Debate discussion

What are your views on it? Personally, I think it's a great idea. I mean the embryos that are,'t used are thrown away anyway, so why not use then for research. Also, is anyone here against giving you body to the science community if you die?

Many embryos are thrown out. I can't see why people would rather they be trashed then help people.

No, if the circumstances are right then I want all my viable organs donated. Like, say I died in a hospital and they could get them out quick. Otherwise, donated to science.

I believe that the embryos should not be thrown away, but should be used. So I do not support stem cell research or the throwing away of stem cells, I think those are both wrong.

Used for what? All the embryos that people have wanted to use as babies are used. You can't give people an embryo and tell them to fertilize it because they would say they want the embryo.

They should be fertilized in my opinion. But then again, I am against IVF too.

...
wow.
"hmmm... i wonder what we can do for stem cells?"
" I KNOW! LETS USE A DEAD PERSON!"
"YEAH!"
well, personaly, i think that abortions are wrong, so i really guess im against USING EMBRYOS for stemm cell research. i dont think stem cell research is wrong, just using embryos for said purpose is wrong. if they can find another way to get stem cells, then it would be ok with me.
like growing them, sort of like skin grafs but growing stem cells instead.

Liz wrote: "They should be fertilized in my opinion. But then again, I am against IVF too."

Fertalized for whom? The people who want babies have had them, FYI it's not that hard. And the people who can't have babies go to the place where the embryos are kept for them to use. But if not enough people want those embryos then what are we to do with them?

Cut down on the initial taking-out-of-mother's-body number and be more conservative with them.

But I also think that IVF is wrong in the first place, I think it is ludicrous to go to desperate measures to have a child genetically similar to you, when one could just adopt. There are so many children that need homes so I don't know why some need one with their same genes. Its ridiculous.

Ah, I don't believe we should limit. Because why not have the discarded embryos being out to work in order to save people's lives? They are just as good as dead than as never existing.

"I believe that the embryos should not be thrown away, but should be used. So I do not support stem cell research or the throwing away of stem cells, I think those are both wrong."

Contradictions. You have them.

"i dont think stem cell research is wrong, just using embryos for said purpose is wrong. if they can find another way to get stem cells, then it would be ok with me. "

The only way to get truly effective stem cells in from the embryos. They haven't decided what they are going to be, so the cells can become anything.

I'm gonna have to agree with Eric. I'm against abortion 100% and stem cell research, about 75%.
They have, I believe, tried this before and it did not work..?
Please, don't take my word on that. I need to do some research to find out if they did so. I'll get back to you all on that.

"They have, I believe, tried this before and it did not work..?"

Try what before?

Stem cell research good!

if your having an abortion at least allow that baby that you could not take care of help somethin else!!

Yes, rather then wasting it.

Lauren wrote: ""I believe that the embryos should not be thrown away, but should be used. So I do not support stem cell research or the throwing away of stem cells, I think those are both wrong."

Contradictions...."

Lauren, I meant being implanted and becoming babies.

On the other hand, you are completely wrong. Embryonic research is NOT the only way to gain stem cells. I have an idea! Maybe instead of killing embryos in the sake of research, which many believe is killing, why don't we just use UMBILICAL STEM CELLS! Pros; no killing, same thing as embryonic stem cells, Cons; NONE. It is ridiculous that so few people donate their babys' umbilical cords when lives can be saved by the stem cells in them.

I am totally against embryonic stem cell research, but totally for umbilical stem cell research.

Lauren wrote: ""They have, I believe, tried this before and it did not work..?"

Try what before? "

lol
"...Please, don't take my word on that..."

"UMBILICAL STEM CELLS! Pros; no killing, same thing as embryonic stem cells, Cons; NONE. It is ridiculous that so few people donate their babys' umbilical cords when lives can be saved by the stem cells in them."

Umbilical cord cells are limited to what they can produce. Many parents keep the blood for their families, and don't donate it. Millions of embryos are thrown out regularly. Why not take what ISN'T wanted instead of taking what people DO want to keep for themselves?

No! All embryos are limited to what they can produce too! Picture this:
Standard procedure for all families is to donate umbilical cords to science. Now, there is no longer the stem cell debate. Now, cancer patients can get cell transplants. Now, there is enough stem cell to go around. How can anyone have a problem with it? Now, prolifers have no issues with stem cell research. Everyone supports it, therefore more people donate and more recieve. Its great!

Umblical cells=Embryonic cells minus the killing of babies (depending on the perspective)

How can you have a problem with that, Lauren?

"No! All embryos are limited to what they can produce too!"

No, pure stem cells have no restrictions on what they can be. Freshman bio teaches that.

"Standard procedure for all families is to donate umbilical cords to science."

Most families keep the cells for themselves in blood bank type places.

"Now, there is enough stem cell to go around."

Umbilical cords are limited in what they can produce. They cannot become all types of cells.

"Umblical cells=Embryonic cells minus the killing of babies (depending on the perspective)"

An embryo =/= a fully grown baby, or organism for that matter.

If people could part with their cell blobs, it could work even better, seeing as iv produces tons of unused cell blobs every year.

cell blobs?

Eric▲ wrote: "Lauren wrote: ""They have, I believe, tried this before and it did not work..?"

Try what before? "

lol
"...Please, don't take my word on that...""

Thank you :P

http://www.stemcellnews.com/articles/...

http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/conten...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/ne...

From wikipedia:
After nearly ten years of research[14:], there are no approved treatments or human trials using embryonic stem cells. ES cells, being pluripotent cells, require specific signals for correct differentiation - if injected directly into another body, ES cells will differentiate into many different types of cells, causing a teratoma. Differentiating ES cells into usable cells while avoiding transplant rejection are just a few of the hurdles that embryonic stem cell researchers still face.[15:] Many nations currently have moratoria on either ES cell research or the production of new ES cell lines. Because of their combined abilities of unlimited expansion and pluripotency, embryonic stem cells remain a theoretically potential source for regenerative medicine and tissue replacement after injury or disease.

Rule #1 when debating: Do Not use wikipedia as a source

"Most families keep the cells for themselves in blood bank type places."

Yes, I know. My whole scenario was; what if everbody donated theirs instead of selfishly keeping it for themselves. Then, there would never be a shortage because evreyone will have donated their umbilical cord stem cells.

I believe, and many other prolifers agree with me, that an embryo, a fetus, and a baby all have life and should not be aborted, disposed of, or researched upon.

I don't see how you can object to umbilical stem cells. They do the same thing as embryonic and can be used in the same transplants, but without the cost of a life. Clearly, you do not believe fetuses or embryos have life, but 50% of the population does, so this way, we can use stem cells but half the population doesn't object.

Are you against using umbilical stem cells for some reason?

"Rule #2 when debating: if someone uses wiki as a source, find something to contradict them if you want, and use that to prove them wrong.

"what if everbody donated theirs instead of selfishly keeping it for themselves. Then, there would never be a shortage because evreyone will have donated their umbilical cord stem cells."

How is it selfish to keep something of yours for yourself in case you need it?

"researched upon."

The, all the research conducted to find the 8 signs of healthy baby that doctors use everywhere to save their lives should never have happened?

"Are you against using umbilical stem cells for some reason? "

They are limited to who they can be used for and what they can be used for. They are pluralpotent and not totipotent.

"Rule #2 when debating: if someone uses wiki as a source, find something to contradict them if you want, and use that to prove them wrong."
Really? Do you really need another thing to jump at me for? I happen to have double checked my resources thankyouverymuch. I think we disagree on enougha nd don't need ANY more conflict, eh?

Lauren wrote: ""Are you against using umbilical stem cells for some reason? "

They are limited to who they can be used for and what they can be used for. They are pluralpotent and not totipotent. "

Yes, that is right. But they also do not kill embryos and they do have the ability to be transplanted and save lives just like embryonic stem cells. They are often discarded, but it is the consensus that they are in no way human life. Embryos are heavily debated upon and many people believe they are living, therefore some believe using them for research is killing. Umbilical stem cells are limited, yes, but they do not kill. They are 100% birth byproduct and do not contain life.

