Adult Stem Cells Provide Little To No Help

Easy question to answer. I don't believe that these embryos are human beings; therefore, I see nothing wrong with using them to alleviate suffering.

 

the only blame then is to God himself for not showing us that a soul is formed at the exact moment of fertilization. Is it really that hard to provide an inspiration for such a device to detect that? Then again, how harder would it be to advocate for laws on manipulating spirits?

 

as a matter of fact I'll go even further to say that since God hasn't given to us any supernatural insights or powers, he really dosen't care about our souls or the chemical ropes that hold it in bondage. I bet he just want's to destroy us all anyway, but to make it interesting, he'll let us try to gain spiritual power therogh other means such as satanic, so we'll die thinking we ahve to power to fight him. There's no other explination to why God won't allow to see a spirit form within a fertilized egg, thus proving that this is a human bieng- and to why we can't unleash the potential of God's spirit that is supposidely in us to do greater works than Moses or Peter and finally see some revival!

 

Terry, that leads me to two questions:
1. "Alleviate suffering" is the job of a commodity. I can think of many things folks use to accomplish that goal:

• Tylenol
• a Cigarette
• Diaper rash cream
• an Ice pack

are embryos in that category? If so...that leads me to question 2:

2. When do they move from "commodity" to "child?" Does it happen all at once, or over a few days?

Terry...I'm not trying to be a smart-aleck. But on this issue, the stakes are high. If I'm right, we're talking about thousands upon thousands of lives that we are simply going to "use" for the benefit of others. Isn't that a mgihty high price to pay?

As I said before, I'm in a quandary about all of these frozen embryos. I'm bothered by the fact that they were simply "made," and no firm plans were made for their future.

But since I believe life begins at conception--and I see no logical way for me to believe otherwise--I can't go along with destruction.

 

I have a close friend who is attempting to adopt a frozen embryo. I know very little of the specifics of how this works, etc., but I guess that's one option.

 

not if you and every other husband give a dozen to your wife---how can you not condemn any mother who would give away their unborn child this way?

 

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Are you saying that it's better for an embryo to be destroyed than to allow another person to adopt it?

Please clarify.

 

i don't know how to put it planer---where else are they getting these embryos from? moms willing donate them or yell at their kids that they regret doing this option right?

 

If two human beings procreate then what else can the creation be. How can the embryo not be human when it was procreated from humans.

What species is it?

Does it have different DNA?

If I took the DNA from an embrio to a crime lab and had it tested, and asked what species is it. Would they say Human?

 

Your spit will not grow up to be a person.

We are on topic, you just want to limit the argument avoid questions that are hard to answer and will not strengten your own view. Everything that has been said on this thread is related and important to this subject.

 

Somebody will be murdered tonight, regardless of what I do. Does that mean I should participate in a murder.

 

and before any anal-rentitive mods or admins chime in-this is a political debate now so it's smarter to move it to the politics section rather then just closing it..

 

Does the DNA in your spit match the rest of your DNA, or is it a little different?

 

uncharted...PLease don't get angry, but all I got from reading your posts was confused.

Dude...If you're attacking me for mentioning a friend who is burdened for the situation regarding the embryos, then lighten up. I didn't explain the full story here, as to not further sidetrack the debate. If you'll notice my posts in this thread, I've been able to engage in debate with folks that disagree almost completely with me--yet it's been civil and we've avoided the name calling that others have done, we've avoided the tone that you seem to be taking.

If it were me, I would avoid referring to the mods as "anal-retentive." They do a great job dealing with difficult issues, and quite a few grumpy and difficult people.



If

 

Then we have little discussion-we've just been trying to barricade ourselves from the painful truth: God would rather everyone exists, suffer and die in any manner rather than a few people exist confortabily due to the destruction of others. Job being the principle example, unless that bings up another discussion in this thread. Therefore we shouldn't be looking to cure anyone so desprately unless for God's greater glory and power we go and heal them ourselves and gain one miracle to cast before him in heaven. Unfourtanately secularization has gotten too much influence into the Church these days. We're been intimidated by the media and nonbelivers not to perform miricales. I'm sure we try to reason around it with things like "oh, that would be 'testing the Lord' and provoking Him." We KNOW we have the power to work miricales? What is there to test? How embarrassing for us could it be when God does not to want to heal someone through us? That's HIS decision to make! God's grace is the only silver bullet to cancer or dehibilating deseas, not destorying the ghosts he wants to build into humans for us.