Stem Cell Research

A Finnish man regrew his upper jawbone using his own stem cells.

Link

Most Christians are turned off by stem-cell research, because they automatically associate it with embryonic stem-cell research, which I oppose.

Science, as a general rule doesn' t interest me much (Go on, make the joke Agent), no less on a molecular level, but I find stem-cell research absolutely fascinating, in that cool four-year-old way, like when you first see a dinosaur movie, or first saw Star Wars. The idea of creating new tissue, or a whole new organ all together out of a basic cell is such an out-there concept, and seeing it in action really amazes me.

What are your personal opinions on, & where do you think stem-cell research will go (IE, how far, which organs, human development?)?

I think that this could be a great step for humanity if perfected. Imagine when its so advanced that you could completely grow limbs or even vital organs.

I am catholic, but I really couldn' t care less if the church thinks this is wrong. I for one, don' t think that trying to improve the quality of life is a bad thing. Is not like they are playing to be god by creating new humans or anything like that.

Anyone religoous should be bared from any political decision making.


Im all for science, any science that can better our future. Embryo stemcell growth isnt really that fucked up.

I had this long brilliant post to defend my position but I lost it because of that fucking glitch . There' s no way I' m re-typing all of that again.

Basically what I said is that people against Stem Cell Research need to be hit in the face with a 2x4.

Christians want God to have an undisrupted control over suffering. Fuck that, and fuck them. This is a perfect example of why Church and State need to be seperate.

Do you know how much suffering the zygote experiences through SR, none! A zygote is just a cluster of cells. NOT self aware. Not even taken from a pregnancy.

The mountain of suffering we can solve with SR is immeasurable.

Well know these arguments might finally end.

Even if you break 2 legs from a crab it still runs!
What you gotta do is find its weak spot and do massive damage at it.

Btw my uncle suffers from MS.

So im glad they are making progress.
But people have to remember that even people with MS/Parkinson had before been against stam cell because of their views.

Even if you break 2 legs from a crab it still runs!
What you gotta do is find its weak spot and do massive damage at it.

This is a perfect example of why Church and State need to be seperate.

I couldn' t agree more wholeheartedly. And to think, it' s actually supported in the bible. Not like you could tell from our current state of political affairs though.

I had this long brilliant post to defend my position but I lost it because of that ***ing glitch . There' s no way I' m re-typing all of that again.

Ah, bummer. I was hoping to get a decent debate with you in. I do all my large posts (impressions and uh, debates with you) in notepad.

Basically what I said is that people against Stem Cell Research need to be hit in the face with a 2x4.

People against stem-cell research? Definitely.

People against embryonic stem-cell research? Debatable.

We' ve thus far treated things like cancer, spinal cord diseases, blindness, diabetes (I think), and Parkinson' s disease with adult stem cells.

Now, all moral quandaries aside in regards to embryonic destruction, how many approved medical treatments have come out of embryonic stem-cell research?

(the answer is none, by the by)

Whether you find it morally permissible or not, simple fact is we' re getting further with the less controversial, more effective adult stem cells. Not to mention, there' s the whole donor/host issue, where the cells can be rejected, a step avoided by using your own.

Adult stem cells aren' t nearly as useful as embryonic stem cells. Embryonic cells can be any other cell. It' s the greatest medical discovery in the history of humanity. It' s horrifying that some people don' t want to use this. Or rather the arguments that I' ve heard are so shockingly stupid.

If I was religious, I would argue that God gave us the tools to cure diseases and heal otherwise permanent injuries/disabilities.

Since I' m not religious my argument is that we have the tools to cure diseases and heal otherwise permanent injuries/disabilities.

The only reasonable argument against using even embryonic stem cells is that it works too well. One could make a case that this may even hamper evolution and weaken the gene pool by allowing the terminally ill to survive. Facing a world of over population, do we really want to extend lives past 90?

Then there' s the lame argument of killing a life. It' s not a life if we grow it in a test tube with no intention of bringing past gestation. People talk about potential of a life, lulz! The Embryo is grown for the purpose of harvesting cells. There is no potential for birth. An Embro feels no pain and is not conscious.