Lauren wrote: ""researched upon."

The, all the research conducted to find the 8 signs of healthy baby that doctors use everywhere to save their lives should never have happened?"

Please explain. I cannot read this post.

Lauren wrote: ""Rule #2 when debating: if someone uses wiki as a source, find something to contradict them if you want, and use that to prove them wrong.

"what if everbody donated theirs instead of selfishly ke..."

What if you never need it and it never gets the chance to save a life? If everyone donated, there would not be this problem because there are fewer people who need them than there are people on the planet and if you had such a pool, it would be very easy to find a match. That way, if you needed a blood or cell transfusion/transplant, you could just use someone else's because there would be ample supply.

"believe, and many other prolifers agree with me, that an embryo, a fetus, and a baby all have life and should not be aborted, disposed of, or researched upon."

If babies were not researched upon, we would never notice certain signs that tell a baby is sick when they are first born.

Why are you pro-life?

"Abortion:
Hosea 9:11-16 Hosea prays for God’s intervention. “Ephraim shall bring forth his children to the murderer. Give them, 0 Lord: what wilt thou give? Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts. . .Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit: yea though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb.” Clearly Hosea desires that the people of Ephraim can no longer have children. God of course obeys by making all their unborn children miscarry. Is not terminating a pregnancy unnaturally “abortion”?
Numbers 31:17 (Moses) “Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every women that hath known man by lying with him.” In other words: women that might be pregnant, which clearly is abortion for the fetus.
Hosea 13:16 God promises to dash to pieces the infants of Samaria and the “their women with child shall be ripped up”. Once again this god kills the unborn, including their pregnant mothers.
2 Kings 15:16 God allows the pregnant women of Tappuah (aka Tiphsah) to be “ripped open”. And the Christians have the audacity to say god is pro-life. How and the hell is it that Christians can read passages where God allows pregnant women to be murdered, yet still claim abortion is wrong?

Infanticide:
1 Samuel 15:3 God commands the death of helpless "suckling" infants. This literally means that the children god killed were still nursing.
Psalms 135:8 & 136:10 Here god is praised for slaughtering little babies.
Psalms 137:9 Here god commands that infants should be “dashed upon the rocks”.

The murdering of children:
Leviticus 20:9 “For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.”
Judges 11:30-40 Jephthah killed his young daughter (his only child) by burning her alive as a burnt sacrifice to the lord for he commanded it.
Psalms 137:8-9 Prayer/song of vengeance “0 daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.”
2 Kings 6:28-29 “And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? And she answered, This woman said unto me, Give thy son, that we may eat him today, and we will eat my son tomorrow. So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him: and she hath hid her son.”
Deuteronomy 21:18-21 “If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.”
Judges 19:24-29 “Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing. But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go. Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man’s house where her lord was, till it was light. And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and her hands were upon the threshold. And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her up upon an ass, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place. And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel.” To put it very bluntly this poor, young lady was murdered by her mate for being raped.
Exodus 12:29 God killed, intentionally, every first-born child of every family in Egypt, simply because he was upset at the Pharaoh.
1 Samuel 15:11-18 God repents of having made Saul king since Saul refused to carry out God’s commandments (i.e., Saul refused to murder all the innocent women and children.) At least god realizes what an immoral, murderous pig he is on this one.
Isaiah 13:15-18 If God can find you, he will “thrust you through,” smash your children “to pieces” before your eyes, and rape your wife.
Jeremiah 19:7-9 God will make parents eat their own children, and friends eat each other.
Lamentations 2:20-22 God gets angry and mercilessly torments and kills everyone, young and old. He even causes women to eat their children.

Child abuse:

Genesis 22:9 & 10 “And they came to the place which God had told him of and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood. And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son.” It matters not that god let Abraham get out of murdering Isaac. To put a knife up to your son’s throat is child abuse.

I Kings 3:24-25 “And the king said, Bring me a sword. And they brought a sword before the king. And the king said, Divide the living child in two, and give half to the one, and half to the other." This test was of course given to see who the real mother of the child was. Christians view this king as a wise man. I look upon his suggestion with far more revulsion then I give accredit to Susan Smith.

Proverbs 13:24, 19:18, 22:15, 23:13-14 & 29:15 God commands repeatedly that you beat your children.

Matthew 19:29 If you really loved Jesus then he insists that you abandon your wife and children for him. Only that way will he allow you to go to heaven. (That is if you meet his other hefty requirements, don’t slip through the loopholes, and ignore the contradictions.)

Mark 7:9 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law.



In conclusion I shall end this list with a verse that should keep the pro lifers in check. It is Romans 13: 1-7

“Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which god has established. The authorities that exist have been established by god. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what god has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he shall commend you. For he is god’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is god’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. There fore it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.

This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are god’s servants, who give their full time to governing. Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes, if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.”

Clearly it is the job of Christians to obey the laws, and the laws of this country clearly state that abortion is legal. So too should Christians respect and honor that law. God commands them to NOT disobey, which entails attempting to get the law overturned. If god wanted abortion to be illegal he wouldn’t have appointed authorities to make it legal."

Thats ridiculous. I am pro life because I believe life starts at conception and abortion is murder. Need I say more?

The bible is lovely and all, but how do you know I heed it? You assumed I'm some Christian who believes everything the bible says. You are quite far from the mark. Especially the part about how we must obey laws. I am not going to go out and get an abortion because some blundering fools who landed a spot in the gov said its okay to do. I do not believe in abortion because I believe it is murder and not up to me to kill a baby living inside of me. I also believe adoption should be the only alternative for an unwanted baby.

Lauren wrote: ""believe, and many other prolifers agree with me, that an embryo, a fetus, and a baby all have life and should not be aborted, disposed of, or researched upon."

If babies were not researched upon,..."

You love getting me on technicalities, don't you? Yet you don't spend as much effort on answering my actual questions and the jist of what I'm saying. Example; wikipedia thing, now this.

Can we also get back to the stem cell topic?

I wasn't specifically replying to you, but to any fundies who might be here. It was a general post.

Well, obviously we won't agree. Is there another point to talk about?

I believe that there are those that convientiently ignore the fact that the stem cells scienists want to use are thrown out, never to be used for anything else. Look at it this way. You can either have your unformed babies lying in landfills, or you can support the research to look for cures to life-threatening diseases, therefore using lives to save lives. To me, it's win-win. Being a cancer survivor, it's doubly win-win.

I also don't see a reason to be against stem cell research

Yah, I mean you can donate bone marrow and umbilical stem cells which do the same thing, but aren't components of babies. :)

Which are not totiplural but simply multiplural, and therefore not as effective.

I don't with this at all. Its more of my upbringing coming into play but its wrong. Plus, what are they going to find? A cure to cancer? yeah like that exists...

Nothing is impossible.

Well when the cure to a simple virus like the common cold is found then I'll believe k?

But Kyle, they've found cures to many types of cancer and developed medications, vaccines, and successful ways to treat it. While some cancer cures will remain a mystery for another 500 years, many types of cancer are perfectly treatable and have a much lower death rate than they used to, all because we have worked toward a cure. In another century, will brain tumors be less deadly? Cervical cancer is, and so is skin cancer. I know several survivors of cervical cancer, prostate cancer, skin cancer, and breast cancer, all because of medical advances.

A cure to many types of cancer exists, and in time, many more types of cancer will be treatable and cured.

"I don't with this at all. Its more of my upbringing coming into play but its wrong. Plus, what are they going to find? A cure to cancer? yeah like that exists...
"

The cure for cancer it to prevent everyone with the cancer gene from passing it on. That would stop all genetic forms of cancer.

They have a cure for cervix cancer. A prevention shot.

"Well when the cure to a simple virus like the common cold is found then I'll believe k?
"

The point is, viruses aren't cured. That's not how it operates.

And stem cells aren't for cancer, they can re-grow lost organs. No more donors, no more lists. We can grow as many organs as we need.

Stem cel research will save thousands and thousands of lives. I agree 100 percent with lauren

it is something that needs to happen

There will never be a cure? What a simple, close-minded, negative attitude. There is an answer to everything if you research.