you cant has funds for stemcell research. funding, not yours

[Senoska]

Going to type this fast because Ive got to go to work, and chances are I wont see your replys til later, however, banning one technology because you view cloning in a bad light is fucking retarded. It's like wanting to ban the computer because it enables us to clone. Or rather a better parallel, banning the computer because it stemmed into our current medical sciences and helped us cure hundreds of diseases. Your logic is so beyond flawed its almost annoying. "It brings us one step closer", HOW?! How does it bring is ANY closer, its not even fucking related. This is merely a way of curing disease. You really need to educate yourself before you have a stance on anything, go study something.

To quote Sam Harris:
"Among developed nations, America stands alone in these convictions. Our country now appears as at no other time in her history, like a lumbering, bellicose, dim-witted giant. Anyone who cares about the fate of civilization would do well to recognize the combination of great power and great stupidity is simply terrifying"

You are not helping the great stupidity that is currently plaguing our country.

[Plow]

As soon as you start banning the step before the step before the step where things actually get unethical, you've decided progress isn't worthwhile.

Problem is everyone has a different "line" of when something becomes unethical. I'm sure that there are many who think cloning is a good idea, but that doesn't mean I should have to support it. Equally, it doesn't mean someone should have to be against it because I am.

When it comes to law though, especially if we strive to remain a democratic nation, they have to find the best line they can and try not to cross it. But considering the line is so extremely varied, it becomes a very toughy issue to decide upon.

It's all through the looking glass. Either you're for people suffering because you're afraid to go to hell, or you're for the progress of science to help humanity. Obviously that's a stark contrast and not every single persons view but that is the majority of the case in a nutshell.

This particular situation the ethics against each other are science versus religion, and science is proven while religion is nothing more than theory and storytelling. Believing that someone should suffer because fear of a fairy tale is beyond unethical. If you can give a reasonable and logical standpoint on why cell cloning and stem cell research is unethical I would love to hear it.

Protip: Logic and reason automatically rule out religious conviction.

Well put.

What? Noo...

That's really no different than saying "Either you're for letting nature take its course and making the best you can of it or you're for playing God and farming babies to save old people," it's just the other side of the coin.


Everyone that's read my posts a lot knows I hate Bush, and I most certainly don't believe for a second that he'd do this for any of the right reasons whatsoever.


But you're walking a slippery slope when you're talking about creating and destroying human life for the purpose of research.



I'm really not informed enough of the situation to discuss this meaningfully so I'll leave it at that.

[Xavier]

If you're afraid of consequences that might never happen, progress is impossible.

I'm afraid of Artifical Intelligence taking over our world, we need to stop improving computers and go back to paper full time.

[Octavious]

Wouldn't being able to accept the ethical responsibilities of cloning humans be something to show we've grown as a society? As opposed to being barbarians, or those who maliciously disregard life, IE bombers etc?

IMO, I do not support empryonic stem cell research, on the basis that it is the possibility of new life, whether or not it's 100cells. I do however wish that the Government would fund other forms of stem cell research, there is other ways you can go about obtaining stem cells without the destruction of life.

[Devek]

If you're afraid of consequences that might never happen, progress is impossible.

I'm afraid of Artifical Intelligence taking over our world, we need to stop improving computers and go back to paper full time.

The irony is the issues are kind of one and the same

As someone who has literately been writing software everyday for the last 21 years I can safely say that AI as defined by the layperson is physically impossible. A computer program at its most basic level is just a series of switches being turned on and off and as elaborate as it may get it is never more than just that. Research into quantum computing may change things by for the time being that is an unknown but you're still not talking about a program as we know it much less anything "artificial".

What you're going to start seeing (in our lifetimes) is stuff like this http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/ ... 27308.html except with genetically modified humans This won't really be AI but will actually be a real person who will be "born" and live their entire life inside a machine.

[Maguspk]

If you're afraid of consequences that might never happen, progress is impossible.

I'm afraid of Artifical Intelligence taking over our world, we need to stop improving computers and go back to paper full time.

The irony is the issues are kind of one and the same

As someone who has literately been writing software everyday for the last 21 years I can safely say that AI as defined by the layperson is physically impossible. A computer program at its most basic level is just a series of switches being turned on and off and as elaborate as it may get it is never more than just that. Research into quantum computing may change things by for the time being that is an unknown but you're still not talking about a program as we know it much less anything "artificial".

What you're going to start seeing (in our lifetimes) is stuff like this http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/ ... 27308.html except with genetically modified humans This won't really be AI but will actually be a real person who will be "born" and live their entire life inside a machine.

