Jump to content

Bible thumping teenagers


Recommended Posts

Peter Singer:

 

"Scientists have shown, in many different species, including monkeys, that it is possible to clone an animal by taking the nucleus of an ordinary cell, and implanting it in an egg from which the nucleus has been removed.

 

There is no biological reason to suppose that this would not work for human beings. This means that billions of our cells have the potential to become an actual person.

 

Yet no one thinks that we have an obligation to "save" all these cells and turn them into people."

 

Me:

 

It's actually a lot more complicated than how you (Peter Singer) portrayed it. The vast majority of cloned embryos are not viable, and even the ones that survive to term have problems. Just because you can (in highly artificial circumstances) induce any cells to become embryos doesn't mean those have the same status as actual, already-formed embryos.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 510
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Me:

 

It's actually a lot more complicated than how you (Peter Singer) portrayed it. The vast majority of cloned embryos are not viable, and even the ones that survive to term have problems. Just because you can (in highly artificial circumstances) induce any cells to become embryos doesn't mean those have the same status as actual, already-formed embryos.

 

Pennisi, Elizabeth. (1998). "Cloned Mice Provide Company for Dolly."Science. 281(5376): 495-496.

Abstract: Researchers at John A. Burns School of Medicine at the University of Hawaii in Honolulu have succeeded in replicating the cloning of an animal from adult cells-- the same process that produced the cloned sheep "Dolly" and made international headlines in 1997. The Hawaii research team reports the cloning of 50 mice so far. Other researchers who have analyzed Dolly's DNA have confirmed that she is indeed a clone of the ewe whose cellular material was used in the experiment. In the Hawaiian cloning experiment, researchers used the same basic technique as the Scottish team that produced Dolly. Nuclei from adult cells were transferred into eggs whose own nuclei had been removed. But while the Scottish team triggered the fusing of the adult cells with the eggs by applying an electrical pulse, the Hawaiian team used a very fine needle to take up the donor cell nucleus and inject it into an enucleated egg. The Hawaiian team also differed from the Scottish team in the method used to trigger development of the eggs. While Dolly's egg was jolted to development using an electrical pulse, the Hawaiian team put the eggs into a culture medium containing strontium, which stimulates the release of calcium from the internal stores, triggering the development of the fertilized eggs. This strategy proved most effective with cumulus cells, which surround an egg as it matures. The resulting cloned mice appear normal. The researchers have cloned some clones and mated others; all progeny seem normal and healthy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
"The euphemisms for an aborted fetus--"the product of conception" and "clump of cells"--are what George Orwell might have called newspeak.

 

That it is dependent on another makes it qualitatively no different from countless other humans outside the womb".

I guess the euphemism for woman or mother is "the womb".

 

Language is an interesting key to concept.

 

I wonder what Orwell might have called that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
It never seemed to stop you before.

 

I don't see any of the Pro-lifers jumping to address this point of his post:

 

"Hentoff also takes pro-lifers to task for being inconsistent, quoting Barney Frank: "Those who oppose abortion are pro-life only up to the moment of birth." Hentoff feels that to be pro-life, one requires a "consistent ethic of life. They ought to actively oppose capital punishment, preparations for war, and the life-diminishing poverty associated with" certain government policies.

 

Hmmm. Discuss."

 

And I don't see you getting all over their backs for not doing so - hmmm.....

 

If you insist that I answer it - I ask that you do the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"The euphemisms for an aborted fetus--"the product of conception" and "clump of cells"--are what George Orwell might have called newspeak."

 

Might I add Bush's "Culture of Life" to that list as well?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't see any of the Pro-lifers jumping to address this

And I don't see you getting all over their backs for not doing so - hmmm.....

 

If you insist that I answer it - I ask that you do the same.

Oh I'm sorry but you misunderstood my point. I don't insist anything. I couldn't care less what you answer or don't answer. I was simply pointing out the fact that you pick and choose your arguments based solely on a set of guidelines that you define. You control the debate through the rules as defined by you and you alone. That's not debate, that is merely you telling everyone else how it is per you. I don't get involved in these debates so I'm not going to offer anything in regards to this topic. I have very strong opinions but as much as I stand by them, I'm not going to post them on the board. Mostly because I don't want anyone thinking I am saying what they believe is wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I also think that it's an issue that no MAN should really have a say on, as we do not have uteri.

 

 

there you have it, people. :worship

Link to post
Share on other sites

stork audio.gif

Pronunciation: 'stork

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English, from Old English storc; akin to Old High German storah stork and probably to Old English stearc stiff -- more at STARK

: any of various large mostly Old World wading birds (family Ciconiidae) that have long stout bills and are related to the ibises and herons

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't see any of the Pro-lifers jumping to address this point of his post:

 

"Hentoff also takes pro-lifers to task for being inconsistent, quoting Barney Frank: "Those who oppose abortion are pro-life only up to the moment of birth." Hentoff feels that to be pro-life, one requires a "consistent ethic of life. They ought to actively oppose capital punishment, preparations for war, and the life-diminishing poverty associated with" certain government policies.

 

Hmmm. Discuss."

 

I hate the labels, but I would consider myself a moderate "pro-lifer" - if there is such a thing (and I would like to think there is). Anyway, for myself, I don't know what there is to discuss about Hentoff's above quotation. I think he's right. I know in the past I had been far too willing to accept war and capital punishment, while holding myself out as "pro-life." However, over the past four or five years, for whatever reason, I've changed much of my thinking in regards to certain aspects of foreign policy and criminal justice. Right now, I would say I do fall along the Hentoff suggested anti-war, anti-death penalty, anti-abortion line. I imagine circumstances could arise that would force me to stray from that line, but, for now, that's where I would like to think I am. If I sound holier-than-thou in writing this, I apologize. I just wanted to give ... his desired "pro-lifer" feedback.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally, 2-3 times tops w/ the same partner who was on birth control and my part of the decision would have been to have the child.

Oh, and I meant to say :cheekkiss

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hentoff also takes pro-lifers to task for being inconsistent, quoting Barney Frank: "Those who oppose abortion are pro-life only up to the moment of birth." Hentoff feels that to be pro-life, one requires a "consistent ethic of life. They ought to actively oppose capital punishment, preparations for war, and the life-diminishing poverty associated with" certain government policies.

 

Hmmm. Discuss.

 

I agree. Although 'preparations for war' is kind of a vauge situation, as well as the standards for poverty. But on the whole I agree with his statement...and if you study the teaching of Jesus you'd find that he was of the same persuasion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So far, and I think I counted correctly, only one man has answered Miss Chris' post regarding the frequency unprotected sex in which they have knowingly indulged. I am keen to hear this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So far, and I think I counted correctly, only one man has answered Miss Chris' post regarding the frequency unprotected sex in which they have knowingly indulged. I am keen to hear this.

 

She exempted me from that question. :innocent

Link to post
Share on other sites
So far, and I think I counted correctly, only one man has answered Miss Chris' post regarding the frequency unprotected sex in which they have knowingly indulged. I am keen to hear this.

Zero, but please, no medals. I don't get out that much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have alot more than 3 kids right now, or maybe not because as a man, I am not in any position to tell anyone that they should have, or have not.

 

It's not my body, it's not my decision, and it's sad that so many of you think that it should be up to you. (men, that is) , (oh, and any women who feel they have the end all answer)

Link to post
Share on other sites

My take on it is as soon as the sperm leaves the male, the male could get hit by a bus/fall in a well/high-tail it to another state and that baby is still coming. I'm not saying the dad should have no say, but he should not have the final say.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So far, and I think I counted correctly, only one man has answered Miss Chris' post regarding the frequency unprotected sex in which they have knowingly indulged. I am keen to hear this.

 

Never had sex without birth control + condom. :dance

 

(but i don't get around that much, either)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...