REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

'New stem cell source' discovered

POSTED BY: GEEZER
UPDATED: Thursday, February 1, 2007 12:18
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2908
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, January 8, 2007 5:49 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


Quote:

US scientists say they have discovered a new source of stem cells that could one day repair damaged human organs.
Researchers successfully extracted the cells from the fluid that fills the womb in pregnancy and then grew them in lab experiments.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6231099.stm

So if this works, will it resolve the stem-cell debate, or will there be ethical issues developed around harvesting amniotic fluid?



"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 8, 2007 8:37 AM

GUYWHOWANTSAFIREFLYOFHISOWN


my money is on ethical issues, because someone, somewhere IS gonna complain

Why is the rum always gone?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 8, 2007 1:27 PM

SEVENPERCENT


It might change the debate, but based on what is argued, I doubt it'll change very much.

Most of the proponents of the ESC research don't want to "harvest" embryos. In their case (and I am of this camp) they want to use the thousands of embryos created and discarded through reproductive services (implantation, etc.) - embryos that are going to be destroyed anyway. I know someone who had the process for this done; they created something like 5 or 6 embryos (IANARHS**) and implanted one, which took. As far as I know they destroyed the rest (since my friends opted for no more children).

To the fundies, those are lives - lives I say! - that were discarded. So, to someone whose argument is consistent, the issue doesn't change - i.e., "Why can't we work on embryos that are going to be destroyed anyway?" vs. "It's life." The fact that they can harvest from amnio fluid is nice, but doesn't change anything from that argument.

What it will do though is open up another line of research, which is always nice. It will also move the base debate underground if the research is amazingly successful (by making it a fringe issue instead of a mainstream one). It will take pressure off the research community though, and that's a good thing.


**I Am Not A Reproductive Health Specialist

------------------------------------------
"A revolution without dancing is no revolution at all." - V

Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 8, 2007 5:41 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Guywhowantsafireflyofhisown:
my money is on ethical issues, because someone, somewhere IS gonna complain





Seems to me that's only a good thing. Yay Science ! When folks continue to look for options, good things will follow.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 8, 2007 5:56 PM

SEVENPERCENT


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Yay Science ! When folks continue to look for options, good things will follow.




Is it only "yay science" with you if they "look for options" you like? I seem to recall you in the Edwards thread slamming the scientists looking for options with ESC research, and aren't you one (I may be mistaken here, if I am apologies) that disputes much of the evidence of global warming?
Didn't you argue with me in the other thread when I said even paths that don't lead anywhere can produce results in unexpected areas? Just curious.


------------------------------------------
"A revolution without dancing is no revolution at all." - V

Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 8, 2007 6:11 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


No. The plupotency of embryonic stem cells will probably always make them a more attractive hypothetical option, and for those who view an embryo has no more important then a scab, they will always scratch their heads and wonder what the big deal is. And there will always be those who want to give the pro-choice argument a face-lift by equating it with saving paralyzed people. And there will always be scientists who want to be the first to get at federal funding for a new hESC line. In the long run I suspect we will discover certain uses for embryonic stem cells that cannot be replicated with other cells, but I also think that for the most part, we can and will discover that most uses of embryonic stem cells can be adequately replicated with other stem cells, and indeed we are discovering that.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 8, 2007 6:37 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Nah, they'll just come at it from the "Playing God" angle and scream a damned fit anyway - religion's been sandbaggin science ever since science existed, and will continue to do so as long as petty little minds not broad enough to understand the vast depth of a true creation are in charge.

Not that I partake of any of the common mythos, but it would seem to fall under the whole "giving man dominion over.." and creating a much larger sandbox to play in than a single dinky planet, wouldn't it ?

As for the sanctity of "life"... having seen the lot of unwanted, unwelcome children - (and I will *not* under any circumstances discuss it beyond this) I am neither side of the 'choice' debate, but rather "pro-death", better to kill, than torture to death.

-Frem

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 8, 2007 6:50 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by SevenPercent:
Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Yay Science ! When folks continue to look for options, good things will follow.




