H.A. Letter--Congressmen oppose science - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jul 25, 2006

H.A. Letter--Congressmen oppose science

LeftASAP · Status: Offline

Has LVN and Cossack registered yet? I can guess what they think of this letter.

-- Edited by LeftASAP at 13:36, 2006-07-25

LVN · Status: Offline

I consider the source. I just get so tired of being part of the army of scientific darkness. That's so ridiculous.

For what it's worth, my father had a massive stroke in his early 40's and suffered major impairment until he died in 2004. Towards the end he developed Parkinsons. Under no circumstances would he have countenanced this research, no matter what the outcome for himself personally.

On the other hand, my mother says, "I don't know how to feel about this."

It's not about "scientific ignorance" Dr. Fitzgerald. It's about whether or not the embryo is a "person" -- that is the very, very hard question people are struggling with. To insult those who are struggling, those who honestly believe that an embryo is a human being, is not a solution.

LeftASAP · Status: Offline

LVN, I thought it was Dr. Fitzgerald, but couldn't find him in USM's directory. Did he retire or am I thinking of someone else?

Atheist · Status: Offline

LVN wrote:

...It's not about "scientific ignorance" Dr. Fitzgerald. It's about whether or not the embryo is a "person" -- that is the very, very hard question people are struggling with. To insult those who are struggling, those who honestly believe that an embryo is a human being, is not a solution.

LVN, we finally got around to the real issue. I think it's interesting that something we can't see(or hardly see) with the naked eye would be considered a "Human Being". I don't see how to honestly get to your position by observation of the embryo. Granted it has the "potential" to grow into a human if, and only if, a suitable life support system is provided.

So it seems to come down to someone telling stories about an "immortal soul" that leads people to "believe" embryo are human beings, without evidence. The philosophy the theologians use in their theology employs ancient concepts of "nature" and "substance" that doesn't account for the concept of evolution of one thing into another or in their terms, "one substance evolving into another". I don't see why this scientific principle is difficult for theologians to accept when many believe in transubstantiation.

LVN · Status: Offline

At what point does it become a human?

(It's interesting that you can be arrested for harming the eggs of endangered birds. As far as I know, there's no provision for finding a point at which the egg becomes a bird.)

And Atheist, this is really the conversation I don't want to have on the board. The pro people are pro, the anti people are anti, and neither you nor I will change anyone's mind. Also, you'll have to ask someone Catholic about transubstaniation. I'm a Protestant.

Southern Belle · Status: Offline

This is a discussion that has been carried on for years and will continue to be discussed.

Atheist · Status: Offline

LVN wrote:

At what point does it become a human? (It's interesting that you can be arrested for harming the eggs of endangered birds. As far as I know, there's no provision for finding a point at which the egg becomes a bird.) And Atheist, this is really the conversation I don't want to have on the board. The pro people are pro, the anti people are anti, and neither you nor I will change anyone's mind. Also, you'll have to ask someone Catholic about transubstaniation. I'm a Protestant.

Understood. Apparently a person stops being a "human being" when they are brain dead because that is when they remove life support. If so, how can something without a brain be human? I understand you rather not discuss this and respect your position.

LVN, I thought you were in the Episcopal Church. Am I wrong or don't they have the Eucharist. Don't they believe in transubstantiation? I will stop here, but I would appreciate being educated about the Episcopal Church.

Silver Surfer · Status: Offline

As most here know, there are several types of stem cell research: embryonic, umbilical cord blood, and adult, among others. AFAIK, nobody's raging against the latter types of stem cell research. I think there's a larger issue here, one that transcends the "is an embryo a person" debate.

Suppose embryonic stem cell research is allowed in the U.S. The response to this will be that scientists will need embryos for study. Once the currently existing stores of embryos are used up, where will science turn for more? To women! Women could be asked to "do their part" in the fight against [insert disease here] by providing embryos for research. Think about the politics of that.

I think this is a real slippery slope. Once we say it's OK to test embryos, we'd better be ready for the embryo production industry that will surely follow. Critics of anti-embryonic groups claim that it's a religious issue, when the issue might be better characterized as an ethical issue. Do we want to start breeding for the sake of science? Will certain types of women or men be solicited to help provide certain types of embryos? Should we start engineering embryos to fit our scientific needs?

I have some real trouble with this issue, and it's not all religious. Keep in mind that nobody currently knows if embryonic stem cell research will provide any cures/solutions not provided by the other types of stem cell research.

LVN · Status: Offline

Atheist wrote:

LVN wrote:

LVN, I thought you were in the Episcopal Church. Am I wrong or don't they have the Eucharist. Don't they believe in transubstantiation? I will stop here, but I would appreciate being educated about the Episcopal Church.

Oh heavenly days, Atheist. There is an "Anglo-Catholic" wing and a strongly Evangelical wing. Officially, it's the "Real Presence" and the elements are treated with great respect.
You can private-message me if you want to know more. Let's not bore everybody else with it.
Silver Surfer, I can't answer these questions. (Personal incident removed.)

-- Edited by LVN at 16:01, 2006-07-25

Silver Surfer · Status: Offline

LVN wrote:

Silver Surfer, I can't answer these questions. {edited per lvn request} You're right, I really don't want to get into these issues on the board.

I respect that you don't want to discuss this issue any further on the board.

Now would be a good time for those who are in a position to lay some ground rules.

One I'd like to see is that thread names should represent the crux of the thread, with the understanding that threads take on lives of their own sometimes. Also, if you don't like a thread or don't want to read a thread, you should hit your "Back" button and go on to something else. Hopefully registration will control spamming and the incessant COB posting. Of course, I recognize that I'm really not in a position to ask for anything.

-- Edited by Silver Surfer at 15:59, 2006-07-25

-- Edited by Moderator at 18:17, 2006-07-25

LVN · Status: Offline

SS, I was about to edit out the part of my post about my sister. Would you please edit it out of yours too? Thanks.

Reporter · Status: Offline

More Letters:

C.L.--Stem-cell bill veto delays research

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060726/OPINION02/607260305/1009/OPINION

C.L.--Religion doesn't oppose science

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060726/OPINION02/607260303/1009/OPINION

C.L.--Bush correct on stem-cell bill veto

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060726/OPINION02/607260308/1009/OPINION

-- Edited by Reporter at 06:40, 2006-07-26

Emma · Status: Offline

Perhaps the Congressmen were blinded with it. You know, like poetry in motion:

All their tubes and wires

And careful notes

And antiquated notions

Silver Surfer · Status: Offline

I think the 3rd letter posted by Reporter today makes a good point. Embryonic stem cell research isn't illegal -- it's just not taxpayer funded.

Cossack · Status: Offline

Has LVN and Cossack registered yet? I can guess what they think of this letter.

If I attacked everyone who disagreed with me and called them disrespectful names, I would be too busy to do anything else. Discussing ideas often leads to positive outcomes. However, I have never seen an incidence of name calling that has led to anything other than a reply such as "So's your mama". Being a minority on campus, i.e., a conservative that believes in markets, individual property rights, and representative government, I am no stranger to being the recipient of the name calling activity. Of course, in my darker moments I can conjure up some insulting terms for those who disagree with me. I hope that we all agree that this Board is not the place for this sophomoric activity.