Embryonic Stem-Cell Research

[FalseSyllogism]

By the way, there are more than 70 illnesses/diseases which are currently being treated by stem-cells harvested from non-embryonic sources. There is ZERO need for embryonic stem cells. We need to focus our attention on funding research to develop other ways (such as through umbilical chords, bone marrow and adult stem cells) so that we can improve life without having to destroy life in the process.

What about in vitro fertilization for women who are infertile? During the process of in vitro fertilization, 6+ zygotes are injected into the woman and the majority of those zygotes end up dying. If you don't support embryonic stem cell research, then you should also be opposed to in vitro fertilization.

[Tubal-Cain]

Earlier on in this thread someone made the comparison to your thinking and the Nazi's. I know you didn't see the connection, but it is right here in this statement.

One can make a "comparison" between anyone and the Nazis or some other grossly immoral person/people. For example, you appear to think that God gets to say who is deserving of moral consideration and who is not. I could compare this to the thinking of Muslim terrorists who also receive their morality from what they think God says. In both cases the comparisons are unproductive as they ignore the vast differences between me and the Nazis and you and Muslim terrorists.

Your position is that the collective gets to decide when a human deserves moral consideration.

If morality is something reasonable and rational then we should be able to talk about it without resorting to God. If it is unreasonable then we might as well do away with it. That's really at the heart of what I'm saying. The fact is that the Bible does not mention embryos and all attempts to use the Bible in this debate are based on personal interpretations. I propose we try to reason it out without contorting Bible verses. Moreover, in a world with countless religious beliefs it make sense to use secular reasoning that we can all agree on and not on religious beliefs.

That is exactly what the Nazi's did. As a collective they decided which humans received moral consideration and which did not. Now you have placed the "mark" at a level which you think is reasonable, but so did the Nazi's. When human value can be measured by some one or some collective we set ourselves on a path of inevitable evil. It is absolutely imperative that all human life be treated as precious, God made, and God owned. We as humans can never determine the moral value of another human. To do so in and of itself is an act of evil. You nor any collective ever have that right.

Do you oppose all killing? If not, then you too have placed a moral value on people and have decided when they can be killed and when they can't. If you do oppose all killing then you have no problem letting tyrants terrorize the earth and implicitly place moral value on the tyrant's victims as not worth standing up for. The Bible does not give us moral advice for every single situation that arises, we are left to reason it out. All of us, not just me, place a "mark" on people and make moral decisions.

[Tubal-Cain]

But doesn

[Tubal-Cain]

Surely you don

[CaritateDei]

By the way, there are more than 70 illnesses/diseases which are currently being treated by stem-cells harvested from non-embryonic sources. There is ZERO need for embryonic stem cells. We need to focus our attention on funding research to develop other ways (such as through umbilical chords, bone marrow and adult stem cells) so that we can improve life without having to destroy life in the process.

What about in vitro fertilization for women who are infertile? During the process of in vitro fertilization, 6+ zygotes are injected into the woman and the majority of those zygotes end up dying. If you don't support embryonic stem cell research, then you should also be opposed to in vitro fertilization.

I am opposed to that as well.

[Hypathia]

I see a lot of "opinions" here minus the many verses in the BIBLE that talk about the very issue of "life" and the "soul".

The Bible says:

1) conception

2) womb

3) blood

4) breath

Only one is involved in embryonic-stem-cell research and that one takes place in a petrie dish; no pregnancy; no baby.

I think you guys see the "error" of your argument but you've been "conditioned" by those in leadership to ignore the bible in favor of the "pet political agenda" of these handful of leaders who have way too much power and influence among the flock; yet these same wolves in sheep's clothing call for no ban on invitro-fertilization. Is it because the flock will stop giving $$$ if their own toes get stepped on [since many of those who oppose embryonic stem-cell research have no problem getting invitro when God gives THEM a barren womb?] The hypocrisy, as always just astounds me.

Let's try again:

Conception

(I did a

[CaritateDei]

I see a lot of "opinions" here minus the many verses in the BIBLE that talk about the very issue of "life" and the "soul".

The Bible says:

1) conception

2) womb

3) blood

4) breath

Only one is involved in embryonic-stem-cell research and that one takes place in a petrie dish; no pregnancy; no baby.

I think you guys see the "error" of your argument but you've been "conditioned" by those in leadership to ignore the bible in favor of the "pet political agenda" of these handful of leaders who have way too much power and influence among the flock; yet these same wolves in sheep's clothing call for no ban on invitro-fertilization. Is it because the flock will stop giving $$$ if their own toes get stepped on [since many of those who oppose embryonic stem-cell research have no problem getting invitro when God gives THEM a barren womb?] The hypocrisy, as always just astounds me.

Let's try again:

Conception

(I did a

[Hypathia]

I see a lot of "opinions" here minus the many verses in the BIBLE that talk about the very issue of "life" and the "soul".

The Bible says:

1) conception

2) womb

3) blood

4) breath

Only one is involved in embryonic-stem-cell research and that one takes place in a petrie dish; no pregnancy; no baby.

I think you guys see the "error" of your argument but you've been "conditioned" by those in leadership to ignore the bible in favor of the "pet political agenda" of these handful of leaders who have way too much power and influence among the flock; yet these same wolves in sheep's clothing call for no ban on invitro-fertilization. Is it because the flock will stop giving $$$ if their own toes get stepped on [since many of those who oppose embryonic stem-cell research have no problem getting invitro when God gives THEM a barren womb?] The hypocrisy, as always just astounds me.

Let's try again:

Conception

(I did a

[apothanein kerdos]

In YOUR opinion. Others such as myself find it morally bankrupt not to pursue this research with the left-over MICROSCOPIC embryos that are already created and being destroyed now. Those who oppose, imo, do not value human-life at all; instead they value ideology over human life. You don't need a microscope to see children and adults dying in hospitals and at home across this country...or the ones who are suffering; children and adults who have completed the journey to personhood but whose very lives are devalued by those who stand in the way of possible cures.

Emotional appeal = logical fallacy.

The size of these little humans doesn't matter. They are still human.

[Hypathia]

In YOUR opinion. Others such as myself find it morally bankrupt not to pursue this research with the left-over MICROSCOPIC embryos that are already created and being destroyed now. Those who oppose, imo, do not value human-life at all; instead they value ideology over human life. You don't need a microscope to see children and adults dying in hospitals and at home across this country...or the ones who are suffering; children and adults who have completed the journey to personhood but whose very lives are devalued by those who stand in the way of possible cures.

Emotional appeal = logical fallacy.

The size of these little humans doesn't matter. They are still human.

The overwhelming number of verses on the subject disagree with you. Those who oppose also use emotional appeals for "potential life"; that which feels no emotion; that which knows nothing. The embryos in question have no womb, no blood, and no breath which are clear biblical components for human life. Your empathy is misplaced both biblically and ethically. Your emotion; your empathy, should be with those who do live but could die; those who suffer because they do feel emotion and pain. It's cruel and inhumane to devalue these REAL people in favor of idealogy that doesn't even line up with the scriptures themselves.