That article is mad kewl.

[abadd]

If you're afraid of consequences that might never happen, progress is impossible.

I'm afraid of Artifical Intelligence taking over our world, we need to stop improving computers and go back to paper full time.

"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of the human mind. "

[Septimus]

I know how to get this passed. We tell the President that the terrorists and Hollywood directors are going to make an army of evil cloned stem cell babies to create a movie about Jesus as a gay cowboy. The only way to stop them is to make our own good stem cells for research so we can take the evil out of the evil ones. If he doesn't support stem cells, he supports terror.

[MF Perm]

You know the funniest thing about all of this is the majority of medical advances we have today due to our understanding of human biology and anatomy was in the 17th and 18th centuries ( and some cases even previous to that ) was due to scientists and doctors at the time using prisoners ( some condemned some not ) as experiments.


They would do biopsies on these guys, as well as test chemical compounds and such on them to see the reaction on the human body. This is where we get the stories of mad science and Frankenstein from.

Hardly moral or ethical, but I doubt anyone here refuses to go to the doctor in the case of an emergency because of the evolution of medical science. And I certainly doubt anyone that's against embryonic stem cell research in the general public would refuse the same. Hypocrisy is certainly a bitch, ain't it?

[Creeps]

I'm in full support of dead babies of any kind

[Senoska]

You people bitching about it being a human life are using the "Life happens at conception" bullshit. No, it doesn't. When the fetus has feelings, limbs, a brain, and a heartbeat, I will agree with you it is a living thing. It is almost offensive that you people will deny others a medical life saver because it has the POSSIBILITY of being a living thing. Its like not walking on a rock because after millions of years it can turn into a living thing. Get over it. You say you don't want to destroy a "Human" life(Its a fucking blob.), ironic, you're destroying ever single CURRENT -LIVING- people that can benefit from this treatment.

Let me make something very clear to you, there would be at no time any "Cloning" going on, the cells used would go in the trash. Thrown out. Imagine someone taking a loved one, like your mother, your father, your brothers or sisters, and just throwing them in the dumpster. Imagine one of your loved ones have something that can be cured by this, would you HONESTLY say "Well, its going to get thrown out anyway but because it can be (IT WONT BE) a human life, im going to let me loved family member die", my god give me a fucking break.

It is completely INSANE that this cave man thought process is going on in our country, let alone in our country's highest power. Use some logic people, use some reason. People, real people, are dieing. You can save these people, and yet you don't. These people are SUFFERING, their family's devastated because of one man's reasoning. I have personally seen this, you have absolutely no idea. This is a disgusting way of murder on his part, make people suffer to this degree, millions of people.

Let me know when you get it. Think about this and reply, I would love to see your justification for this.

[Intense]

I'm in full support of dead babies of any kind

Youre a monster!

[Gregorio]

You guys do realize that the government isn't "banning" stem cell research at all, right?

There's a difference between the government not funding something and banning it...especially since private donations fund the majority of all scientific research.

[MF Perm]

You guys do realize that the government isn't "banning" stem cell research at all, right?

There's a difference between the government not funding something and banning it...especially since private donations fund the majority of all scientific research.

Yet taxpayer dollars subsidize rich oil companies and private defense contracts. If my money is going anywhere in scientific research and funding I want it to be in the realm of humanitarian issues, not global profiteering and warmongering.

[Rigor]

Excuse me for a moment while I play devil's advocate.

I spotted something that wasn't being discussed in this thread. Remember from Sociology 101 where the teacher talked about the "Greying of America"? As in, America is getting older and older and we're having less and less children. So now with stem cell research we can save all our grandparents so that they can send us birthday presents forever! Overpopulation is already becoming a problem, and if we don't allow people to die then humanity is fucked, even if we can cure cancer, lou gehrigs, and alzheimers.

Im not against stem cell research, I just wanted to pick your brains a bit.

[Gregorio]

You guys do realize that the government isn't "banning" stem cell research at all, right?

There's a difference between the government not funding something and banning it...especially since private donations fund the majority of all scientific research.

Yet taxpayer dollars subsidize rich oil companies and private defense contracts. If my money is going anywhere in scientific research and funding I want it to be in the realm of humanitarian issues, not global profiteering and warmongering.

They also go toward Social Security and medical programs that may not be around when I'm at the age where I may need them. If my money is going anywhere I want it to be somewhere I can benefit from seeing as it's my money and all.

