DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> Cool! No more killing babies!
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 22 of 22, (reverse)
AuthorThread
11/20/2007 12:55:56 PM · #1
Scientist finally found a way to use regular stem cells to acheive the same results previously thought only possible by killing preborn children for harvesting purposes!

Thank God that our leaders held firm and prevented legalizing this atrocity and forced science to find a better way.

Well done!

//canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5hCfW-LMaRh6FNwiqvok8ergoEcaw
11/20/2007 12:59:38 PM · #2
i hope you're kidding
11/20/2007 01:04:11 PM · #3
I moved thread to "Rant" since it doesn't have anything to do with photography.
11/20/2007 01:13:57 PM · #4
Originally posted by ursula:

I moved thread to "Rant" since it doesn't have anything to do with photography.


Well, I put it in General Discussion along with all the other "News" related topics -- this really is not a rant per se, but a dicussion of great news!
11/20/2007 01:14:25 PM · #5
Originally posted by Mo:

i hope you're kidding


You don't like non-baby-killing-stem-cell advances? I'm confused by what you mean.
11/20/2007 01:20:14 PM · #6
It sounds like a fabulous advance that could take the whole stem cell research issue off the political burner & back onto the scientific burner where it belongs, so that progress can continue to be made unimpeded.

However, I would go with mo's "I hope you're kidding." reaction. I can't speak for Mo, but as one who doesn't believe that using fertilized eggs is wrong, I resent being essentially labelled as "pro baby killing," which I think is a disgusting & completely fallacious statment.
11/20/2007 01:27:50 PM · #7
I also am offended by being called a pro baby killer. I would more refer to you as a killer of everyone because you and your political fools are preventing the treatment and cure of some of the most deadly diseases that plague our society. Use of a fertilized egg to save an adult cancer patient is an intelligent choice. Arguing the fact that your killing a baby while adults, children and babies all die of disease is ridiculous.

Our leaders are idiots. They have no problem sending our young men and women to die by the thousands in war yet a fertilized egg is too much to sacrifice for the greater good of curing disease. Idiots.
11/20/2007 01:33:23 PM · #8
Actually, using adult stem cells isn't new. When I was pregnant with my son, my OB and I were talking about this issue. According to him, even while he was in college, it was reported that adult stem cells were more "stable" and easier to work with.
11/20/2007 01:39:23 PM · #9
Originally posted by karmat:

Actually, using adult stem cells isn't new. When I was pregnant with my son, my OB and I were talking about this issue. According to him, even while he was in college, it was reported that adult stem cells were more "stable" and easier to work with.


Correct, which is why the whole kill-babies-to-get-stem-cells was a bad, dishonest argument. Most of the advances in stem-cell research was due to adult stem cells. It was just a theory that science wanted to test that required the murder of kids to get them.

And again, this advancement is from... tada... adult stem cells! The ones the liberals were trying to claim were so limited in their usefulness.


11/20/2007 01:40:32 PM · #10
Originally posted by Bebe:

It sounds like a fabulous advance that could take the whole stem cell research issue off the political burner & back onto the scientific burner where it belongs, so that progress can continue to be made unimpeded.

However, I would go with mo's "I hope you're kidding." reaction. I can't speak for Mo, but as one who doesn't believe that using fertilized eggs is wrong, I resent being essentially labelled as "pro baby killing," which I think is a disgusting & completely fallacious statment.


I didn't label you or anyone a "pro-baby-kill[er]".
11/20/2007 01:41:41 PM · #11
I think you're missing the point, Hawkeye. Some people are taking exception to the fact that you're calling them "baby killers" simply because they embryonic stem cell research. Its fertilized eggs. Not babies.
11/20/2007 01:43:03 PM · #12
Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

I also am offended by being called a pro baby killer. I would more refer to you as a killer of everyone because you and your political fools are preventing the treatment and cure of some of the most deadly diseases that plague our society. Use of a fertilized egg to save an adult cancer patient is an intelligent choice. Arguing the fact that your killing a baby while adults, children and babies all die of disease is ridiculous.

Our leaders are idiots. They have no problem sending our young men and women to die by the thousands in war yet a fertilized egg is too much to sacrifice for the greater good of curing disease. Idiots.


You weren't called a pro baby killer.

And the military signs up for the duty they are assigned. And the majority of them support this just and necessary war. So they make a conscious choice. Abortionists don't give the child that choice -- they allow the mother to choose to kill the baby instead.

And embryonic stem cell usefulness was only ever a theory -- they HOPED it would work and wanted permission to kill children in order to find out. So no, our leaders who kept this (and cloning) back in the Nazi-wish-book are heroes.
11/20/2007 01:44:26 PM · #13
Originally posted by frisca:

I think you're missing the point, Hawkeye. Some people are taking exception to the fact that you're calling them "baby killers" simply because they embryonic stem cell research. Its fertilized eggs. Not babies.


I am not missing the point... as I stated, I never called them pro-baby-killers. Just pointed out the fact that embryonic stem cell research DOES kill a child -- same as an abortion.

It is what it is. If you don't like it, don't do it.

EDIT: Perhaps you're right. BABY refers to a stage of human development and does not encompass necessarily all levels of pre-toddler life.

So instead of stating that it kills a baby, the proper view would be that it kills a human being.

A fertilized egg IS human life as much as a fetus, infant, toddler, teen, adult, senior, and yes, even as much a human life as is Hilary Clinton.

So embryonic stem-cell research kills a HUMAN that is preborn and not yet at the stage we call infant or baby.

So I didn't call you pro-human-killers directly.

Message edited by author 2007-11-20 13:48:52.
11/20/2007 01:46:10 PM · #14
you and I posted at nearly the sametime, Hawkeye. I get the sense that I won't change your mind on this issue and you're highly unlikely to change mine, so I think I'll duck out of this and just say that science is amazing.
11/20/2007 01:48:40 PM · #15
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:

. Just pointed out the fact that embryonic stem cell research DOES kill a child -- same as an abortion.

It is what it is. If you don't like it, don't do it.


Believing that either embryonic stem cell research or abortion equates to killing babies requires belief that abortion is actually equivalent to murder. You may believe it to be so, but your opinion is far from universal.
11/20/2007 01:50:15 PM · #16
Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:

. Just pointed out the fact that embryonic stem cell research DOES kill a child -- same as an abortion.

It is what it is. If you don't like it, don't do it.


Believing that either embryonic stem cell research or abortion equates to killing babies requires belief that abortion is actually equivalent to murder. You may believe it to be so, but your opinion is far from universal.


Nope... but in recent polls, it is rapidly becoming the majority view.

Science IS amazing... and hopefully one day there will come a day when people who seek to murder their child (later term abortions ARE of babies) won't be able to and can just have that child removed and given to a parent who will love them.
11/20/2007 01:51:05 PM · #17
Originally posted by frisca:

you and I posted at nearly the sametime, Hawkeye. I get the sense that I won't change your mind on this issue and you're highly unlikely to change mine, so I think I'll duck out of this and just say that science is amazing.


I didn't think you were trying to change my mind. Just that you misread and felt that I'd called someone something I clearly did not.
11/20/2007 01:52:06 PM · #18
Wow. First off you did call everyone in favor babie killers.

About enlisting, soldiers enlist and trust that our government will not send them into harms way without a just cause. This is not, they were sent on misinformation and now they are stuck in a place they shouldn't be being shot at and bombed at every turn. Its not a just and necessary war and that is being proven as we speak. What was accomplished?

Our govt is about as far from heros as I could imagine. THey are greedy and self centered with no other interest than profits for their own interests. Why did Haliburton move to Dubai? Must be for the weather.

Aside from that, if science has proven adult stem cells are better and more useful than great. If before they believed embryonic stem cells were better, I am sure there was data to support it. Its not like they just woke up one morning and decided they wanted to use embryos because its fun and would piss off the conservatives.

The comparison to Nazis is about as offensive as the baby killing comment.

11/20/2007 01:53:57 PM · #19
Well I can't help myself get involved in this explosive issue. This post was correctly moved to the rant section. It's particularly obvious by the origninal post and the title that it's completely biased and offensive to those who don't support your ideas.

Having worked in the scientific field at the academic level for several years while any advancement in science is good, this advancement is overshadowed by the years of quality scientific research lost because of un-informed poltical figures giving in to peer pressure from over-charged relious figures.

These are cells, not babies. They have no nervous system cannot feel, think or cry as the picture you are trying to instill.

Dawkins makes a nice arguement against this reasoning with respect to In vitro fertilization.

Excerpt from Dawkins...

