I simplify the moral question easily by asking myself, is there a moral reason not to use tissue from a dying "human"? We do transplants and it is never questioned. On many death penalty cases the person to die is allowed to offer organs to be donated. A baby born with no brain donates heart and lungs to one child, kidneys to two other children, liver to another abnd pancrease to still another and finally the corneas were taken. Donating tissue is a good thing?
Suddenly, out of the right comes the fundamentalists who suggest that taking tissues that would be destroyed is unholy and immoral because these are babies we are killing. An embryo has no brain, no organs, and if it weren't for the skilled doctors, nobody could prove these were stem cells.
Does any of these folks want to lend a womb for the embryos? No. Anyone want to cleanup the lab or baptize the embryos? No. Are the embryos a result of abortion? No.
Are we treating these embryonic cells with respect as we wash them down the sink? Not at all.
If we use these tissues to improve the lives of the living, are we not giving the cells life. Have we not afforded these cells an amount of respect they would have otherwise been denied? Yes. We do allmost all of us respect and praise those that give of themselves for the benefit of others? Yes? 
We are being told this misguided rag of lies by people that then turn around and talk about giving being a wonderful thing. Explain why these embryos, that will otherwise be destroyed, can not be allowed the one christian act that they can do, that is "give"?
 
Refusing to support Stem cell research on religous grounds is hypocrytical for Christians. Therefore, typical of our president.
 
john 
 
In a message dated 7/21/2006 4:10:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The Stem Cell "Dilema"
In my opinion, the deeper issue requires an insight into how an "Inch" keeps turning into the horror mile.
Org "Roe vs Wade" was nothing more than lifting the restriction on abortion during the 1st tri-mester That inch was twisted into a "Constitutional Right" to the point of argueing for sucking the brains out of the skull just before birth. Approx 47,000,000 abortions have been committed, and a good portion of those were AFTER that 1st tri-mester.
Org "Child Abuse" laws were about "real" abuse, now they've been taken so far as to punish parents who "ground" their brats, after every other form of "attitude adjustment" has been declared "child Abuse". Since mom can't wash out the mouth of her brat, society now is forced to endurelistening to teenagers AND CHILDREN who could make a sailor blush.
There is no "Seperation of Church and State" clause in the 1st Amendment, however the part of "prohibiting free exercise thereof" is totaly ignored.
Now its been twisted into prevention of "exercise thereof", declaring a public place can't allow it.
Our modern "Indoctrination Centers" aka "Public Schools" have robbed an entire generation of the truth in favor of "Political Correctness". So a whole generation can't see how wrong those decisions are.
For this reason, too many people don't have the knowledge required to see through sound bite news and political issues.
Remember, the USA wouldn't exist w/o "Christianity", as "FREEDOM" in itself is derived from "Freedom of Choice", and our "Bill of Rights" got their seeds from such Christian philosophies including "Love thy Neighbor".
Check for yourself at
http://wwweadshome.com/QuotesoftheFounders.htm
Now "Organized Religion" is a man made Idea, and that is a whole can of worms which divides and seperates instead of just following the basic principles.
For that reason I consider myself a Christian, but I don't believe in organized religion.
But I do see the possibility for abuse if the "Inch" is given regarding embryoninic research.
This is based on the previous abuses, not my religious views.
Today "disgaurded fetuses"  tomorrow it could be  embryo's  created just for harvesting.
Believe me, THAT is a real moral dilema. One where human life has no value.
Stunt

Reply via email to