Is it only "yay science" with you if they "look for options" you like? I seem to recall you in the Edwards thread slamming the scientists looking for options with ESC research, and aren't you one (I may be mistaken here, if I am apologies) that disputes much of the evidence of global warming?
Didn't you argue with me in the other thread when I said even paths that don't lead anywhere can produce results in unexpected areas? Just curious.



Good grief, can't you give it a rest ? A BETTER alternative has come through study and reseach, and all you can do is gripe ? Some folks just want to fight for the sake of fighting. ESCs, aren't a viable option to treatments or cures, not when you have very real progress with ASCs. It's not so much an issue any more. So I see no point in fussing over it any longer.

And yes, I do have issues w/ the myth of 'man made' global warming. The evidence going back millions yr yrs, not just decades or a few hundred yrs, shows how the Earth is constantly in flux w/ warmer and cooler climates.

So yes, I say - Yay science !

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 8, 2007 7:00 PM

SIRI


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:

....So if this works, will it resolve the stem-cell debate, or will there be ethical issues developed around harvesting amniotic fluid? ...



I've read about this recently. I'm of a mind to agree with having more options to explore. That way it at least gives a chance that there will be some potential areas of agreement to allow further study and research.

While I have what would be called by some - a liberal bias leaning toward science and allowing discussion and debate on the ethics of same. Once a door has opened someone is going to walk thru it - scientists somewhere at some time are going to do it - whatever it is.

Thanks for the post - I do enjoy reading these shared discusions on topics of this ilk. I don't always respond but simply enjoy voyeuring and am sometimes entertained and amazed at the diversity of the discussion.


"Nothing in the 'verse can stop me."



Siri

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 8, 2007 7:14 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Like many potential avenues, this comes with both hope and caveats. So it's not time to bring out the champagne yet.

But for those who think birth control is abortion b/c humanity lies in a single cell this may not be a work-around. If these cells are pluripotent, then just like a newly fertilized egg in a woman or a Petri dish, it’s still a human.


The soul lies in the cytoplasm of the egg.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, January 8, 2007 7:31 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
But for those who think birth control is abortion b/c humanity lies in a single cell this may not be a work-around. If these cells are pluripotent, then just like a newly fertilized egg in a woman or a Petri dish, it’s still a human.

Of course, it’s human; all human stem cells are human, whether they are embryonic or not. But if its use doesn’t interrupt the natural development of a child, then I don’t think many people will object.



Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 12:27 AM

SASSALICIOUS


There seems to be a set of issues associated with the collection of the amniotic fluid. The issues addressed in the article could be avoided by taking some fluid before labor, but of course that also comes with the risk of miscarriage.

I would bet that people will complain because that's what people do.

Personally, I don't get what is so wrong about using one of the many many leftover embryos sitting in fertility clinics that are just going to get tossed anyway . . .

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wisconsin sucks. I don't want to be here.

~Forsaken Forever

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 7:14 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

A BETTER alternative has come through study and reseach, and all you can do is gripe ?
And you, of course, get to define "better".

---------------------------------
Hide the rum.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 7:25 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Finn,

"Of course, it’s human; all human stem cells are human, whether they are embryonic or not. But if its use doesn’t interrupt the natural development of a child, then I don’t think many people will object."

To extend your argument further, the naural development of a child doesn't happen in a petri dish - so how are ivf fertilized eggs an issue?

Unless you want to factor in 'intent'. As in, if the 'process' had an 'intent' to develop a child then it's a child, if not then not. But then I could ask how a process has intent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 7:37 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
To extend your argument further, the naural development of a child doesn't happen in a petri dish - so how are ivf fertilized eggs an issue?

Unless you want to factor in 'intent'. As in, if the 'process' had an 'intent' to develop a child then it's a child, if not then not. But then I could ask how a process has intent.

I think we’ve been over this already. I think you know how I feel about that. A embryo is part of the development of a human being. A cell floating around in amniotic fluid is not necessarily.




Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 7:47 AM

FLETCH2


A friend of mine has a genetic defect that can (and has) resulted in disabled children. If these unused fetuses are "human" and therefore in need of protection, why isn't more being done to allow them to be donated to couples who cannot safely have kids of their own?

This to my mind is one of the weaknesses of the pro-life argument. If you ban abortion then are you willing to help families who end up with unwanted children? If every fetus is human shouldn't you "spread the wealth" by matching spare fetuses with families that need them?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 7:49 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by AURaptor:
And yes, I do have issues w/ the myth of 'man made' global warming. The evidence going back millions yr yrs, not just decades or a few hundred yrs, shows how the Earth is constantly in flux w/ warmer and cooler climates.

So yes, I say - Yay science !

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "



Except pretty much every study not funded by oil companies is saying it's not just part of the normal cycle.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 8:30 AM

RAZZA


Quote:

Originally posted by Fletch2:
This to my mind is one of the weaknesses of the pro-life argument. If you ban abortion then are you willing to help families who end up with unwanted children? If every fetus is human shouldn't you "spread the wealth" by matching spare fetuses with families that need them?



I'm confused Fletch. One of the reasons many prolifers give for banning abortion is the fact that so many couples who can't have children of their own are looking for children to adopt. There is such a shortage of newborns up for adoption that many people go out of the country to find one. This isn't a weakness of the pro-life arguement at all, it is in fact the opposite.

-----------------
"There is not such a cradle of democracy upon the earth as the Free Public Library, this republic of letters, where neither rank, office, nor wealth receives the slightest consideration."
---Andrew Carnegie

"Doing research on the Web is like using a library assembled piecemeal by pack rats and vandalized nightly."
---Roger Ebert

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 8:34 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:

A BETTER alternative has come through study and reseach, and all you can do is gripe ?
And you, of course, get to define "better".

---------------------------------
Hide the rum.



Better meaning...

A: Treatments that don't result in harmful tumors, which results from the use of ESCs.

B: No needless destruction of 1 life so another can be treated.

C: A far higher success rate with ASCs than with ESCs.

D: All of the above.

You get to pick.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 10:21 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Oh Hi Finn,

The topic was covered, but with SignyM. This new post just reminded me of that issue. It looks like the same theme.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 10:54 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Rap,

I like that you address your issues straight-on as you see them. But you are usually short on backing up your claims. I was wondering if you could provide a link or two for each one.

Thanks

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 12:00 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
Rap,

I like that you address your issues straight-on as you see them. But you are usually short on backing up your claims. I was wondering if you could provide a link or two for each one.

Thanks



"They grow fast, as fast as embryonic stem cells, and they show great pluripotentiality," meaning they can become many kinds of tissues, said study leader Anthony Atala, director of the Institute for Regenerative Medicine at Wake Forest University School of Medicine in Winston-Salem, N.C. "But they remain stable for years without forming tumors," he added, something that embryonic cells are not very good at.

Moreover, because the cells are a genetic match to the developing fetus, tissues grown from them in the laboratory will not be rejected if they are used to treat birth defects in that newborn, researchers said. Alternatively, the cells could be frozen, providing a personalized tissue bank for use later in life.

The new cells are adding credence to an emerging consensus among experts that the popular distinction between embryonic and "adult" stem cells -- those isolated from adult bone marrow and other organs -- is artificial.


"This is wonderful news," said Richard Doerflinger, deputy director of pro-life activities at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which opposes research that depends on embryo destruction. "It doesn't require harming anyone or destroying life at any stage."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/07/AR2007
010700674.html


That'll get ya started.




People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 3:00 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

A embryo is part of the development of a human being.
Deterministic model of nature. Not valid. Nature has no "intent".

---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 17, 2007 8:12 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


This is an interesting article.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/01/070110181217.htm

Scientists Discover Stage At Which An Embryonic Cell Is Fated To Become A Stem Cell
Science Daily — Cambridge scientists have discovered the stage at which some of the cells of a fertilised mammalian egg are fated to develop into stem cells and why this occurs. The findings of the study, which overturn the long-held belief that cells are the same until the fourth cleavage (division) of the embryo, are reported in the journal Nature.

