Bush vetoes stem cell bill as promised

Again Ralph, you miss the point. For every child to be born, I agree, there has to be a conception, a fertilization of the ovum. However every fertilized ovum is not a child until some point in its development. When that is, again, I don't think any of us know, but it is evident that a clump of cells is not that point.

This is like saying all pigs are mammals, therefore all mammals are pigs. Just ain't so.

 

Not so.

If you cannot tell us when it becomes a child, then you certainly can't tell us at what point it would be murder.

 

Nor have I made such a claim.

What is clear is that a blastocyte dying is not murder. The ones in question will die anyway. Why aren't women who believe this is murder offering their wombs to save these "babies"?

I don't know at what point a rocket reaches the dominance of gravity from Alpha Centauri either, but i know when it is 100 miles from earth, it isn't there yet.

The silence is deafening...all these folks claiming a blastocyte is a baby, but still no scriptural or scientific evidence.

 

You are right. The word isn't in scripture, just that "I knew thee before I made thee" thing that keeps getting ignored.

 

Rather than closing this thread, it will be moved to Politics Forum.

Lady Eagle

 

Magnetic Poles you stated:

I specifically and directly answered your question! Both with the Dictionary but especially with the Bible! You cannot maintain that view given what the Bible says.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes we do. Before Mary had even experienced the miraculous conception you see reverence for life. Indeed you again see such with Mary's pregnant relative. Luke 1:35-36

Conception is stated by God and written in the Bible, as the beginning of human life! Such is not referred to as a "clump of cells".




As with your argument, in playing down the importance of potential life, by comparing it to other organs or cells. Can a clump of skin cells be nurtured into a child? Or is there something special about these cells?

I spent an entire lifetime around some doctors and several hospitals. So everyone has compassion and heartfelt sympathy for the ill. But we should not destroy potential life in order to advance doubtful science. We should not be involved with such at all. Especially when there are others ways.raying:

 

I think your post raises two issues:
1. Is the blastocyte a baby/child/human life?
2. If it is, then is using it for stem cell research because these blastocytes are destined to die anyway okay?

I think for #1, there is no way for a Christian to say a blastocyte is not human life. Left alone, he/she will develop into a baby under normal circumstances. The blastocyte comes from a fertilized egg; it is the beginning of life.

For #2, if one says it is okay to use these because they will die anyway, that is like saying it's okay to kill someone with a terminal disease in order to get his cells (assuming one could do this and the disease would not interfere) or some medical benefit. If someone has a degenerative disease, let's say, and we know that if we kill the person now we could get something from him (maybe a part that is not affected by the disease) to help someone else, would that be okay? I say no.

Pragmatism cannot be the measure of ethics for the believer. Once we do that, we have crossed a line and we will only continue to cross lines.

 

Excellent Marcia!

Magnetic Poles, to address your quandary as to women stepping up to save these throw away cells. This is an intriguing thought however you are speaking from a hypocritical point. One could ask you to sell all your belongings and give the money to a needy person or family. As you well could save someone by doing such.

We all fall short of the glory of God and are but rags in his sight! Thank God he gave his only begotten son for us!

If people are going to use in-vitro fertilization to get pregnant, they should not use more than necessary. If it does not take then try again. Even if people did step up, as in your quandary, do you think they would not then, begin to create even more? This alone simply points to how morality must govern us. As Joseph Botwinick stated "Either implant them and leave it in God's hands, or don't do it at all".

 

Daisy

It seems people disagree about wether the reasearch was usefull. I have heard ethics teachers say that his reasearch put medicine ahead decades. What would have taken etical reasearches decades to find out, Mengele found out in years by doing his reasearch unethicly.

It does not matter my point is still there. Are you saying that if Mengele would have found the cure to cancer then his reasearch would have been worth it? Daisy if Joseph Mengele would have found the cure to cancer while experimenting on twins would you support his reasearch? It sounds like you would.

Also the people he used were condemed to death. This seems to fit MPs argument that since the babies (that is what they are) are going to be destroyed anyway it is ok.

