Vatican vows to expel stem cell scientists from Church

[StreetScooby 5]

I can't believe the Catholic church is going to do this. It leads me to believe we'd all be living in mud huts if no one ever questioned their reasoning. Let's hope our bible thumping politicians don't legislate us away from this next great technology.

From the NYTimes:
=================================
Scientists who carry out embryonic stem cell research and politicians who pass laws permitting the practice will be excommunicated, the Vatican said yesterday.

"Destroying human embryos is equivalent to an abortion. It is the same thing," said Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, head of the Pontifical Council for the Family.

"Excommunication will be applied to the women, doctors and researchers who eliminate embryos [and to the] politicians that approve the law," he said in an interview with Famiglia Christiana, an official Vatican magazine.

Excommunication forbids Catholics from receiving communion, assisting in any Church duties, and sometimes from having a Church burial.

But the threat was shrugged off yesterday by Italy's leading expert on cloning, Prof Cesare Galli, of the Laboratory of Reproductive Technologies in Cremona, who was the first scientist to clone a horse.

Prof Galli likened the Vatican to the Taliban and added: "I can bear excommunication. I was raised as a Catholic, I share Catholic values, but I am able to make my own judgment on some issues and I do not need to be told by the Church what to do or to think.

"I will be, together with Elena Cattaneo [a scientist working in the University of Milan] the first to be affected by the excommunication and then there are two other labs that I know using imported embryonic stem cells."

The research is opposed by the Catholic Church because it involves destroying embryos. This occurs at the point when they consist of about 100 to 200 cells and the so-called inner cell mass is removed. These stem cells can grow indefinitely and turn into any of the body's 200 cell types.

Scientists believe research making use of the cells could eventually yield treatments for a range of diseases, including diabetes, heart disease and Parkinson's.

The Vatican's tough stance on the issue came as the Pope prepared to visit Valencia for the fifth annual world conference on the Catholic family. Spain passed a law permitting embryonic stem cell research two years ago to the dismay of the Church.

An Italian senator, Paola Binetti, a member of Opus Dei and a prominent campaigner for Catholic rights, also spoke against the Church's line.

"I am upset and stunned," she said. "It is a mistake to give out the idea that God is angry with Man because he is not in agreement with him."

Cardinal Trujillo said it was not just Spain which had "thrown out the fundamental laws of nature" but also Belgium, Holland, the Scandinavian countries and France. He did not mention Britain, which is at the forefront of embryonic stem cell research.Belgium's divided State.

We are all engines of karma

[shropshire 0]

Personnaly, I dont agree with their stance ... but they're at least consistent.

.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[niu 0]

Quote

I can't believe the Catholic church is going to do this.

Why not?Science and religion does not mix well at all.

[bch7773 0]

Wow, a church official making threats against scientists.... and spain....

Didn't the spainish inquisition end a long time ago?

MB 3528, RB 1182

[freethefly 6]

Does anyone expect anything sensible to come from an organization that does everything possible to protect child molesters? If I were raised chatholic, I'd run as far as possible from these people.

What he really meant to say:

Quote

"Destroying human embryos is equivalent to an abortion. It is the same thing and it gives us less children to molest" said Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, head of the Pontifical Council for the Family.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[kbordson 8]

Great ... then I can reach for another goal that will get me excommunicated!

Love is bad - don't marry divorced guys unless you pay of his sins with lots of money

Knowledge is bad - Don't learn that the Earth isn't the center of the Universe. Don't learn that evolution exists. Don't even think about learning about genetics.

Self Deternimation is bad - Birth Control?!



Karen

[SkyDekker 1,465]

If idiots like this can get a billion followers, why are we so surprised more extreme views in all religions get a couple of thousand followers?

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

Knowledge is bad - Don't learn that the Earth isn't the center of the Universe. Don't learn that evolution exists. Don't even think about learning about genetics.

If I think about this, I get scared. Enforced ignorance must count as a sin somewhere in the greater scope of things.

We are all engines of karma

[Remster 30]

Quote

Didn't the spainish inquisition end a long time ago?

