Letter to the Pres, from Bob, the stem cell

[Downthestretch55]

The president calls an embryonic cell "human life". He holds the destruction of human life as immoral.
OK, not to call attention to the capital punishments he authorized in Texas, not the 3534 American military lives that have been sacrificed in the invasion and occupation of a country he decided to invade, nor the countless people that have died in their homeland, perhaps one of his supporters might be able to explain this for me.
If an embryo is going to be discarded because it is no longer viable, and we're talking many thousands regarding this, what exactly is the difference if the same embryo is used to find and expand remedies that will sustain life?
OK...you might say that the president regards stage eight mitosis embryos
as "human life". I don't. And though I know that his pandering to some "religious" constitancies gains support for his "moral cause", frankly,
I don't see the logic.
Exactly what "life" is important to the president and his supporters?
The embryos that will be medical waste anyway, or the Iraqi children that have been killed by the actions of the invading military?
Oh..here's Bob's letter:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/ope...tter_to_pr.htm

[GenuineRisk]

I've always thought if these pro-lifers were actually consistent, they'd be protesting outside fertility clinics as well as abortion clinics, seeing as how thousands and thousands of embryos are created and then destroyed.

Other than Bush never ever being wrong about anything, I can't understand the reasoning behind banning using these embryos- they're going to be discarded anyway!

Or else be consistent and ban fertility clinics and tell women and men who can't conceive that clearly God didn't want them to have children so they should suck it up and accept it.

Excerpt from the forthcoming: "A Tragic Legacy: How a Good Vs. Evil Mentality Destroyed the Bush Presidency:"

http://salon.com/books/feature/2007/06/20/greenwald/

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

I've always thought if these pro-lifers were actually consistent, they'd be protesting outside fertility clinics as well as abortion clinics, seeing as how thousands and thousands of embryos are created and then destroyed.

Other than Bush never ever being wrong about anything, I can't understand the reasoning behind banning using these embryos- they're going to be discarded anyway!

Or else be consistent and ban fertility clinics and tell women and men who can't conceive that clearly God didn't want them to have children so they should suck it up and accept it.

Excerpt from the forthcoming: "A Tragic Legacy: How a Good Vs. Evil Mentality Destroyed the Bush Presidency:"

http://salon.com/books/feature/2007/06/20/greenwald/

Well, I hate being called "pro-life", that's part of the mindless terminology used by both sides of the abortion issue...of course I'm pro-life in the general sense, as I am pro-choice in the same sense....what I am is anti-abortion. And I am consistent I guess because I oppose the creation of life by artificial means...I don't think "God" has anything to do with it actually, at least not as some sort of devine "punishment", we all have differences physiologically and some women and some men are simply unable to create life, that's a sad thing but yes...there is no "devine right" to have a child.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

Is it really that hard to simply understand an opinion with which you disagree (and, really, how can you disagree without even understanding it??? )?

Until it is explained to me how it is consistent to say it is fine to create embryos that will be destroyed but not fine to use those same unwanted embryos in research that may ultimately save lives of people born with all kinds of genetic diseases, yes, I'd have to say it's hard to understand.

Care to take a crack at explaining the reasoning to me? I'm all ears. Or eyes, in this case.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

Are we still talking in context of the recent veto?


(Just so I can understand and focus my reply)

Focus it however you wish. I'm interested to hear your thoughts.

[GenuineRisk]

And, finally, a survey of people who actually have stored embryos they aren't going to implant and what they'd like to see done with them:

http://salon.com/wire/ap/archive.htm...D8PSO6G01.html

Now THERE's a crazy idea- actually ask people personally involved in a situation like this what they think... not just politicians and religious leaders...

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

OK, fine. Let's start here:



Bush vetoed a bill that would have provided federal funding for research that would have involved the destruction of embryos/human life. There is no federal funding for fertility clinics and/or the destruction of unimplanted embryos from such.

You have determined when a human life begins? Or you got a definition of what kind of cell is or is not considered a human life, or has the ability to become one? Or what cause I wanna hear this part. I understand the federal funding part.

Or am I just all mixed up?

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by pgardn

You have determined when a human life begins? Or you got a definition of what kind of cell is or is not considered a human life, or has the ability to become one? Or what cause I wanna hear this part. I understand the federal funding part.

Or am I just all mixed up?

The problem is we lack the ability to determine exactly when "life begins", what we do know is the process that leads to what we are...it is not an unreasonable position to consider that process as synonymous with life.

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

I used "embryo / human life" to cover "both sides" (ie some consider them "mere embryos" and others "life").

IMO, life begins at conception; consequently, a zygote constitutes a human life. Since I am not sure if I am getting at what you are interested in, I will save the scientific and philosophical reasoning for later.

Why at conception? In your opinion.
And inside or outside of the body?

[pdrift1]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

The president calls an embryonic cell "human life". He holds the destruction of human life as immoral.
OK, not to call attention to the capital punishments he authorized in Texas, not the 3534 American military lives that have been sacrificed in the invasion and occupation of a country he decided to invade, nor the countless people that have died in their homeland, perhaps one of his supporters might be able to explain this for me.
If an embryo is going to be discarded because it is no longer viable, and we're talking many thousands regarding this, what exactly is the difference if the same embryo is used to find and expand remedies that will sustain life?
OK...you might say that the president regards stage eight mitosis embryos
as "human life". I don't. And though I know that his pandering to some "religious" constitancies gains support for his "moral cause", frankly,
I don't see the logic.
Exactly what "life" is important to the president and his supporters?
The embryos that will be medical waste anyway, or the Iraqi children that have been killed by the actions of the invading military?
Oh..here's Bob's letter:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/ope...tter_to_pr.htm

because as you stated thier is no logic to his thinking!!!!!

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by pdrift1

because as you stated thier is no logic to his thinking!!!!!

B-I-N-G-O !!!!!!!!!!!