toldailytopic: Do you support embryonic stem cell research?

rexlunae

New member
Wrong. Again, it is about the same as a serial killer harvesting and selling body parts.

It's not.

If you lived in Germany in 1940, you'd have turned a blind eye then too?

Most Germans didn't know until they were taken to the liberated camps and shown. You seem to be intent on showing the wrong pictures. That tactic will backfire.

When does it become wrong?

When it becomes something entirely other than what it is.
 

Lon

Well-known member
Such as when you're destroying an embryo that never would have developed into a person.
Hypothetically, okay. But what is the reality (I don't really know of the hypothetical potentiality but might be okay with it, I just don't think that line wouldn't be abused)?
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
What we're talking about looks a lot more like this:

PorcineBlastocyst.jpg
Irrelevant. A person is a person, no matter how small or how they look.
 

bybee

New member
Vegas, you cannot confuse a blastocyst and a human being. Sorry, but it can't be done. And if this kind of madness perpetuates suffering all in the name of ignorance done to assuage a misguided conscience, you have my sympathy.

Just because a thing can be done doesn't mean it is right to do it.
Their are other viable options available to science.
The possibilities of experimenting with fertilized eggs are monstrous.
Consider "Dr. Moreau".
In the laboratory scientists could do anything they wish with fertilized embryos.
A fertilized embryo is an incipient human being. If it does not have the right to protection then none of us have that right.
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Just because a thing can be done doesn't mean it is right to do it.
Their are other viable options available to science.
The possibilities of experimenting with fertilized eggs are monstrous.
Consider "Dr. Moreau".
In the laboratory scientists could do anything they wish with fertilized embryos.
A fertilized embryo is an incipient human being. If it does not have the right to protection then none of us have that right.

There is no consciousness, no person. Barely even the hint of a person. We're talking about 100 cells here, bybee. Do you even understand what the world a blastocyst is?

This kind of fanaticism and madness at the expense of alleviating suffering is probably the starkest example of full-blown religious insanity.
 

bybee

New member
There is no consciousness, no person. Barely even the hint of a person. We're talking about 100 cells here, bybee. Do you even understand what the world a blastocyst is?

This kind of fanaticism and madness at the expense of alleviating suffering is probably the starkest example of full-blown religious insanity.

I disagree. To allow scientists a free hand with that which is the beginning of all life is insanity. How many of those blastocycsts are being brought further along developmentally in their petri dishes, the place they must call home?
There are other avenues available.
It is a moral bottom line and I won't cross it.
 

The Horn

BANNED
Banned
Stem cells are POTENTIAL life . That's all . A cell is no more a "person" than an acorn is a tree, or a couple of nuts and bolts are an automobile .
To demand that scientists and others be denied the right to use them in research and experiments which could possibly be highly beneficial to mankind is not only idiotic but insane .
Pure obscurantism .
 

bybee

New member
Stem cells are POTENTIAL life . That's all . A cell is no more a "person" than an acorn is a tree, or a couple of nuts and bolts are an automobile .
To demand that scientists and others be denied the right to use them in research and experiments which could possibly be highly beneficial to mankind is not only idiotic but insane .
Pure obscurantism .

Stem cells may be recovered from other sources.
Either there are moral underpinnings to our decisions or not.
I won't purchase my health or the health of a loved one at the expense of a viable embryo. This is no easy decision.
But, I am called to protect these the least able, most vulnerable beginnings of human life.
 

Dogrek

New member
Not an easy question, but in my opinion the spirit or soul does not exist or begin to function without the capability to make a decision... and that can be primal (voluntary muscle movement or primal brain survival thinking, i.e. cold, hunger, etc. vs. involuntary reflex) or conscious.

Does that exist in a embryo or fetus? At what point in development does that decision-making capability come into existence?

My own thinking is that there is no existence from a spiritual perspective until that moment. Can a stem cell feel and react to pain (primal thinking, decision-making... "must move because there is pain")? Can an embryo? At what point does the developing fetus have this brain function?

Every animal has this point in development. There is a reason God constructed the brain as it is, it is His tool and it is meant to begin functioning in this way, at some certain moment. I think that's where life actually begins, spiritually.
 
Last edited:
Top