Ah HA! No one expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Remster

[SpeedRacer 1]

well, since there are many more school teachers and camp counselors than priests who are child molesters, maybe we should start by closing down all the schools & summer camps.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Well, that depends. if a School Board find outs they have a child molester working for them, do they just transfer him to a different school or do they deal with it?

[TheAnvil 0]

latae sentientae for stem cell support/research?

Hmmm...not sure if I agree with that, but then again, though Catholic, I don't agree with all of the Church's doctrine.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[mr2mk1g 10]

BURN HER!

[micro 0]

Quote

Great ... then I can reach for another goal that will get me excommunicated!

Love is bad - don't marry divorced guys unless you pay of his sins with lots of money

Knowledge is bad - Don't learn that the Earth isn't the center of the Universe. Don't learn that evolution exists. Don't even think about learning about genetics.

Self Deternimation is bad - Birth Control?!



Karen

Your post is so full of innaccuracies and invective, it's not even worth a rebuttal. How about really trying to determine WHY the Church is against divorce? birth control? instead of just railing against it in an irresponsible, ignorant way?

the catholic church is against love... give me a break. what a bunch of hogwash.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[JohnnyD 0]

Quote

BURN HER!

SHE'S A WITCH!

[micro 0]

Quote

latae sentientae for stem cell support/research?

Hmmm...not sure if I agree with that, but then again, though Catholic, I don't agree with all of the Church's doctrine.

a latae sententiae excommunication doesn't need any formal pronouncement from the church. see here for a simple definition...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latae_sententiae

basically, just by having an abortion or by assisting in an abortion, one incurs the act of being excommunicated, ipso facto.

the church is just being consistent, as someone previously said.

if human life begins at conception, which the catholic church beliefs, teaches, and professes, (although she is not the only entity who espouses this belief), then it follows that the intentional destruction of an embryo (human life) is wrong. embryonic stem cell research is the intentional destruction of embryos for the use of using their stem cells for research.

it's quite easy to see the logic of their position. you may disagree w/ their fundamental assumptions, but that is another issue entirely.

have we even begun to harness the power of adult stem cells? umbilical cord stem cells? placentas? No we haven't. and why is that?

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[wmw999 2,447]

What is the church's thought on in-vitro fertilization? Should all embryos be implanted, and if so, when?

If not, what should be done with the ones which are not implanted?

I'm sincerely wondering. I'm sure you know that I disagree with the Catholic church in this area, but, well, I'd rather know what I'm disagreeing with.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[micro 0]

Quote

What is the church's thought on in-vitro fertilization? Should all embryos be implanted, and if so, when?

If not, what should be done with the ones which are not implanted?

I'm sincerely wondering. I'm sure you know that I disagree with the Catholic church in this area, but, well, I'd rather know what I'm disagreeing with.

Wendy W.

I appreciate the honest question. And I certainly have no problem w/ disagreements. Heck, if you don't like what Catholicism teaches, well you, Wendy are certainly one that's very respectful about it. And there are plenty of other churches out there that have belief systems that match one's unifying philosophy...

anyway, onto the question... the stance on in-vitro is no-no. children have the right to be procreated in the very act of intercourse and not in a petri dish.("pro" because it is believed that in the act of conception, it isn't just stuff from the guy and stuff from the girl that comes together and forms a baby, but also a soul, a unique and unrepeatable soul that didn't exist before in creation is created by God at that very moment of conception.)

as for the ones -the other children- that aren't implanted, well, they SHOULD be implanted, for they are children, at least in the mind of the church. and this brings a little caveat... they either are or they aren't... isn't this what it comes down to? the only thing that differentiates them from exutero, born children is what? growth and nutrition.

if conception has occurred, and children exist, either in a petri dish or inutero, an environment should be created wherein those babies can grow and develop as is in accord w/ their nature. the "extras" shouldn't be destroyed, as is too often the case.

what I'd really like to see happen is that these "unwanted" children, these unimplanted embryos that are most likely slated for destruction (death, if you believe, as I do, that they are children), be given to families who so desperately want kids but cannot for whatever reason cannot have them.

(i can see the flames coming already... not from you wendy, you're one of the nicer ones...)

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[wmw999 2,447]

Quote

the stance on in-vitro is no-no

That's consistent; good.

