That would make an interesting poll..."who is in favor of using embryonic stem cells for research, and who is also pro-life/pro-choice?" With four possible combinations as choices. Then it could be observed whether or not all individuals' beliefs do neccessitate support for each other. Even without interpretation, it would make a nice piece of statistical data.bassjones wrote:I'm opposed to both, but I also recognize the difference. There have been several abortion debates. This isn't one. It's an ethical issue, and I believe support for one all but necessitates support for the other, but they are still two separate issues and jumbling them together helps neither side of either argument.Grindspine wrote:Since when did this become about abortion instead of what to do with unused, frozen (not actively alive) stem cells for research?
Stem-Cell Research - Vetoed!
Moderators: MrSpall, bassjones, sevesd93, zenmandan
I 've see a lot of straw men get blown to pieces in this thread with amazing accuracy. Bassjones seems to have nailed it on the head, and nobody caught it: FEDERAL FUNDING for the research is what was voted down. Good old private enterprise is free to do all the research they want:
bassjones wrote: Scientists THINK they can find cures using what many millions of people consider unethical means. Yet, not one cure has come from any of this research so far. Meanwhile, cures are actually being found using adult stem cells for research, including cells from the eye, skin tissue, spinal chords, etc... And the most promising cell research is that taken from umbillical chord blood of BORN fetuses.
Also, not allowed is a bit of a misnomer. Scientists can research all they want, they can even harvest all the embryonic stem cells they want. They can't however get federal funding to do so. Nothing's been banned (I think it should be), it's just not being funded over ethical considerations.
"Yesterday Mr. Hall wrote that the printer's proof-reader was improving my punctuation for me, & I telegraphed orders to have him shot without giving him time to pray." -Mark Twain
"There is a level of cowardice lower than that of the conformist: the fashionable non-conformist."
Ayn Rand
". . .and the trees are all kept equal by hatchet, axe, and saw."
"There is a level of cowardice lower than that of the conformist: the fashionable non-conformist."
Ayn Rand
". . .and the trees are all kept equal by hatchet, axe, and saw."
Damned Libertarians don't want the government doing anything... 
"brad!
...your tunes and your playing sound really great... all the best to you and god bless-
adam nitti" www.myspace.com/adamnittimusic
www.bradjonesbass.com
http://groups.myspace.com/northeastindianabassplayers
www.myspace.com/bassjones
www.myspace.com/whitehotnoise
www.esession.com/bradjones - hire me for your session from anywhere in the world.
...your tunes and your playing sound really great... all the best to you and god bless-
adam nitti" www.myspace.com/adamnittimusic
www.bradjonesbass.com
http://groups.myspace.com/northeastindianabassplayers
www.myspace.com/bassjones
www.myspace.com/whitehotnoise
www.esession.com/bradjones - hire me for your session from anywhere in the world.
-
Grindspine
- RockStar
- Posts: 643
- Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 3:43 pm
Understandable...bassjones wrote:I'm opposed to both, but I also recognize the difference. There have been several abortion debates. This isn't one. It's an ethical issue, and I believe support for one all but necessitates support for the other, but they are still two separate issues and jumbling them together helps neither side of either argument.Grindspine wrote:Since when did this become about abortion instead of what to do with unused, frozen (not actively alive) stem cells for research?
So (separate from the abortion issue), if stem cells (talking general adult or umbillical stem cells, not fetal stem cells) are used for research, specifically regrowing tissue (as in skin or neuron grafts), is it an ethical issue to you?
Hahursey, that would make an interesting poll... It'd be nice to see what the case really is opposed to the assumption that one is necessarily linked to the other...
As far as federally funding research in general, I'm assuming that most research is done by a) pharmaceutical companies and b) universities. Will banning federal funding for that type of research keep places like IU's medical center from doing certain types of research (which would have had to have been reviewed by an ethics board in the first place before starting)?
-
poopstains
- SuperStar
- Posts: 392
- Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 8:01 pm
- Location: fort wayne
(i didn't read any of the post's above)
The way I look at is if abortion remains legal, and there are dead babies being thrown away or whatever it is they do, than at the least they should be put to some use, my only issue with a full on stem cell research grant is that it would end up giving an inscentive (horribly mispelled) to have an abortion, a tax rebate or a cool tote bag with the clinics logo.
The way I look at is if abortion remains legal, and there are dead babies being thrown away or whatever it is they do, than at the least they should be put to some use, my only issue with a full on stem cell research grant is that it would end up giving an inscentive (horribly mispelled) to have an abortion, a tax rebate or a cool tote bag with the clinics logo.