After fertilisation, the cells of the embryo at first undergo equal, symmetrical divisions and unequal, asymmetrical ones that direct smaller daughter cells towards the inside of the embryo. These become the inner cell mass of stem cells. Previously, it was believed that the mammalian embryo starts its development with identical cells and only as these inside and outside cells form do differences between cells first emerge.

However, research led by Professor Magdelena Zernicka-Goetz, University of Cambridge, has revealed evidence to suggest that differences between the embryonic cells are already apparent at the 4-cell-stage, before the cells become partitioned between the inside or outside of the embryo. And those differences depend on the orientation and order of the very first cleavage divisions of the embryo.

Professor Zernicka-Goetz said, "Our findings were surprising since they showed that cells of the mammalian embryo first start to differ from each other much earlier in development than previously supposed but also they give us a real clue on how to manipulate embryonic cells so that they will develop with the properties of the natural stem cells of the embryo."

The study also found cell fate and transcription activity is determined by the level of a methylated form of histone H3, one of the basic proteins around which DNA is packaged and which when modified in this way affects gene expression. They found that the higher the levels of this modified form of histone H3, the more predisposed the mammalian embryonic cells were to develop the qualities of inner embryonic cells, a population that have stem-cell-like properties. Thus, their results show that manipulating epigenetic information in this protein in early mouse embryos can influence cell fate determination.


Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by University of Cambridge.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 31, 2007 2:05 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/01/070128140041.htm

Beating Heart Muscle With Built-In Blood Supply Created From Stem Cells

Science Daily — Researchers at the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology have created new heart muscle with its own blood supply using human embryonic stem cells

Despite progress over the past two decades in treating cardiac disease, there are few good ways to fix damaged heart muscle.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 31, 2007 2:39 PM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by Razza:
I'm confused Fletch. One of the reasons many prolifers give for banning abortion is the fact that so many couples who can't have children of their own are looking for children to adopt. There is such a shortage of newborns up for adoption that many people go out of the country to find one. This isn't a weakness of the pro-life arguement at all, it is in fact the opposite.

That's not what he's saying. He's saying that if the pro-lifers were serious they'd be willing to do something positive to aid adoption, where instead they want to force their world view on others and walk away. I believe the weakness comes in where they're willing to let other people, and only others, pay for the implementation of their desired world view.

It would strengthen the pro-life case immensely if pro-lifers also supported social programs helping these extra pregnancies and children. They don't on the whole, probably because they'd then have to do something themselves.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, January 31, 2007 3:03 PM

RAZZA


Citizen:

Why would you say they do not support adoption programs? A quick google search using the terms "pro-life adoption programs" found several links of which these are just few that contradict your belief. I'll agree with you that there are too many pro-life advocates who do not couple their anti-abortion statements with an appropriate amount of sex education, but their support of adoption is more than just cursory IMHO.

http://www.ppl.org/adoptinsert3.html

http://www.choosethechild.org/pages/programs.htm

http://www.nccbuscc.org/prolife/programs/rlp/97rlpdes.htm



-----------------
"There is not such a cradle of democracy upon the earth as the Free Public Library, this republic of letters, where neither rank, office, nor wealth receives the slightest consideration."
---Andrew Carnegie

"Doing research on the Web is like using a library assembled piecemeal by pack rats and vandalized nightly."
---Roger Ebert

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 1, 2007 5:03 AM

FLETCH2


I think Citizen has the crux of my argument and I know that some Christian charity's do great work in that regard. I was behind an SUV a year or so ago with a bumper sticker that said "Pregnant? alone? scared? Call us and we will help you" it carried the number of a Catholic charity group and I thought it was extremely effective. I have no problem with faith groups that advocate a pro-life view point and then actively work for the benefit of the resulting children. To my mind that is the right thing to do.


