruction in any way. The argument that they represent a potential life is lacking to. With the advances we have in science any cell in the human body with a nucleus and DNA can be a potential life. Everytime you pick your noes you are creating a holocaust of potential lives. This also should beg the question if almost half of all conceptions end in miscarriage (with or without the mother ever knowing), then God has been the biggest killer of blastocysts since time began.

On the otherhand, it is beyond dispute that babies and holocaust victims could feel pain, have life functions, and hae conciousness. Furthermore, there are an inumerable amount of people suffering needlessly because this research is being blocked by a minority of people that think the very same way you do, the current president, and possible VP included.

You simply can't overlook the qualitative differences and epistimological fallacies concerning the argument you have proposed here.
 
#104
#104
rjd970 said:
Haha.....nice.

I was just trying to give an example of someone that had no previous record of religious ideology driving policy, yet made decisions based on personaly religous faith after taking office that impacted policy...since this is the percieved weakness of my argument.
Click to expand...

I disagree with your assessment here. Bush said his opposition was due to religious reasons. I think he did it to pander to his base because it was such a controversial issue, it also couldn't hurt to distract us all while he was spending our money like a drunken navy liberal on shore leave!
 
#106
#106
rjd970 said:
Well, first off, the fact that you are comparing a collection of cells to that of a baby and holocaust victims is one problem. I find this line of argument hopelessly short-sighted and blinded by religious dogmatism.

These are the facts. Stem cells are harvested from a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst (for the sake of comparison, there on 100,000 cells in the brain of a fly). These cells have no brains, neurons, feelings, life functions, or even conciousness. There is no reason whatsoever to believe they suffer their destruction in any way. The argument that they represent a potential life is lacking to. With the advances we have in science any cell in the human body with a nucleus and DNA can be a potential life. Everytime you pick your noes you are creating a holocaust of potential lives. This also should beg the question if almost half of all conceptions end in miscarriage (with or without the mother ever knowing), then God has been the biggest killer of blastocysts since time began.

On the otherhand, it is beyond dispute that babies and holocaust victims could feel pain, have life functions, and hae conciousness. Furthermore, there are an inumerable amount of people suffering needlessly because this research is being blocked by a minority of people that think the very same way you do, the current president, and possible VP included.

You simply can't overlook the qualitative differences and epistimological fallacies concerning the argument you have proposed here.
Click to expand...

It is funny.... you feel the need to explain every thing as if we do not already know.....

Really, tell us how you really feel about us....

:lolabove:
 
#108
#108
rjd970 said:
Well, first off, the fact that you are comparing a collection of cells to that of a baby and holocaust victims is one problem. I find this line of argument hopelessly short-sighted and blinded by religious dogmatism.

These are the facts. Stem cells are harvested from a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst (for the sake of comparison, there on 100,000 cells in the brain of a fly). These cells have no brains, neurons, feelings, life functions, or even conciousness. There is no reason whatsoever to believe they suffer their destruction in any way. The argument that they represent a potential life is lacking to. With the advances we have in science any cell in the human body with a nucleus and DNA can be a potential life. Everytime you pick your noes you are creating a holocaust of potential lives. This also should beg the question if almost half of all conceptions end in miscarriage (with or without the mother ever knowing), then God has been the biggest killer of blastocysts since time began.

On the otherhand, it is beyond dispute that babies and holocaust victims could feel pain, have life functions, and hae conciousness. Furthermore, there are an inumerable amount of people suffering needlessly because this research is being blocked by a minority of people that think the very same way you do, the current president, and possible VP included.

You simply can't overlook the qualitative differences and epistimological fallacies concerning the argument you have proposed here.
Click to expand...
In order to harvest embryonic stem cells, one must destroy the embryo! Try to deny that as you might, but it is an inconvenient fact that you are trying to skirt around in your argument.

To paraphrase your argument from earlier, "the great thing about science and theories is that they do not have to be proven right, they only have to keep from being proven wrong." Feel free to try an prove wrong the widespread belief that an embryo is human life.

Being that an embryo is human life, then I make no distinction in destroying that human life for the sake of science and destroying the life of an adult in a concentration camp for the sake of science.

Again, feel free to try and prove my theory wrong.
 
#109
#109
rjd970 said:
Well, first off, the fact that you are comparing a collection of cells to that of a baby and holocaust victims is one problem. I find this line of argument hopelessly short-sighted and blinded by religious dogmatism.

These are the facts. Stem cells are harvested from a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst (for the sake of comparison, there on 100,000 cells in the brain of a fly). These cells have no brains, neurons, feelings, life functions, or even conciousness. There is no reason whatsoever to believe they suffer their destruction in any way. The argument that they represent a potential life is lacking to. With the advances we have in science any cell in the human body with a nucleus and DNA can be a potential life. Everytime you pick your noes you are creating a holocaust of potential lives. This also should beg the question if almost half of all conceptions end in miscarriage (with or without the mother ever knowing), then God has been the biggest killer of blastocysts since time began.

On the otherhand, it is beyond dispute that babies and holocaust victims could feel pain, have life functions, and hae conciousness. Furthermore, there are an inumerable amount of people suffering needlessly because this research is being blocked by a minority of people that think the very same way you do, the current president, and possible VP included.

You simply can't overlook the qualitative differences and epistimological fallacies concerning the argument you have proposed here.
Click to expand...

I do not have enough info to form my own opinion but I remember reading somewhere that embryonic stem cells were of much less value to research (yielded positive results) as adult stem cells (possibly even other sources[too long since reading]).

What do you know about this and is there any validity to it.

How far are we to go to get these stem cells? It is a hot topic issue and I do not know the percentages but I do not think a vast majority of the public would be in complete favor and not have any reservations about it. I would consider myself one of those who is open to the debate but many questions would have to be answered first.
 
#111
#111
I also like how RJD is leaving out the fact that GWB opposed the use of federal funds being used to further this research. Unless the scientific community can lay out a plan in which the research could be used for the defense of this nation, then I am certainly against government funding for all scientific research.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top