 

MP

If I told you that my 6 month old baby was not a human being untill he/she could walk and talk, and I am going to kill it. Could you show me reasearch or scripture that I am wrong and 6 month old babies are humans.

Just post the scripture for that. If you can not I will assume that you do not believe 6 month old babies are humans worthy or life.

Also you said you would not kill a 3 month old fetus. Please tell me exactly what age a fetus becomes a human. I think that is important, somehow you know that a 1 month old fetus in not human but a 3 month old is.

 

What most people don't know or chose to disregard is that this bill would have funded only the use of embryoes leftover from the test tube baby process by which couples who haven't been able to have children are helped in doing so. Most of these "leftover embryoes" will be "discarded" or murdered because the hopefull parents have no need for them after successfully becoming pregnant.

If there are any murders in this scenario it it the parents which go to extreme means to have a child. This bill would at least have provided a humanitarian use for these leftover embryoes instead of having them put out in the trash.

If we want to save unborn lives in this situation we should make it illegal to have test tube babies.

 

I agree with the last sentence. It should be illegal to have test tube babies.

However is it ethical or moraly right to use the evil of killing babies to benifit us. It is alright to say that since people are killing babies anyway we might as well profit from it.

 

Amen, brother. :thumbs:

 

This is not a pro abortion statement but I believe life begins at birth. Anything unborn has yet to live or to be given life. Life, in my opinion, came to Adam when GOD breathed in him the breath of life and not when he formed him from the dust of the ground. Same with the dry bones, the came together but did not have life until Ezek preached to the wind. I contend when each person is born and becomes alive when GOD breaths in them the breath of life.

Again, I am not pro abortion except in cases of rape (especially young girls), incest etc.... Perhaps these embryo can be used.

I also agree with StraightAndNarrow, these are not conceived by normal means and will either have be placed in a womb or discarded because they will never become life. Do I agree Man should be making test tube babies. Probably not, then again, GOD did give us the knowledge for some reason and the research is pointed toward healing.

 

If you do not believe a baby has life until born, then why do you care at all about abortion. You say in one sentence that life does not begin until the baby is born. Then say in the next sentence that you are not pro abortion. WHY do you care at all?

If an unborn baby is not a life then exterminating that non-life should not matter any more to you then if I cut my grass or pull the weeds in my garden.

 

LeBuick makes an excellent scriptural point...Adam became a living soul with the breath of life. Seems scripture DOES answer the question, but not the way people wanted to believe. All the other verses quoted speak of developed embryos or God's foreknowledge, not any definition of when a human life begins, and certainly do not support personhood of the zygote.

 

Ludicrous comments, DeeJay. You know we are not talking about fetuses or post birth children. You are tossing out strawmen.

 

This shows you are more pationate toward the argument then about trying to openly discuss the issue. You obviously don't even consider another persons point of view.

Though I don't believe it is life I do believe it is created by the divine creator and without a doubt a potential living being. I care because it's right to care.

 

Wow, if I had not seen this with my own eyes, I would never have believed that I would ever read this on a Christian forum! This is what a lot of New Agers believe - that until a baby takes a breath, "it" is not a human life. (Other views include the one that until the soul enters the fetus, "it" is not a life).

I think using the argument about Adam is totally invalid and logically flawed. That was the creation of the first man - the first man could not exist until God enabled him to do so. However, an unborn child does exist and is alive! You can't compare Adam and an unborn child -- it's apples and an orange. If an an unborn child is not alive, then how can unborn babies die and be called miscarriages? Should pregnant women refer to the child - er tissues - in their womb as ....what? I guess they should not think of the unborn _____ as a human.

Well, since unborn babies are not human life, then I assume you two are fine with abortion, right? If not, why not? LeBuick, you said you were not pro-abortion. Why not?

 

So, what if the embryos are destroyed? Is that the equivalent of murder?
Am I supposed to believe that these frozen embryos are in fact frozen human beings?

If they aren't being used, there is no intention of using them, and the donors do not want them, what is wrong with using them?