This isn't Just About Abortion

#77
#77
rockytophigh said:
If you take a seed, place it in fertile soil, give it a dab of water......the second that seed starts to root, life begins. Plain and simple guys. Is is a tree yet? No, but to rip it out of the ground and deny it's ability to grow into one is simply killing the plant. Twist it, wrap it up, throw some color on it, photoshop it, use great words only academics understand but you know what....simple as chess pie....it's killing.
Click to expand...

A clump of cells doesn't have brains, or even neurons. There is no conciousness. There is no reason whatsoever to believe they suffer their destruction in any way. They do not fit any description of human life. Yet we are told, by reasoning of the sort that you just provided, that the interests of those cells (seeds, or whatever analogy you used) trump the interests of of some little girl with burn marks on 80% of her body, or a parkinson's patient, or quadripalegic...all of which are conscious, can feel pain, and are in a great deal of suffering.

Stem cell research offers promise for all these conditions. 75% of the US electorate support this research. Scientists are all in agreement. In fact, any cell in the human body with a nucleus...given the advancements we have accomplished in the field of genetics...is a potential human (or "seed"). So by your reasoning, everytime you brush your hair or pick your nose, you are committing a holocaust of potential human beings.
 
#78
#78
rockytophigh said:
This really isn't a hard thing to figure out. We can complicate it to the point it fits our needs to defend a position...cloud it to the point it sounds really, really understandable...but it's a load of hoooey.

If you take a seed, place it in fertile soil, give it a dab of water......the second that seed starts to root, life begins. Plain and simple guys. Is is a tree yet? No, but to rip it out of the ground and deny it's ability to grow into one is simply killing the plant. Twist it, wrap it up, throw some color on it, photoshop it, use great words only academics understand but you know what....simple as chess pie....it's killing.
Click to expand...

So everytime I eat a steak or fish I am then advocating the murder of a life. I think the question should be when is a human a human life. That should be the debate, and I do know when that is.
 
#79
#79
rjd970 said:
A clump of cells doesn't have brains, or even neurons. There is no conciousness. There is no reason whatsoever to believe they suffer their destruction in any way. They do not fit any description of human life. Yet we are told, by reasoning of the sort that you just provided, that the interests of those cells (seeds, or whatever analogy you used) trump the interests of of some little girl with burn marks on 80% of her body, or a parkinson's patient, or quadripalegic...all of which are conscious, can feel pain, and are in a great deal of suffering.

Stem cell research offers promise for all these conditions. 75% of the US electorate support this research. Scientists are all in agreement. In fact, any cell in the human body with a nucleus...given the advancements we have accomplished in the field of genetics...is a potential human (or "seed"). So by your reasoning, everytime you brush your hair or pick your nose, you are committing a holocaust of potential human beings.
Click to expand...

Is there something stopping stem cell research?
 
#80
#80
rjd970 said:
A clump of cells doesn't have brains, or even neurons. There is no conciousness. There is no reason whatsoever to believe they suffer their destruction in any way. They do not fit any description of human life. Yet we are told, by reasoning of the sort that you just provided, that the interests of those cells (seeds, or whatever analogy you used) trump the interests of of some little girl with burn marks on 80% of her body, or a parkinson's patient, or quadripalegic...all of which are conscious, can feel pain, and are in a great deal of suffering.

Stem cell research offers promise for all these conditions. 75% of the US electorate support this research. Scientists are all in agreement. In fact, any cell in the human body with a nucleus...given the advancements we have accomplished in the field of genetics...is a potential human (or "seed"). So by your reasoning, everytime you brush your hair or pick your nose, you are committing a holocaust of potential human beings.
Click to expand...

And by your logic we should be able to take out a booger and fix a burn victim? Ok, I'm taking liberties...but still.

You pretty much did exactly what I said someone would. Photoshop some academia in with some things you've heard here & there and come up with this rational. You couldn't be more transparent. A booger does not have the potential to become a child....you need "descriptions" to make your (or rather other's you've adapted and mutated) point. The fact that the cells have the ability to be a human being has a rat's *&^ to do with the "description" of a human being and you know it.

Stem cell research is a bit of a different topic and I think there have been some advances in that area that will not require the murdered babies to be your lab material.

Open up photoshop and get back to me with some descriptions of how taking something that has the ability (a given right) to become a human and we'll think up some more "descriptions" to help your point. I particularly laughed my head off at the can't feel pain remark...that one's a real peach. How "kind" of you, lol.
 
#83
#83
overseasorange2 said:
So everytime I eat a steak or fish I am then advocating the murder of a life. I think the question should be when is a human a human life. That should be the debate, and I do know when that is.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I follow but I'll try to clarify my example. When the seed starts to root, is that not the point which we would say that that plant is alive? When it's forming it's root system and beginning to search for the surface. At that very moment th plant is alive and to remove it would be killing the plant.

