sundevil777 102 #26 January 12, 2007 QuoteKilling tens of thousands of innocent people - moral enough to pay hundreds of billions to accomplish it. That statement implies that the purpose of the war was to kill tens of thousands of innocent people. That is of course, pure bullshit. What level of innocent casualties allows a war to not be immoral?People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #27 January 12, 2007 QuoteHow many americans are having late term abortions to supply the organ transplant market? How many? Your post is the first I've heard of such a practice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #28 January 12, 2007 >It is illegal to get paid for donating an organ. And apparently it works. So make it illegal to get an abortion and use the embryo for anything. That will work just as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #29 January 12, 2007 >How many? Your post is the first I've heard of such a practice. None that I've heard of. Sounds like the problem of using aborted fetuses for _anything_ is pretty nonexistent, eh? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #30 January 12, 2007 >That statement implies that the purpose of the war was to kill tens of >thousands of innocent people. That is of course, pure bullshit. I agree. A statement that the purpose of stem cell research is to kill embryos would be equally bullshit. In both cases it is a side effect that we accept because we think the good outweighs the bad. >What level of innocent casualties allows a war to not be immoral? War is always immoral. It is the killing of people and destruction of a country to achieve a political result. There is no way that can be spun to be a positive in terms of morality. The only time it's permissible (in my book) is to prevent a larger evil. Saving people's lives is a moral pursuit, and a great many doctors have done a lot towards that end. If we were proposing to use viable fetuses for a guaranteed result, that would be a moral quandry indeed. If you could kill ten eight month old viable fetuses and cure most spinal cord injuries, would it be worth it? Is it OK to sacrifice ten children so thousands of children could walk again? I have a feeling people's decisions would rest in large part on whether their children were the ones being cured or not. Fortunately, this issue does not present such difficult decisions. To me, throwing embryos in an incinerator or using them for research is equal in terms of morality. So there's no real moral question for me there. It's like using the body of someone who has donated their body to science. Is it more moral to use it for a medical school cadaver, or for research on organ rejection? It doesn't matter much. They're dead no matter what you do with the body. Now, the larger issue of whether IVF is a good thing or not is a separate one, and if there were no frozen fetuses, then the only way you could get them would be to create them explicitly for research. I agree that in that case there would be a (quite valid) moral question to consider, and you'd have to weigh the good (curing disease) against the bad (creating human life but not allowing to come to term.)_ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #31 January 12, 2007 Quote creating human life In your opinion, at what point does an embryo become human life?We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #32 January 12, 2007 >at what point does an embryo become human life? When it can feel pain, move, react - basically when its nervous system begins to develop and function. (In other words, the same way we decide if someone in a coma is a human being or an organ donor.) Generally that happens around 10 weeks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #33 January 12, 2007 QuoteQuoteb) Organ transplants are legal. How many americans are having late term abortions to supply the organ transplant market? Bad analogy. . Rubbish!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,106 #34 January 12, 2007 Quote Isn't all this a moot point? Now that embryonic stem cell research has been shown to not be where the research is providing results, and now that amniotic fluid can provide what embryos were providing? Pretty serious assumption there, friend. The researcher from Wake Forest who reported the amniotic fluid data was just on the radio and he EXPLICITLY stated that the amniotic cells were NOT the same as embryonic cells, do not behave the same, and that whether they prove useful will not be known for many years.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #35 January 13, 2007 QuoteNow, the larger issue of whether IVF is a good thing or not is a separate one, and if there were no frozen fetuses, then the only way you could get them would be to create them explicitly for research. I agree that in that case there would be a (quite valid) moral question to consider, and you'd have to weigh the good (curing disease) against the bad (creating human life but not allowing to come to term.)_ Isn't that exactly what the main thrust of the debate over stem cell research is about - government funding to create new lines of embryos for research?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