Thanks for the explanation.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[micro 0]

Quote

Quote

the stance on in-vitro is no-no

That's consistent; good.

Thanks for the explanation.

Wendy W.

actually, I got sidetracked... a better explanation is that children have the right to be conceived in the act of the loving embrace of their parents, in the procreative act of intercourse instead of in the sterile environment of the lab. This harkens back to the churches teaching of the two-fold ends of marriage and sex, babies and bonding... antiquated by todays standards, I know, but still maintained by the church nonetheless. Don't want babies? don't have sex, at least not when the wife is fertile. don't want to be bonded w/ your spouse? don't have sex... and, the two go together according to the church... you can't have one w/o the other...

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[billvon 2,991]

> the stance on in-vitro is no-no. children have the right to
>be procreated in the very act of intercourse . . .

I can understand your position. But I also know about half a dozen kids with great parents who would never have existed if their parents relied solely on intercourse. To me, that is an outstanding advance in medicine - one that allows parents who very much want children to have them.

>what I'd really like to see happen is that these "unwanted" children,
> these unimplanted embryos that are most likely slated for
> destruction (death, if you believe, as I do, that they are children),
> be given to families who so desperately want kids but cannot for
> whatever reason cannot have them.

I agree with you there.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

I can't believe the Catholic church is going to do this.

I see nothing surprising about it.

Quote

Prof Galli likened the Vatican to the Taliban and added: "I can bear excommunication. I was raised as a Catholic, I share Catholic values, but I am able to make my own judgment on some issues and I do not need to be told by the Church what to do or to think.

Good for him. Well, I don't know about the Taliban remark, but it's good to see that sticking with his own judgment is more important to him than listening to the church.

[micro 0]

Quote

> the stance on in-vitro is no-no. children have the right to
>be procreated in the very act of intercourse . . .

I can understand your position. But I also know about half a dozen kids with great parents who would never have existed if their parents relied solely on intercourse. To me, that is an outstanding advance in medicine - one that allows parents who very much want children to have them.

bill, i honestly struggle w/ this, fundamentally as a catholic. i don't doubt for one bit that they are wonderful parents. and if me or my wife weren't able to have kids, it would be heart rending for sure and I don't know if I'd be able to abide by this difficult teaching of this religion I espouse. but here's the kicker i think... and perhaps this is what i'll get flamed for the most... no one has a right to have children. a child is not a commodity. now, i'm not saying that is what these people you refer to are thinking, but biologically, if "nature" says you can't have kids, well, you can't have kids. and i don't think it's necessarily a good thing to do everything w/i our power to circumvent that, just b/c "we can." also, i think we have taken God so far out of the equation that it has made us very easy to do these sorts of things... like creat human life in a... PETRI dish! think of that! the indignity of that! or a test tube! a test tube baby! are we really created in the image and likeness of God? If so, our conception, where a unique, immortal, unrepeatable soul is infused into our bodies should not take place in some glass beaker somewhere in a lab.

Quote

>what I'd really like to see happen is that these "unwanted" children,
> these unimplanted embryos that are most likely slated for
> destruction (death, if you believe, as I do, that they are children),
> be given to families who so desperately want kids but cannot for
> whatever reason cannot have them.

I agree with you there.

thanks. maybe we should propose this to the Gates foundation and to Warren Buffet. Think they'll go for it?

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[jakee 1,490]

Quote

a better explanation is that children have the right to be conceived in the act of the loving embrace of their parents, in the procreative act of intercourse instead of in the sterile environment of the lab.

Does that affect them in any way? If anything the children concieved in a sterile lab are more likely to be products of parents that are absolutely serious about their relationship and their ability to give a child a loving home.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

no one has a right to have children. a child is not a commodity. now, i'm not saying that is what these people you refer to are thinking, but biologically, if "nature" says you can't have kids, well, you can't have kids. and i don't think it's necessarily a good thing to do everything w/i our power to circumvent that, just b/c "we can."

I recently watched a video of open-heart surgery; if that's not "playing God," then I don't know what is. Where do you draw the line of what God is or is not ok with regarding medical technology? Is it ok to do what we can to extend someone's life but not ok to interfere with creating a life?