The point is not everyone agrees with how their taxes are spent...this isn't anything new. While you want everyone to pay for scientific research I couldn't give a damn because the private contributions will vastly outweigh whatever the government will put into it anyway.

[MF Perm]

Excuse me for a moment while I play devil's advocate.

I spotted something that wasn't being discussed in this thread. Remember from Sociology 101 where the teacher talked about the "Greying of America"? As in, America is getting older and older and we're having less and less children. So now with stem cell research we can save all our grandparents so that they can send us birthday presents forever! Overpopulation is already becoming a problem, and if we don't allow people to die then humanity is fucked, even if we can cure cancer, lou gehrigs, and alzheimers.

Im not against stem cell research, I just wanted to pick your brains a bit.

There's a difference between the dying out and dwindling of a population and the long drawn out suffering of millions who are now a draw on added resources to try and ease their pain and suffering.

Basically what you propose is; sick or old? Kill em all! The people that would benefit from this research would now no longer need the medical, human, and technological resources that are now consumed in their sickness. It would open doorways into new areas of study.

I hate to beat a dead horse but, in 3rd world countries there are population problems because you have people like the pope or other religious authorities saying contraception is bad, have 7 children living in poverty this is God's will. The problem is not looking for cures to disease and affliction. History has shown species adapt to circumstances. In our complex evolution we adapt with science.

[MF Perm]

You guys do realize that the government isn't "banning" stem cell research at all, right?

There's a difference between the government not funding something and banning it...especially since private donations fund the majority of all scientific research.

Yet taxpayer dollars subsidize rich oil companies and private defense contracts. If my money is going anywhere in scientific research and funding I want it to be in the realm of humanitarian issues, not global profiteering and warmongering.

They also go toward Social Security and medical programs that may not be around when I'm at the age where I may need them. If my money is going anywhere I want it to be somewhere I can benefit from seeing as it's my money and all.

The point is not everyone agrees with how their taxes are spent...this isn't anything new. While you want everyone to pay for scientific research I couldn't give a damn because the private contributions will vastly outweigh whatever the government will put into it anyway.

This is a government line we're talking about here. And the point still stands there is spending in several other scientific areas like nanotechnology which the government spends money on. From the beginning of the US government we have spent tax dollars on scientific progress in all realms where the private industry lacked or never picked up.

Who do you think is out money if stem cell research is a hit? All these people no longer needing pharmaceutical drugs or medical supplies. Who's out money? The private medical industry.

Obviously there is more money in the private arena, but research like this shouldn't be made in the name of profit and that's the bottom line.

If we can fund weapons research, oil drilling, nanotechnology, and space flight we can sure as fuck fund stem cell research. The only reason it is being veto'd is because of regressive religious conviction plain and simple.

[Gregorio]

You people bitching about it being a human life are using the "Life happens at conception" bullshit. No, it doesn't. When the fetus has feelings, limbs, a brain, and a heartbeat, I will agree with you it is a living thing. It is almost offensive that you people will deny others a medical life saver because it has the POSSIBILITY of being a living thing.

Ok let me start off by saying I don't oppose abortion...but when exactly does the fetus have feelings or consciousness? Define that moment and I think you'll end the discussion right here. What makes the fetus so different from 1 second to another that suddenly you'd classify it as life?

Second, fetus' don't have the POSSIBILITY of being living things...they ARE living things. Now if you want to classify it as a person is a different story, but just because the fetus can't say "ouch" doesn't make it any less living.

[MF Perm]

You people bitching about it being a human life are using the "Life happens at conception" bullshit. No, it doesn't. When the fetus has feelings, limbs, a brain, and a heartbeat, I will agree with you it is a living thing. It is almost offensive that you people will deny others a medical life saver because it has the POSSIBILITY of being a living thing.

Ok let me start off by saying I don't oppose abortion...but when [b]exactly[b] does the fetus have feelings or consciousness? Define that moment and I think you'll end the discussion right here. What makes the fetus so different from 1 second to another that suddenly you'd classify it as life?

Second, fetus' don't have the POSSIBILITY of being living things...they ARE living things. Now if you want to classify it as a person is a different story, but just because the fetus can't say "ouch" doesn't make it any less living.

I made a previous argument regarding necessary evil and sentient life versus non sentient life in this thread. We kill the flu virus so we don't get sick. We kill animals to survive.

Xavier, senoska, myself and a few others have pointed out several times that this line of embryos will be destroyed anyways, so why not use it in research to save lives?