Debate and Discussion

Stem cell Research, Good or Bad?
Comicmasta at 5:58AM, July 26, 2006
(offline)
posts: 1,338
joined: 6-4-2006
Scientists have been taking the aborted baby embryo's and using there cells to cure dieses such as Alzheimers, Incase anyone doesn't know a stem cell in a cell that hasn't fully developed and copy's the cells around it, then turns into that cell.

This has been a controversy for years, and now bush and the governator(I'll be back…..wit weapons) are fighting over is stem cell research should be illegalized or may further continue.

Think of all the good stuff that may happen with it, cure diseases, save lives, Expand our reach on the cloning process. Would you kill an innocent unborn baby just so that you may live on, Or would die with the disease and save an innocent life, who knows that baby could be the next Jesus Christ/Doctor to find a cure for some disease/Or just some low life who sniffs crack in the streets.

Personally im just confused so ill ask you this, What is your opinion?
i have been brought back….The Boanitia..grrrrr…..Must find Super Jesus!!!!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:43AM
Ronson at 6:43AM, July 26, 2006
(online)
posts: 837
joined: 1-1-2006
Comicmasta
Scientists have been taking the aborted baby embryo's…

Wrong. Stem cells are fertilized eggs that HAVE NOT been implanted in the woman. The same process is used with “In Vitro” fertilization, where the egg is extracted from the woman and the sperm from the man and fertilization occurs “in a test tube” (probably not actually a test tube, but whatever). These fertilized cells - stem cells, or blasticist (sp?) embryos - are only about 100 cells and are barely visible to the human eye.

These are not aborted baby embryos. Also, the “In Vitro” process creates many of these stem cells with the hope that if they implant a bunch in the woman at least one will implant itself and result in a baby. Once they are successful, any remaining stem cells are either saved (frozen) or discarded (burned, I think).

About 80% of stem cells created naturally in a woman's body actually fail to implant themselves (because of poor timing or cell abnormalities) and are flushed away in the woman's cycle - with the woman having no idea that it happened.

… and using there cells to cure dieses such as Alzheimers, Incase anyone doesn't know a stem cell in a cell that hasn't fully developed and copy's the cells around it, then turns into that cell.

Right. Although there is no cure as of yet, just the potential for a cure.

This has been a controversy for years…

Wrong. Abortion has been a controversy, but Stem Cell research only began to be a controversy when anti-choice activists (Bush amongst them) got it into their head that stem cells were the same thing as fetuses. They're not. Note that neither Bush nor most other anti-choice activists are seeking to deny the right to perfrom “In Vitro” fertilization, which by its very definition requires the destruction of stem cells.

…and now bush and the governator(I'll be back…..wit weapons) are fighting over is stem cell research should be illegalized or may further continue.

Think of all the good stuff that may happen with it, cure diseases, save lives, Expand our reach on the cloning process. Would you kill an innocent unborn baby just so that you may live on, Or would die with the disease and save an innocent life, who knows that baby could be the next Jesus Christ/Doctor to find a cure for some disease/Or just some low life who sniffs crack in the streets.

Personally im just confused so ill ask you this, What is your opinion?

Well, like I said this isn't as difficult as it's being presented. It isn't a baby being sacrificed, it isn't even a fetus. It isn't even a viable embryo. It's a bundle of cells that will remain frozen or be thrown out. That's all.

80% of naturally formed stem cells don't become fetuses. Nearly 100% of the stem cells their talking about will be destroyed.

This is just politicians spinning the issue to the anti-choice wingnuts.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:10PM
Ronson at 8:07AM, July 26, 2006
(online)
posts: 837
joined: 1-1-2006
It's not abortion.

It's taking fertilized cells created in a lab and not putting them back into a woman's uterus.

Abortion is removing a ferilized embryo that has imbedded itself on the uterus wall.

The difference is simple to understand. Fertilized cells are created and destroyed all the time, naturally and in the lab.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:10PM
Mimarin at 8:22AM, July 26, 2006
(offline)
posts: 1,107
joined: 1-7-2006
Why are there so many paramilitary groups that randomly blow up things, but none that target christian fundamentalists that impede the progress of science?
Of course you will. All intelligent beings dream. Nobody knows why.

Also, tell random people they are awsome! it helps!
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:02PM
isukun at 9:06AM, July 26, 2006
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
now bush and the governator(I'll be back…..wit weapons) are fighting over is stem cell research should be illegalized or may further continue.

Bush isn't really fighting to ban stem cell research. There is far too much support in congress for that to even be an issue. The issue is whether the government should fund embryonic stem cell research. There are other sources for stem cells which Bush is in full support of and has funded in the past and scientists are still welcome to use embryonic stem cells in research, but they won't have the financial backing of the federal government.

I personally believe the research is important and the in vitro excess is a good source for the stem cells they need. I don't think Bush is really speaking for the majority in this case. I could see it being an issue if there were a lot of people who morally objected to stem cell research, but Bush makes it into more of an issue than it really is.

.: isukun :.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:03PM
Ronson at 1:10PM, July 27, 2006
(online)
posts: 837
joined: 1-1-2006
death_monk666
3)It is funding the government does not want to do.

We fund the oil business to find oil. We fund manufacturing companies to move out of our country. We fund R&D for weapons and disease creation. I think a bit of medical R&D is important.

4)Allows for cloning.

No it doesn't. This isn't a clone, it's a very group of fertilized cells.

5)In Vitro could be done. Then you could have sperm from a sperm bank and eggs from a donor. Combine them and bud*** the egg. Use that for a “free” embryo. Then take out some stem cells.

This is basically the same situation, though the only argument right now is with existing stem cells frozen already. Not the creation of additional ones.

Negative side:
1)It allows people to be property.*

No it doesn't. It allows the use of human tissue for experimentation and medical development.

2)“Morally wrong”.**

every time laws are based on “morality”, we end up with muddy rationalizations on exactly where the lines are drawn. Leave morality to religions and personal convictions. Make laws based on rationality and science.

Besides which, stem cells are going to either be thrown away or used to create medicine to save lives. Seems like a no-brainer even judged morally.

**-Who here would not sacrifice their own unborn child if it meant they got to live longer? Then you can have more children.

They aren't children. They don't really even have the potential to be children without a docter implanting them in a woman's uterus. Right now, they're a bunch of cells. That's it.

***-There is a book I read that the civilized people took eggs and sperm from the “slaves”. Then they heated the fertilized eggs to split into several dozen eggs of the same type. When they got eggs with desired traits, they took them and did not bud them. But no one knew of sex.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:10PM
Duck at 3:16PM, July 29, 2006
(offline)
posts: 110
joined: 1-22-2006
Ronson is like all over this, any point I could make he has.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:17PM
Mimarin at 3:28PM, July 29, 2006
(offline)
posts: 1,107
joined: 1-7-2006
Ronson seems like a well informed yet appropriatley skeptical individual, he should be our leader.
Of course you will. All intelligent beings dream. Nobody knows why.

Also, tell random people they are awsome! it helps!
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:02PM
Ronson at 6:23PM, July 30, 2006
(online)
posts: 837
joined: 1-1-2006
Thanks. But it isn't that hard to find these things out. The misinformation that the politicians are creating over this amazes me.

The pResident's spokesman, Tony Snowjob, went so far as to say the pResident thinks stem cell research is murder.

But then retracted it when it became obvious that if he really held that belief he'd have to do something about privately-funded stem cell research. But this isn't so because the pResident is on record encouraging private investment in it (which would mean he was encouraging murder).

It's another appeal to the Christian Right Wing Nuts on an issue they couldn't care less about.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:10PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved