Vezon Dash Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Not if they are a special breed of human that has no rights. To be a human being is to have human rights. The issue debated when it comes to abortion is when that personhood begins. Many legislation stating that personhood begins at conception is shot down because people can't sift through their morality to pin down a definition. Assume they have no rights. It is a hypothetical situation, and we could fix laws to accommodate this situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riku3220 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Not if they are a special breed of human that has no rights. To be a human being is to have human rights. The issue debated when it comes to abortion is when that personhood begins. Many legislation stating that personhood begins at conception is shot down because people can't sift through their morality to pin down a definition. Assume they have no rights. It is a hypothetical situation, and we could fix laws to accommodate this situation.We've got to entirely take the "human" out of the equation then. If we could take the organs from farm animals and put them into humans then the only people I think who would have a problem with this would be PETA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Not if they are a special breed of human that has no rights. To be a human being is to have human rights. The issue debated when it comes to abortion is when that personhood begins. Many legislation stating that personhood begins at conception is shot down because people can't sift through their morality to pin down a definition. Assume they have no rights. It is a hypothetical situation, and we could fix laws to accommodate this situation.We have these laws for a reason. Unless you could genetically modify them so that they are somehow not conscience throughout their existence and be completely brain-dead, they would be suffering. And it would still be incredibly creepy and immoral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vezon Dash Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Not if they are a special breed of human that has no rights. To be a human being is to have human rights. The issue debated when it comes to abortion is when that personhood begins. Many legislation stating that personhood begins at conception is shot down because people can't sift through their morality to pin down a definition. Assume they have no rights. It is a hypothetical situation, and we could fix laws to accommodate this situation.We've got to entirely take the "human" out of the equation then. If we could take the organs from farm animals and put them into humans then the only people I think who would have a problem with this would be PETA. Which is exactly my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastortoise Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 ...we can use umbilical cord blood for stem cell research, guys. Nobody is justifying abortion, stop being pinheads (by bringing it up). I'm pretty sure the only place that ever had stem cell research banned was in the U.S., and Obama lifted that ban since stem cells are so powerful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastortoise Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Not if they are a special breed of human that has no rights. To be a human being is to have human rights. The issue debated when it comes to abortion is when that personhood begins. Many legislation stating that personhood begins at conception is shot down because people can't sift through their morality to pin down a definition. Assume they have no rights. It is a hypothetical situation, and we could fix laws to accommodate this situation.We've got to entirely take the "human" out of the equation then. If we could take the organs from farm animals and put them into humans then the only people I think who would have a problem with this would be PETA. Which is exactly my point.Who decides they aren't human? What makes them not human?P.S. if your train of thought starts with "we could do what the Nazis did except this time..." then you're probably going down an unethical path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrandZephyr Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I agree that the use of fetuses for stem cell research would help people to justify abortions, but I don't think we should stint the research just because of this. I believe the law should be against the promotion of abortion to further stem cell research, not to hinder stem cell research in the fear of increased abortion. As far as the idea of cloning people then slaughtering them for parts; Either way you look at it, there will be people with a rationale to complain. If you're religious and you don't think clones are people because they won't have souls, then I'll bet you won't support cloning of people in the first place as the creation of man is in god's hands. If you're of the mind that people are just a collection of organs and tissue, then you will then support that the clones are in-fact humans and deserve human rights. To me cloning seems like a form of reproduction. So, I believe that a cloned person should be handled similarly to how a child is. If, once they are old enough, this clone wants to give up an organ or be an organ donor when they die, so be it. I don't support the idea of cloning entire people simply to be used as spare parts for the original. If we could clone individual organs, then that is something I would consider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sees_all1 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 ...we can use umbilical cord blood for stem cell research, guys. Nobody is justifying abortion, stop being pinheads (by bringing it up). I'm pretty sure the only place that ever had stem cell research banned was in the U.S., and Obama lifted that ban since stem cells are so powerful. Umbilical cord blood is categorized as adult stem cells. 99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me! ♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thoughtHave some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪♪♪ And I'm not doneAnd I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transcript80 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Question for everyone: What do you guys think about harvesting the organs of the dead to give to living people, organ donors or not? I don't think they should take organs from non-donors. Revolutionary idea here. (Brace yourselves for what I am about to say.) I think that they should start breeding humans as livestock. They can use these "livestock" humans for organs, research, and other uses that is 'unethical' for us to use 'real' humans for. However, these humans will and should be kept completely separate from normal humans. They would not learn to talk or think for their own in order to keep those human rights activists from being all angry. Like in the movie "The Island". I think it is unethical. About stem cell research: Pro on all kinds of stem cells. It is baloney to think abortion rates would increase. Where I live, abortion is legal (until a certain amount of weeks of pregnancy) and there is no influence of the rate of abortion that has ANY kind of correlation with stem cell research legislation. The majority of abortions is not taken lightly by the would -be mother, and the knowledge that them embryo is usefull in some way had little to no influence at all on the decision of heving one. The vast majority decides to have an abortion regardless of what happens to the embryo. To add to that: most embryos that are used, are not from abortions, but from embryos that are "left over" from IVF. In IVF (in vitro fertilisation), several eggs are fertilised by semen, but only 1 (or in some cases more) are plantd in the womb. The "left over" embryos (usually a clum of 4 or 8 cells!) are used for stem cell reasearch. As for mature stem cells, such as umbilical cord stem cells, fat stem cells and mesenchymal stem cells: they are not "true" stem cells, the have differentiated into an early stage developed cell already. "Finding the right enzymes" (which are mainly cytokines/hormones instead) as an ealier poster said, is costly, and does not yield the desired effect of reverting the adult stem cell into "true" stem cell. It is my observation that the more (right-wing) conservative christian the government, the more of this potentially life saving reasearch is outlawed. When asked, whether the involved politicians would take the cure for the cancer when they were to get the disease, or the transplant when they needed it, the amount of "yes" is making me sad...hypocrits. As for organ donation: it should remain voluntarily. I am in control of whatever happens to my body, both alive and dead.I do think that organ donors may be given an advantage on the waiting list over non-donors.I always find it hypocritical when people, ask weter they'd like to receive an organ, say yes, but when asked whether they are organ donor still say "no". And that there is no light bulb popping up in their head... Other data was removed when acoount got hacked... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastortoise Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 To add to that: most embryos that are used, are not from abortions, but from embryos that are "left over" from IVF. In IVF (in vitro fertilisation), several eggs are fertilised by semen, but only 1 (or in some cases more) are plantd in the womb. The "left over" embryos (usually a clum of 4 or 8 cells!) are used for stem cell reasearch. As for mature stem cells, such as umbilical cord stem cells, fat stem cells and mesenchymal stem cells: they are not "true" stem cells, the have differentiated into an early stage developed cell already. "Finding the right enzymes" (which are mainly cytokines/hormones instead) as an ealier poster said, is costly, and does not yield the desired effect of reverting the adult stem cell into "true" stem cell.You're completely right. But the most useful goal to strive towards in stem cell research is to revert undifferentiable adult cells into stem cells to eliminate any organ/blood rejection. I feel like we shouldn't need a source of stem cells that we would be dependent on, like how we now have cDNA banks for all sorts of genes so that we don't have to grow or keep a steady strain of cells alive for research. I really don't feel like all researchers "need" pluripotent stems cells just yet - we don't even know all the factors that initiate Mitosis in regular (and cancer) cells. ...we can use umbilical cord blood for stem cell research, guys. Nobody is justifying abortion, stop being pinheads (by bringing it up). I'm pretty sure the only place that ever had stem cell research banned was in the U.S., and Obama lifted that ban since stem cells are so powerful. Umbilical cord blood is categorized as adult stem cells.It contains multipotent Hematopoietic stem cells, which can generate any type of blood cell. Instead of using pluripotent stem cells for research, scientists can tease away the special characters of multipotent cells to discover what makes them able to differentiate into multiple types of cells. Like how we use baker's yeast to study the genetics of humans or study rats and mice in human psychology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Okay, maybe it was a jump to say that abortion rates would increase if embryonic stem cell research was legalized (if it isn't already). My main buff against it is that it'll be used as a means of convincing people that their actions were okay. Justifying the killing of an innocent with 'unstable' research such as embryonic stem cell research is morally wrong. And I'd hate for people to not feel any remorse/convince themselves it was okay because of this research. It's funny, this talk about cloning and everything relates perfectly to the book I'm reading (Frankenstein). :P | My Tumblr | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vezon Dash Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Okay, maybe it was a jump to say that abortion rates would increase if embryonic stem cell research was legalized (if it isn't already). My main buff against it is that it'll be used as a means of convincing people that their actions were okay. Justifying the killing of an innocent with 'unstable' research such as embryonic stem cell research is morally wrong. And I'd hate for people to not feel any remorse/convince themselves it was okay because of this research. It's funny, this talk about cloning and everything relates perfectly to the book I'm reading (Frankenstein). :P Why are we still on abortion? Stemcell research =\= abortion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Embryonic stem cell research involves abortion. I'm not addressing abortion, but rather stem cell research in relation to abortion, and that's perfectly on topic. | My Tumblr | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sees_all1 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 The fact is that by the time someone is looking to get an abortion (2-3 months), their baby has already differentiated enough and it does not contain embryonic stem cells. 99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me! ♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thoughtHave some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪♪♪ And I'm not doneAnd I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I have a feeling most people who look to get abortions wouldn't be told that/have the decency to research it. | My Tumblr | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Okay, maybe it was a jump to say that abortion rates would increase if embryonic stem cell research was legalized (if it isn't already). My main buff against it is that it'll be used as a means of convincing people that their actions were okay. Justifying the killing of an innocent with 'unstable' research such as embryonic stem cell research is morally wrong. And I'd hate for people to not feel any remorse/convince themselves it was okay because of this research. Is it a bad thing that people don't feel remorse or feel less remorse? More specifically, is it worth taking away potential treatment from others in order to make someone feel bad? Stem Cell research would be making the best of a bad situation, in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I think it's a very bad thing if a person doesn't feel bad about taking someone else's life. More importantly, I think it's a very bad thing if a person feels good about taking someone's life in the name of research. The above is assuming that you believe a fetus is 'someone'. And again, if the research can be done another way, why not utilize this way instead? At this point, potential treatment of others is not taken away with the 'illegalization' of embryonic stem cell research, because adult stem cell research has been more successful/less potentially harmful. | My Tumblr | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimberly Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 And again, if the research can be done another way, why not utilize this way instead? To add to that: most embryos that are used, are not from abortions, but from embryos that are "left over" from IVF. In IVF (in vitro fertilisation), several eggs are fertilised by semen, but only 1 (or in some cases more) are plantd in the womb. The "left over" embryos (usually a clum of 4 or 8 cells!) are used for stem cell reasearch. Many states restrict research on aborted fetuses or embryos, but research is often permitted with consent of the patient. Almost half of the states also restrict the sale of fetuses or embryos. Louisiana is the only state that specifically prohibits research on in vitro fertilized (IVF) embryos. Illinois and Michigan also prohibit research on live embryos. Finally, Arkansas, Indiana, Michigan, North Dakota and South Dakota prohibit research on cloned embryos. http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=14413 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Not against stem cell research. I'm against embryonic stem cell research. I couldn't tell if that post was directed to me or transcript. | My Tumblr | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I think it's a very bad thing if a person doesn't feel bad about taking someone else's life. More importantly, I think it's a very bad thing if a person feels good about taking someone's life in the name of research. I agree that it's not a good thing necessarily, though I think that someone feeling good about an abortion is worth saving a life. The above is assuming that you believe a fetus is 'someone'.The arguments/statements I've been using have been assuming that. Not because it's what I believe (I'm somewhere in the middle of pro-life and pro-choice, I can elaborate if anyone wants), but because it should allow both parties to [hopefully] agree. And again, if the research can be done another way, why not utilize this way instead? At this point, potential treatment of others is not taken away with the 'illegalization' of embryonic stem cell research, because adult stem cell research has been more successful/less potentially harmful.Not going to lie, I'm not incredibly educated about stem cell research, and I agree 100% with this point. Though I do feel that scientists should see if stem cells from fetuses have more potential to lead to medical breakthroughs. If they don't, then they can simply use one of the other methods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimberly Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I'm against embryonic stem cell research. Why? Because when people say 'embryo' they think 'abortion'? There is a reason why I quoted Transcript's post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Because it is the result of an abortion. I'm not going to support something that is made possible by something I'm adamantly against. Especially since there are other means of doing the same research, means that don't rely on abortions. And to clarify, I'm also against in vitro fertilization (and that is due to my religion). I'm also against embryonic stem cell research for the reasons I've been discussing with Rob. I don't like the mindset legalizing it will create. | My Tumblr | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giordano Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Abortions, condoms, pills...same thing really. "The cry of the poor is not always just, but if you never hear it you'll never know what justice is." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeno Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 1. take adult stem cells 2. continue research 3. apply research in "the field" 4. do this for 10+ years 5. check outcome 6. outcome is probably successful, in this case I'll assume its successful 7. ???????????????????????????? 8. profit Avoid all of the commotion to just not use embryos, and just leave it as it is Stats[hide][/hide]Click for my adventurer's log Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprint Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 1. take adult stem cells 2. continue research 3. apply research in "the field" 4. do this for 10+ years 5. check outcome 6. outcome is probably successful, in this case I'll assume its successful 7. ???????????????????????????? 8. profit Avoid all of the commotion to just not use embryos, and just leave it as it isThe thing is that mature cells dont reproduce, so that won't work as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now