Sorry, I try not to over complicate what I try to say but sometimes the old noodle ain't what she used to be!
 
#84
#84
rockytophigh said:
I'm not sure I follow but I'll try to clarify my example. When the seed starts to root, is that not the point which we would say that that plant is alive? When it's forming it's root system and beginning to search for the surface. At that very moment th plant is alive and to remove it would be killing the plant.

Sorry, I try not to over complicate what I try to say but sometimes the old noodle ain't what she used to be!
Click to expand...

No problem. I wasn't too clear. I was on my way out the door. So, I was in a hurry. Everybody here is starting to celebrate the Chinese New year, so it is rather hectic.:baloon:

Chuc Mung Nam Moi!(Happy New Year!)
 
#85
#85
i do not believe the federal government should have a say in abortion one way or the other. i do not agree with it but that is not the federal governments decision. i have no problem with the morning after pill, as long as the gov't isnt footing the bill, but an abortion of an embyo i can not agree with. the waiting list for a couple looking to adopt a newborn child is 3+ years so there are better options than abortion. the death penalty i am in favor of. i favor this because of new technologies that we now have(dna). there was nothing stopping stem cell research before yesterday. the only difference is now the federal gov't will help pay for it. this is not a given duty of the federal gov't so it should not be involved.
 
#87
#87
Any law fiscally sound or not that allows partial birth abortion is immoral, plain and simple. Any lawmaker that would not support a ban on partial birth abortion is scum and should be treated as such, plain and simple.
 
#88
#88
JOEY'S ALL VOL !!! said:
Any law fiscally sound or not that allows partial birth abortion is immoral, plain and simple. Any lawmaker that would not support a ban on partial birth abortion is scum and should be treated as such, plain and simple.
Click to expand...

there are many medical reasons for this -- but it should be for medical reasons only. It's an awful process but in certain cases it must be done.

A personal example is: At a 20 week sonogram the brain growth has completely stopped. The child will not even be able to breathe on it's own outside the womb, but can stay alive in the womb. So -- should the mother be forced to carry the baby to term and then birth it and watch it die (or stick it on a respirator until she pulls the plug) or can she have the choice to abort and deliver the fetus right then and there? for me, she can have that choice.

Does this mean I support partial birth abortions in full? No -- the procedure is disgusting and anyone that could do that just because they didn't want a child has some mental problems. But that's just my opinion.
 
#89
#89
rjd970 said:
A clump of cells doesn't have brains, or even neurons. There is no conciousness. There is no reason whatsoever to believe they suffer their destruction in any way. They do not fit any description of human life. Yet we are told, by reasoning of the sort that you just provided, that the interests of those cells (seeds, or whatever analogy you used) trump the interests of of some little girl with burn marks on 80% of her body, or a parkinson's patient, or quadripalegic...all of which are conscious, can feel pain, and are in a great deal of suffering.

Stem cell research offers promise for all these conditions. 75% of the US electorate support this research. Scientists are all in agreement. In fact, any cell in the human body with a nucleus...given the advancements we have accomplished in the field of genetics...is a potential human (or "seed"). So by your reasoning, everytime you brush your hair or pick your nose, you are committing a holocaust of potential human beings.
Click to expand...

Okay, here's some dumb questions about embryonic stem cells. Can they be created without fertilization? Can they be cloned? If the answer is yes to either, why not create them out of the lines already authorized for federal funding?

As a follow-up - would a cure that uses stem cells require mass production of ESCs from fertilization?

To me, the ethical question is the creation of human life via fertilization with the express intent of harvesting it.
 
#92
#92
rjd970 said:
A clump of cells doesn't have brains, or even neurons. There is no conciousness. There is no reason whatsoever to believe they suffer their destruction in any way. They do not fit any description of human life. Yet we are told, by reasoning of the sort that you just provided, that the interests of those cells (seeds, or whatever analogy you used) trump the interests of of some little girl with burn marks on 80% of her body, or a parkinson's patient, or quadripalegic...all of which are conscious, can feel pain, and are in a great deal of suffering.

Stem cell research offers promise for all these conditions. 75% of the US electorate support this research. Scientists are all in agreement. In fact, any cell in the human body with a nucleus...given the advancements we have accomplished in the field of genetics...is a potential human (or "seed"). So by your reasoning, everytime you brush your hair or pick your nose, you are committing a holocaust of potential human beings.
Click to expand...

This may be true but there are many who raise ethical concerns about research using embryonic stem cells. There has to be a better way that does not so closely resemble the acts of Nazi "researchers" during WWII.
 
#94
#94
"Its funny that all the people that are for abortion have already been born..."
-Ronald Reagan
 
#97
#97
OrangeEmpire said:
Throw money at it.......... that always works!
Click to expand...

That is the only thing that will be gained here. This will open the flood gates of funding to Planned Parenthood who will then use it to push their government subsidized cash cow which we all know by the term abortion.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top