Time for a chill pill. Mothers and fathers predated lawyers by centuries (or more). It was LAWS that removed the sanctity we held for "innocent" human life. Roe VS Wade paved this road with their good intentions. Try reading some real history and sociology books. Stunt
On 4/9/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I believe life begins the moment you can sight it in a 4 power rifle scope. How can you tell a sperm and an egg joined? Why are men who father children called dads by lawyers? Why are women that give birth called mom's by lawyers? Are babies that develope from IVF damned by god? Why do people have to interpret the bible after it has been rewritten in english? Was it done wrong? Does god hate people in wheelchairs? Does god hate gays? If God hates rich people then why do Americans keep electing them. I think everyone just picks the part of religion they like and ignores the rest. If god even gave mankind a second thought he wouldn't have allowed nuclear bombs to work. The real problem with stem cell research is if it is allowed then any woman that wants IVF will get it paid for by the gov't. pretty soon men are not needed. Most men are bad fathers and woman can do any thing men can when it comes to work. A 13yld boy with a cup could provide enough sperm for the next 20 years. Stem cell research is the next step toward a society that doesn't need men! Lets face it guys, I'm a quad and women say I'm more fun than most guys. We are being phased out. Its all a big plot by rosie odonnell so oprah can run the world. john -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] Sent: Sun, 8 Apr 2007 3:02 PM Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] Six Stem Cell Facts Angie, I do respect your opinion, even if I don't agree with it. You at least state that you define "a life" as having a consciousness. I am not aware if an 8 month old fetus has a consciousness or not but I would consider that stage of development a life. That is why I define a human life from the point of conception, joining of a egg and sperm. You wonder why you shouldn't have the option to use embryos for research just because you don't consider it a life? You don't see a problem with the premise of your question? You don't consider it a life so why should anyone prevent you from taking it to better your life. At 11:07 AM 4/8/2007, Angie Novak wrote: Everyone is entitled to their opinion, of course. But look at some of the people around, can we really say that all human life is precious? I can't. There are just some people living their lives out there walking around and breathing that don't deserve to be. However, these are people, not just 50-150 cells that don't have a consciousness, what I consider life. And these 50-150 cells are just going to be destroyed anyway. Why not let them serve a purpose. Shouldn't those of us who want a cure to be found, including using embryonic stem cell research, be able to have that option? If you don't want to be treated, potentially cured and able-bodied again someday from what this research finds, just don't accept that treatment. Stay trapped in your body if you'd like. But don't take that chance for living again, really living, away from those of us who want a shot at it. I would gladly donate my eggs to be fertilized via in vitro, solely for the purpose of being used for embryonic stem cell research. CURE not care- Angie Novak Dan T <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: Human life is sacred and an embryo is the initial stage of life. I would like to be up and around and Independent but not at the sacrifice of another human life. Dan T. Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yes, yes, yes! We must not destroy all those useless fertilized eggs. We should let them perish on their own and then we should have an elaborate funeral and bury them in a tiny little plot of earth. AND we must not allow abortion at ANY cost. Thank you Jesus! Hallelujah! Dan, who always gives great credence to anything authored by a reverend. At 06:15 PM 4/7/2007 -0700, Jim Lubin said something that elicited my response: SIX STEM CELL FACTS The public discussion of human embryo research has too often lacked intellectual honesty, which has only compounded the confusion of an issue of great scientific and moral complexity, say Robert P. George professor of jurisprudence at Princeton University and a member of the President's Council on Bioethics and Rev. Thomas V. Berg, executive director of the Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person. Consequently, there are certain facts on which people on either side of the moral debate should be able to agree, say George and Berg. For example: There is no "ban" on human embryonic stem cell (ESC) research in the United States; the federal government has funded such research to the tune of $130 million dollars since 2001, and the United States continues to be the international leader in the field. We are a long way away from therapies derived from embryonic stem cells; many leading stem cell researchers have echoed the fact that there may be no breakthrough any time soon. Standard embryology texts insist that from the zygote (single-cell embryo) stage forward there exists a new living member of the species homo sapiens that has the active potential to develop by an internally directed process towards maturity. Also: There are non-controversial alternatives worth exploring; such as the reprogramming of ordinary somatic (body) cells, the derivation of stem cells from amniotic fluid, and (assuming that it can be shown that the product is not an embryo), altered nuclear transfer. Concerns about embryo destruction are not only religious; but merely a healthy respect for the human capacity for doing evil in pursuit of the good. The search for cures is not the only motive behind ESC research,; many scientists are interested only in enhancing basic scientific knowledge of such things as cell signaling, tissue growth and early human development. Source: Robert P. George and Thomas V. Berg, "Six Stem Cell Facts," Wall Street Journal, March 14, 2007. For text: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117384191108736444.html The public discussion of human embryo research has too often lacked intellectual honesty, which has only compounded the confusion of an issue of great scientific and moral complexity, say Robert P. George professor of jurisprudence at Princeton University and a member of the President's Council on Bioethics and Rev. Thomas V. Berg, executive director of the Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person. Consequently, there are certain facts on which people on either side of the moral debate should be able to agree, say George and Berg. For example: There is no "ban" on human embryonic stem cell (ESC) research in the United States; the federal government has funded such research to the tune of $130 million dollars since 2001, and the United States continues to be the international leader in the field. We are a long way away from therapies derived from embryonic stem cells; many leading stem cell researchers have echoed the fact that there may be no breakthrough any time soon. Standard embryology texts insist that from the zygote (single-cell embryo) stage forward there exists a new living member of the species homo sapiens that has the active potential to develop by an internally directed process towards maturity. Also: There are non-controversial alternatives worth exploring; such as the reprogramming of ordinary somatic (body) cells, the derivation of stem cells from amniotic fluid, and (assuming that it can be shown that the product is not an embryo), altered nuclear transfer. Concerns about embryo destruction are not only religious; but merely a healthy respect for the human capacity for doing evil in pursuit of the good. The search for cures is not the only motive behind ESC research,; many scientists are interested only in enhancing basic scientific knowledge of such things as cell signaling, tissue growth and early human development. Source: Robert P. George and Thomas V. Berg, "Six Stem Cell Facts," Wall Street Journal, March 14, 2007. For text: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117384191108736444.html Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile and always stay connected to friends. ---- Jim Lubin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://makoa.org/jim disAbility Resources: http://www.makoa.org ________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.