"IVF, is a wonderful technique whereby couples that cannot conceive normally are helped to achieve their dream. The woman is stimulated by hormone injections to super-ovulate. As many as a dozen eggs are harvested from her ovaries under general anaesthetic. An attempt is made to fertilize all these eggs with her husband's sperm, in a dish. Of those that are fertilized, two, or occasionally three, are chosen for insertion into the uterus. The remainder are either flushed down the drain, or used for research, or frozen for future possible use. Of the two or three that are implanted, the expectation is that no more than one will survive. Sometimes twins are born and very occasionally triplets. But doctors do not implant three conceptuses in the hope of making triplets. Quite the contrary. In the unlikely event that all three implant successfully and develop, normal practice is to kill at least one of them. A surplus is provided in the hope that one will survive. IVF doctors, in other words, do what nature (or God if that is how your mind works) does anyway: they budget extra embryos which are destined to die as collateral damage in the course of bringing one of their siblings to term.

Perhaps you still feel, on religious grounds, that there is an important distinction between God choosing to kill embryos, and humans making the choice. If that is how you feel, please at least give some attention to another distinction: the distinction between killing blastocysts as collateral damage, in medical research which will certainly achieve the saving of many lives, and killing innocent men, women and children, or blowing their limbs off, as collateral damage in a war which might just possibly achieve . . . what?

Of those conceptuses that IVF doctors freeze for possible future use, a very few are later implanted, often into a different woman. Some doctors are dubious about the practice, because they worry that freezing might damage the embryo. Nevertheless it is sometimes done, and a few 'snowflake' babies have been born. In announcing his veto of the bill allowing federal funding of stem cell research, Bush characteristically chose to make it a nauseating photo opportunity. He surrounded himself with 'snowflake' children, even taking one in his arms for the big climax to the photo-opp. Let us hope the resulting heart-warming photograph will comfort and console the bereaved in Iraq and Lebanon. Never mind that you have lost your limbs or your children: at least the fate of the world is in the hands of a man who is pro-life."

Message edited by author 2007-11-20 13:59:51.
11/20/2007 01:54:21 PM · #20
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:

And the military signs up for the duty they are assigned. And the majority of them support this just and necessary war. So they make a conscious choice.

How many innocent victims of this "just and necessary" war do you think were able to make a conscious choice to be killed?
11/20/2007 02:03:14 PM · #21
Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

Wow. First off you did call everyone in favor babie killers.


Where did I do that?

Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

About enlisting, soldiers enlist and trust that our government will not send them into harms way without a just cause. This is not, they were sent on misinformation and now they are stuck in a place they shouldn't be being shot at and bombed at every turn. Its not a just and necessary war and that is being proven as we speak. What was accomplished?


Nope. You and the media keep glossing over the fact that WMDs ended up being found -- this war was in violation of the cease fire of 1991. Many who have signed up have done so SINCE 2001, not before.

What was accomplished? Iraq was liberated from a dictator who was a clear and present danger to the USA and the world.

Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

Our govt is about as far from heros as I could imagine. THey are greedy and self centered with no other interest than profits for their own interests. Why did Haliburton move to Dubai? Must be for the weather.


Mr. Soros must be proud of you, reciting his mantras so well.

In THIS case (stem cell), they clearly were heroes.

Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

Aside from that, if science has proven adult stem cells are better and more useful than great. If before they believed embryonic stem cells were better, I am sure there was data to support it. Its not like they just woke up one morning and decided they wanted to use embryos because its fun and would piss off the conservatives.


Nah... to kill children for testing does not require much thinking.

Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

The comparison to Nazis is about as offensive as the baby killing comment.


cloning and killing humans for research sounds right up their alley.
11/20/2007 02:03:27 PM · #22
Originally posted by HawkeyeLonewolf:

You weren't called a pro baby killer.

And the military signs up for the duty they are assigned. And the majority of them support this just and necessary war. So they make a conscious choice. Abortionists don't give the child that choice -- they allow the mother to choose to kill the baby instead.

And embryonic stem cell usefulness was only ever a theory -- they HOPED it would work and wanted permission to kill children in order to find out. So no, our leaders who kept this (and cloning) back in the Nazi-wish-book are heroes.


Godwin's Law invoked.

~Terry
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 07/30/2021 06:58:07 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2021 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 07/30/2021 06:58:07 AM EDT.