Well Hub, you said that the entire reason why you were against embryonic stem cell research was that it would increase abortions. Now you know that it won't for many reasons.

That said, are you pro stem cell all the way now?

And in deciding on IVF, it's purpose is to create life so you should be happy there...

quote:

Originally posted by CelticNewAger:

quote:

How very wrong you are. Faith lets one see so much more.

If 95% of the country believe something, it doesn't matter why they think that, it just matters that the people have decided. That's the constitution.

Common sense has a lot to do with faith.

See more of nothing, really.

So, if the US believed in, say, going to Africa and bombing it atomically, it would be correct, because it doesn't matter why?

Common sense has much to do with faith because you loose your common sense.

No. If the US believed in going to Africa and bombing it, it wouldn't be right, but I'm sorry. That's the way our constitution is set up...so tough luck.

You don't lose your common sense when you have faith. Neither of us have an argument that the other takes as legitimate about faith/common sense, so let's just drop that. We're not getting anywhere. Both of us are just stating our opinion over and over again.

quote:

Common sense has a lot to do with faith.

I agree.

quote:

How very wrong you are. Faith lets one see so much more.

If 95% of the country believe something, it doesn't matter why they think that, it just matters that the people have decided. That's the constitution.

Common sense has a lot to do with faith.

See more of nothing, really.

So, if the US believed in, say, going to Africa and bombing it atomically, it would be correct, because it doesn't matter why?

Common sense has much to do with faith because you loose your common sense.

quote:

Originally posted by yogore:

quote:

. If it doesn't have sperm, how does it do any good? If it's just ovum, wouldn't it just be...ovum and not help us at all?

Donated eggs and donated sperm, obviously.

Liberal is right. Thanks. I didn't feel like explaining it out.

And have you talked with your siblings about all their knowledge on stemcell research? I doubt it's something they'd just tell you. "Oh guess what, stem cell research doesn't use aborted fetuses."

Being the geeky family that we are, things like stem cell research are dinner-table conversations.

I haven't actually decided on vitro fertilization yet. I'm currently weighing facts and values about it. Right now, I'm on a depends. Depends on the circumstances.

quote:

. If it doesn't have sperm, how does it do any good? If it's just ovum, wouldn't it just be...ovum and not help us at all?

Donated eggs and donated sperm, obviously.

Liberal is right. Thanks. I didn't feel like explaining it out.

And have you talked with your siblings about all their knowledge on stemcell research? I doubt it's something they'd just tell you. "Oh guess what, stem cell research doesn't use aborted fetuses."

Okay, this is my new information.

Apparently the embryos for stem cell research are taken from in vitro fertalization clinics. As you probably know, that's taking a donor sperm and donor egg from outside the body, and mating them in the lab. Then they let them grow to a small defined group of cells and transplant them back into the recipient's womb.

It seems that there are a lot of extra embryos that are discarded form this process all the time. This is where stem cell researchers are getting their embryos, not from abortions at all. Also, in the lab, one embryo can be split to make two functioning embryos and etc. to make infinite stem cell canidates- kind of like man made mitosis. So it's not as if stem cell would create a new demand for the in vitro fertalization process, even.

Now the question is- are you against in vitro fertalization too?


Again, this is what I have briefly researched. Correct me Yogore if I have it wrong. It is my fault, Hub, for not being aware sooner. Could have spared us all the debate, but nay, this was more fun.

quote:

Originally posted by yogore:
They don't need any more embryos. Stem stell researchers never bought aborted fetuses. They already have all of the emryos they needed. They never took embryos from becoming babies. We went over this in my bio class. They were all donated eggs that were not being used and would have gone to waste because they were not fertalized beforehand. They never took an embryo that was being aborted. That's just misinformation.

Then how are they rich? I don't get this. If it doesn't have sperm, how does it do any good? If it's just ovum, wouldn't it just be...ovum and not help us at all?

Okay, my sister has never told me this and she's almost ready to graduate with a biology degree. My brother hasn't told me anything about this, and he's going to graduate next December with a degree in bio-chemistry. You would think they'd cover that in those degrees.

(For info, yes my sister is going to a Mormon college, BYU. However, my brother's going to the University of Washington, which is greatly commended for its Med School. Wouldn't they know?)

quote:

Originally posted by CelticNewAger:

quote:

f most everyone in the country believes it to be so, yes they can. If decisions can't be made on faith, it follows that they can't be made on the lack thereof, so what on earth are you going to make them with?

Yeah, 95% of the country. And it doesn't.

Decisions will be made on common sense instead of faith. Faith makes one blind.

How very wrong you are. Faith lets one see so much more.

If 95% of the country believe something, it doesn't matter why they think that, it just matters that the people have decided. That's the constitution.

Common sense has a lot to do with faith.

quote:

Originally posted by clpo13:
I was thinking about this whole one life for many thing and it occurred to me that I could provide an argument even hubbabaloo would appreciate.