If we have to draw a line as to what constitutes a person, the embryo is way too early. Especially under artificial circumstances. An Embryo has no rights, the rights belong to the mother and father. No parents? No problem.

It' s nature. We' re a part of nature. If we can manipulate the farces at be. I say it' s about time.

Were' re talking about this:


Not this:



I' ve had discussions with religious people in the past and on thing they always ask me is where do I get my morals?

It sounds like a ridiculous question to me but I' ll answer this question because it' s appropriate.

Firstly, we have to decide on what is morality and it' s purpose.

The purpose of morality is painfully simple. Morality exists mearly to protect our rights and ultimately promote productivity. Our rights exist to protect productivity as a species as well as an individual. Even nature is geared towards protecting productivity. The only times we feel pain is when productivity is being threatened. You want the meaning of life? Productivity. Actually the meaning of life is survival, productivity is the means.

The next logical question is how would one measure productivity. Well I' m not about to bring out a fucking histogram but as a general rule of thumb, pain is a marker for a depression in productivity. Keep in mind that different activities calls for different levels of comfort. So I would argue that the right answer to every moral question is the action promoting the least pain.

The other aspect of morality is the difference between objective and subjective morality. Right off the bat, I' ll tell you that objective morality is bullshit. Basically objective morality is the idea that if something is wrong, it is wrong under any circumstance. In other words, objective morality is only looking at the action rather than the consequences. The consequences being the whole point. So clearly, subjective morality blows away objective morality.

That being said, I would never say that something is always wrong. Anything can be justified under the right circumstances. That' s subjective morality.

Now looking at embryonic stem cell research. Considering that the embryo has no future. It' s purpose and cause was to be an embryo. The suffering of the people who need a cure/remedy that can only be derived from embryonic research far far outweigh the suffering of any amount of embryos. There is no suffering or productivity lost from embryonic research from the embryos themselves.

Where' s the moral dilema?

Fuc.k everybody who' s against stem cell research! They can test on newborn babie for all i fuc.king care - just as long as they keep me alive i don' t give a damn about their research.

I support human cloning too. The world need more Jews like me

I' m all for stem cell research so I can get bat' s wings, goat' s horns, a komodo dragon' s tail and be 25 foot tall.

If this doesn' t happen in my lifetime I' ll make sure I freeze my sperm so a grandchild of mine can have these attributes. Christians can argue their point against him.

***flyingsaucersdisguisedasmushrooms***
***mushroomsinvadingfromouterspace***

just as long as they keep me alive i don' t give a damn about their research.

This was a triumph.
I' m making a note here: Huge Success.
It' s hard to overstate my satisfaction.

Aperture Science,
We do what we must, because we can.
For the good of all of us
(except the ones who are dead.)

But there' s no sense crying over every mistake.
You just keep on trying till you run out of cake.
And the science gets done, and you make a neat gun
For the people who are still alive.

I' m not even angry.
I' m being so sincere right now.
Even though you broke my heart and killed me;

And tore me to pieces;
And threw every piece into a fire.
As they burned, it hurt because
I was so happy for you.

Now these points of data make a beautiful line,
And we' re out of beta, we' re releasing on time.
So I' m GLaD. I got burned. Think of all the things we learned
For the people who are still alive.

Go ahead and leave me.
I think I prefer to stay inside.
Maybe you' ll find someone else to help you.

Maybe Black Mesa.
That was a joke. Ha ha, fat chance.
Anyway, this cake is great;
It' s so delicious and moist.

Look at me still talking, when there' s science to do.
When I look out there, it makes me glad I' m not you.
I' ve experiments to run, there is research to be done
On the people who are still alive.
And believe me, I am still alive.
I' m doing science and I' m still alive.
I feel fantastic and I' m still alive.
While you' re dying I' ll be still alive.
And when you' re dead I will be still alive.
Still alive, still alive, still alive.

lulz, good times