The issue I have is with faith groups advocating public policy and then not "closing the circle" with the social impact of that policy change. Do you want to know what girls who don't have an abortion become? On the whole single "welfare" moms. If you make anti-abortion a public policy and take the choice from the individual then society has to step up to shoulder some of the responsability for having taken that decision. If that means a faster more streamlined adoption process to match unwanted kids with childless couples or fronting some of the child care costs to allow single moms to go to school or work full time jobs then so be it. Yes that's a burden and yes you as a tax payer were not stupid enough to have unprotected sex or have a contraception method that failed, but if you are taking away someone else's ability to chose based on your moral sensabilities then there has to be a cost associated with that.

Just as an aside. Last year a friend of mine got pregnant even with birth control, there is a genetic handicap in her family and the baby has it. The abnormality was diagnosed early but she did not abort because of religious conviction. However, that child has a lifetime of expensive medical procedures and care ahead of it. She made the pro-life choice and I suppose understands the problems she will now have. However, if the girl had been forced into this by law, would you expect society in general to help with the burden of raising that child?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 1, 2007 6:51 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

If that means a faster more streamlined adoption process to match unwanted kids with childless couples or fronting some of the child care costs to allow single moms to go to school or work full time jobs then so be it. Yes that's a burden and yes you as a tax payer were not stupid enough to have unprotected sex or have a contraception method that failed, but if you are taking away someone else's ability to chose based on your moral sensabilities then there has to be a cost associated with that.

*DING*DING*
We have a winner...(Cue Siren)

I concur, with the further statement that proper education should include contraceptive devices and their proper and effective use - and said devices should be readily available.

I still think we should make the Trojan Man a national hero, too, but i'll pass on that one to get the rest.

That's one use of my tax dollars I do *NOT* mind.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 1, 2007 7:16 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by Razza:
Citizen:

Why would you say they do not support adoption programs? A quick google search using the terms "pro-life adoption programs" found several links of which these are just few that contradict your belief. I'll agree with you that there are too many pro-life advocates who do not couple their anti-abortion statements with an appropriate amount of sex education, but their support of adoption is more than just cursory IMHO.

I said most, and it still holds, most pro-life advocates also want to cut welfare and other programs that would be required to help society cope with their desired world view. I'm not blind to the fact that some do want to shoulder the burden, and although I don't agree with their position I respect them for at least being ready to shoulder the responcibilities that their world view will foster, but still in my experience they are much in the minority.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 1, 2007 7:47 AM

RAZZA


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
I said most, and it still holds, most pro-life advocates also want to cut welfare and other programs that would be required to help society cope with their desired world view. I'm not blind to the fact that some do want to shoulder the burden, and although I don't agree with their position I respect them for at least being ready to shoulder the responcibilities that their world view will foster, but still in my experience they are much in the minority.



Okay, I can see your point of view. Where I part from you is the belief that the only solutions to the net results of their beliefs are government funded ones.

-----------------
"There is not such a cradle of democracy upon the earth as the Free Public Library, this republic of letters, where neither rank, office, nor wealth receives the slightest consideration."
---Andrew Carnegie

"Doing research on the Web is like using a library assembled piecemeal by pack rats and vandalized nightly."
---Roger Ebert

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 1, 2007 7:52 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by Razza:
Okay, I can see your point of view. Where I part from you is the belief that the only solutions to the net results of their beliefs are government funded ones.

If your not willing to pay money to the goverment for government funded schemes I fail too see how you'll be willing to spend possibly more money and definatly more time on private ones. I've not seen anyone say "We should cut these schemes because private ones will be better". I've seen plenty say "Not with MY money".



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 1, 2007 8:06 AM

FLETCH2


Personally I don't care who does it as long as someone does. The reason that government tends to be involved is that society is the one that is enforcing the policy (through laws) and it is society who will pay the social costs if we get it wrong.