Jesus allegedly died on the cross to give the rest of the world their lives. One for many. He sacrificed his life in exchange for the lives of millions. So are you calling Jesus barbaric?

He volunteered. It's not the same thing, but thanks for trying to convince me by playing to my beliefs. I find that refreshing, rather than people trying to convince me to change my beliefs so that I think their way. That was badly stated on my part, so I doubt if you have a clue what I'm saying.

I was thinking about this whole one life for many thing and it occurred to me that I could provide an argument even hubbabaloo would appreciate.

Jesus allegedly died on the cross to give the rest of the world their lives. One for many. He sacrificed his life in exchange for the lives of millions. So are you calling Jesus barbaric?

quote:

f most everyone in the country believes it to be so, yes they can. If decisions can't be made on faith, it follows that they can't be made on the lack thereof, so what on earth are you going to make them with?

Yeah, 95% of the country. And it doesn't.

Decisions will be made on common sense instead of faith. Faith makes one blind.

oh really hmm thanks for pointing that out yogore.

They don't need any more embryos. Stem stell researchers never bought aborted fetuses. They already have all of the emryos they needed. They never took embryos from becoming babies. We went over this in my bio class. They were all donated eggs that were not being used and would have gone to waste because they were not fertalized beforehand. They never took an embryo that was being aborted. That's just misinformation.

quote:

Originally posted by ampmaster:
huh take a life to make some one living life better kinda like cannabalism some one dies so you survive

Exactly what I've been saying.

quote:

Originally posted by liberalhugger:

quote:

Originally posted by hubbabaloo:
Right now, there's nothing really FOR abortion. With stem cell, people who can't make up their minds will think of it as a plus to that, and being against abortion, that's a big loss in my mind to the human race.

liberalhugger, there are prostitutes, so if they did pay, wouldn't it be the exact same thing? Money for something that sane people wouldn't do for money?

Thank you for explaining that prostitutes exist. Even if (and it won't happen because I am sure that it would be ruled unethical as we both agree) stem cell centers offered money for aborted fetuses...

A. Money for sex is completely different than money for fetuses. Sex is fun, abortions are not. Enough said.

B. Stem cell clinics wouldn't ever have enough extra money to pay for individual fetuses. Even in the most unrealistic circumstances, the ammount would be a very minimal incentive or, as I have said, the abortion would cost more in the first place.

I can't even understand your last disjointed sentence, what point were you trying to make?

There are not a whole lot of "undecided"s on abortion- people are either for it or against it; I have never encountered a person saying "Gee, I really can't make up my mind..."


The validity (or lack thereof) of your arguement is based on unprobable assumptions, poor comparrisons, and pacifism gone distressingly awry.

I'm just really torn about stem cell, so my arguments are a little stupid, because I'm half arguing with myself at the same time, so bear with me. I'm really thinking it's not a good idea, but another side of me's saying why not.

I met an undecided on abortion. She was a pregnant teen. Some friends and family thought she should get an abortion...others thought not.

huh take a life to make some one living life better kinda like cannabalism some one dies so you survive

quote:

Originally posted by hubbabaloo:
Right now, there's nothing really FOR abortion. With stem cell, people who can't make up their minds will think of it as a plus to that, and being against abortion, that's a big loss in my mind to the human race.

liberalhugger, there are prostitutes, so if they did pay, wouldn't it be the exact same thing? Money for something that sane people wouldn't do for money?

Thank you for explaining that prostitutes exist. Even if (and it won't happen because I am sure that it would be ruled unethical as we both agree) stem cell centers offered money for aborted fetuses...

A. Money for sex is completely different than money for fetuses. Sex is fun, abortions are not. Enough said.

B. Stem cell clinics wouldn't ever have enough extra money to pay for individual fetuses. Even in the most unrealistic circumstances, the ammount would be a very minimal incentive or, as I have said, the abortion would cost more in the first place.

I can't even understand your last disjointed sentence, what point were you trying to make?

There are not a whole lot of "undecided"s on abortion- people are either for it or against it; I have never encountered a person saying "Gee, I really can't make up my mind..."


The validity (or lack thereof) of your arguement is based on unprobable assumptions, poor comparrisons, and pacifism gone distressingly awry.

Right now, there's nothing really FOR abortion. With stem cell, people who can't make up their minds will think of it as a plus to that, and being against abortion, that's a big loss in my mind to the human race.

liberalhugger, there are prostitutes, so if they did pay, wouldn't it be the exact same thing? Money for something that sane people wouldn't do for money?

quote:

Go ahead and experiment with the ones you have, but you'll need more, sooner or later, and that will only encourage abortion, which I believe to be murder.

As long as the stem cell clinics don't pay a great reward for aborted fetuses, (and that seems highly unlikely; it would probably be a donation based system) I don't see stem-cell encouraging abortion.

Even so, I really can't imagine that many people getting pregnant and having abortions for cash. Besides pregnancy and abortion being physically and emotionally taxing, abortions cost money themselves.

So then, what is your rationale for stem-cell allegedly causing more abortions?