Other than that, I'm in agreement with Citizen. The problem with charity is that it is not a garenteed constant source of funding. The consequences of bringing that child into the world is a blank cheque with a potentially life long commitment. Someone or something with a stable income has to underright that.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 1, 2007 8:35 AM

RAZZA


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
If your not willing to pay money to the goverment for government funded schemes I fail too see how you'll be willing to spend possibly more money and definatly more time on private ones. I've not seen anyone say "We should cut these schemes because private ones will be better". I've seen plenty say "Not with MY money".



I'm sorry you fail to see how anyone would be willing to spend their own money and time helping others. Maybe that is why you cannot envision a society that does not sub-contract their charitable responsibilities to their government.

-----------------
"There is not such a cradle of democracy upon the earth as the Free Public Library, this republic of letters, where neither rank, office, nor wealth receives the slightest consideration."
---Andrew Carnegie

"Doing research on the Web is like using a library assembled piecemeal by pack rats and vandalized nightly."
---Roger Ebert

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 1, 2007 8:58 AM

FLETCH2


Is that charitable commitment legally enforcable? Because once that child is here there are costs that someone has to pay. If you want to legally enforcing your moral viewpoint on abortion why wouldn't you legally enforce the "charitable" moral obligation that goes with it?

I think the charity argument is a cop out, you are enforcing your moral viewpoint, forcing someone to make a none volentary continuous commitment while you yourself want your part to be a volentary, sort of moral obligation... kinda.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 1, 2007 9:43 AM

RAZZA


Quote:

Originally posted by Fletch2:
Is that charitable commitment legally enforcable? Because once that child is here there are costs that someone has to pay. If you want to legally enforcing your moral viewpoint on abortion why wouldn't you legally enforce the "charitable" moral obligation that goes with it?

I think the charity argument is a cop out, you are enforcing your moral viewpoint, forcing someone to make a none volentary continuous commitment while you yourself want your part to be a volentary, sort of moral obligation... kinda.



Fletch:

First off, I'm pro-choice, so please don't lump me with those who want to push their morals on others, just playing devil's advocate here. I have no problem with passing laws that give legal requirements for the care of children born as a result of other laws which ban abortion. I do not believe those requirements necessarily have to include government funded institutions to carry them out, however.

-----------------
"There is not such a cradle of democracy upon the earth as the Free Public Library, this republic of letters, where neither rank, office, nor wealth receives the slightest consideration."
---Andrew Carnegie

"Doing research on the Web is like using a library assembled piecemeal by pack rats and vandalized nightly."
---Roger Ebert

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, February 1, 2007 12:18 PM

CITIZEN


Quote:

Originally posted by Razza:
I'm sorry you fail to see how anyone would be willing to spend their own money and time helping others. Maybe that is why you cannot envision a society that does not sub-contract their charitable responsibilities to their government.

Well that's an interesting way to make up what I'm saying.

Maybe you can go back and read what I wrote before talking out of your arse again, thanks so much.
Quote:

First off, I'm pro-choice, so please don't lump me with those who want to push their morals on others, just playing devil's advocate here.
Considering what you've just done with me I don't think you have a right to complain. Not so nice when the boot is on the other foot no?



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Sun, November 24, 2024 09:50 - 7496 posts
The Islamic Way Of War
Sun, November 24, 2024 08:51 - 41 posts
Favourite Novels Of All Time?
Sun, November 24, 2024 08:40 - 44 posts
Russia to quit International Space Station
Sun, November 24, 2024 08:05 - 10 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Sun, November 24, 2024 08:03 - 946 posts
Russia should never interfere in any other nation's internal politics, meanwhile the USA and IMF is helping kill Venezuela
Sun, November 24, 2024 07:48 - 103 posts
Japanese Culture, S.Korea movies are now outselling American entertainment products
Sun, November 24, 2024 07:24 - 51 posts
The parallel internet is coming
Sun, November 24, 2024 06:04 - 180 posts
Giant UFOs caught on videotape
Sun, November 24, 2024 05:43 - 8 posts
California on the road to Venezuela
Sun, November 24, 2024 05:41 - 26 posts
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Sun, November 24, 2024 05:37 - 71 posts
MAGA movement
Sun, November 24, 2024 05:04 - 14 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL