just gave this some thought.... [Archive]

Pam

10-24-2004, 03:43 PM

I made a promise to myself to stay out of the Dog House but I saw this thread and clicked on it because I didn't think it would be politicial. WRONG! I just wanted to clear one thing up. Stem cells do not just come from the umbilical cord. Where do stem cells come from?

Pluripotent stem cells are isolated from human embryos that are a few days old. Cells from these embryos can be used to create pluripotent stem cell "lines" —cell cultures that can be grown indefinitely in the laboratory. Pluripotent stem cell lines have also been developed from fetal tissue obtained from fetal tissue (older than 8 weeks of development)

I would never vote for just one item on the table in an election. The differences between these two men is VAST and I and many others believe this is the most important election in my lifetime. I will not go into it here as I have been flamed enough in the Dog House. I just clicked on this thread and saw a fact that needed correcting. I would encourage you to look at ALL of the issues here.

carole

10-24-2004, 04:22 PM

Pam thank you for your input, and yes I was aware of that, I know that stem cells are not just from the cord, that is why it is so controversial., but it is something that needed correcting.

I absolutely agree with you, I would not vote someone in just because of one thing I agree with, I was just saying from a NZer's point of view that would be something that would sway me towards Mr Kerry if I were voting, because I have very personal and strong reasons for wanting cell research promoted, just as others will have different opinions and strong views.

I certainly have no intention of anyone being flamed in this thread and will promptly delete it, if anyone is offended.

I accidentally posted this thread, my computer crashed and I did post something similar in the politicial thread, it asked for a subject, which I did think odd at the time, then I noticed I had started a new thread, but I thought oh well, maybe its a good topic for conversation, even if it is controversial,but i could well be wrong here.:o

Pam

10-24-2004, 04:33 PM

Carol, thank you for that. I don't want to get embroiled here either, and had I known this would be a political thread I would have never clicked on it.

Essentially this all boils down to when is a human life in existence and how we treat that life. I know this also stirs up abortion debate as well. There is a bumper sticker that I see a lot and I really admire. It reads “Abortion stops a beating heart.” I would never put it on my car for fear of retribution unfortunately.

When my daughter conceived my grandson she had a routinely done ultrasound, something that was not available when I had my children. I was permitted in the room to view the ultrasound on the screen. What did I see? A beating heart!! Tears flowed down my face as I saw the earliest glimpses of my precious grandson. He was very much alive and I loved him immediately!

I think the thing that I have the hardest time dealing with here at Pet Talk is the extraordinary measures that people will go to for pets who are in such fragile states from abuse and such (and I am not minimizing this nor am I in disagreement). The thing that amazes me is that when we are dealing with a human life at its most fragile we are so quick to say “it’s only a few cells.” It is not. It is a beating heart!

I don't think life should be created to be destroyed. I can understand those who would like this research to continue but I do not believe that killing the innocent to accomplish this is morally correct. I know the flames will come, and if they do so be it. Be aware that once the young and innocent are no longer vauable in a society the next will be the elderly and infirm. There is much to this debate and I won't get involved as I am not really an argumentative person. My heart bleeds for this country and the path it will go down if John Kerry should be elected. End of rant.

guster girl

10-24-2004, 05:02 PM

I have actually been advised that even if it's just choosing one thing about a candidate that will directly affect me or people I know, or one thing that I am passionate about, that's what I should go with when I vote. Because so much of the election is still unclear to me, I'm just trying to find one thing about one of the candidates that means something to me, and, that isn't so blurry, so, that I can comfortably say I voted because of something that meant something to me. I'm still trying to figure it out, and, I probably will, yet again, not vote.

micki76

10-24-2004, 05:16 PM

lizbud

10-24-2004, 06:53 PM

Originally posted by guster girl
I have actually been advised that even if it's just choosing one thing about a candidate that will directly affect me or people I know, or one thing that I am passionate about, that's what I should go with when I vote. Because so much of the election is still unclear to me, I'm just trying to find one thing about one of the candidates that means something to me, and, that isn't so blurry, so, that I can comfortably say I voted because of something that meant something to me. I'm still trying to figure it out, and, I probably will, yet again, not vote.

I believe that if you really don't have a clear idea about the
issues & each candidates views on the issues,by now, you should not vote blindly. I certainly don't mean for this to be a slam on you
personally. It is very hard to get a clear picture of someone's
intentions if elected President, but is very easy to check into
pass actions to predict future ones.

moosmom

10-24-2004, 07:14 PM

Pam,

This is in no way flaming anyone, so please, do not take offense.

I am not voting for Kerry JUST BECAUSE he's not against stem cell research. There are many other factors.

I stand corrected on where the stem cells come from. But think of it this way...

I can understand those who would like this research to continue but I do not believe that killing the innocent to accomplish this is morally correct.

women have been having abortions since Roe vs. Wade in 1973 (correct me if I'm wrong on the year). It's a fact. Everyone has their own beliefs for or against it. That is what THEY believe and that's fine. But, in the meantime, millions of stem cells are being discarded when, in fact, they can do some GOOD. So while I understand YOUR reasoning, I also feel that if women are going to have abortions (which, let's face it, they ARE) why not make something good come out of it.

Am I making sense? Anyway, that's my take on it.

Lady's Human

10-24-2004, 07:16 PM

President Bush is not against stem cell research. His decision regarding EMBRYONIC stem cell research was an attempt to balance the advance of science and morality. Stem cell research not utilizing embryonic stem cells, like research involving adult stem cells and stem cells from the umbilical cord blood is unaffected by the federal rules regarding Embryonic stem cell research.

lizzielou742

10-24-2004, 07:32 PM

FYI

http://stemcells.nih.gov/index.asp
http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/ethics.asp

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_1004.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/08/20010809-2.html

I am all for embryonic stem cell research. I don't think something grown in a lab into a few cells can be considered human, especially if it has no chance of ever developing into a fetus. But, I'm pro-choice too, so what did you expect? ;)

carole

10-24-2004, 11:32 PM

I fully respect what Pam and others have said, and it is all about what you believe in, some people believe life begins from conception, others donot.

I am not necessarily for or against abortion, every circumstance is different and should be taken into account, but I really take the same line or point of view as Donna mentioned and I agree with her.

Sorry if I was mis-informed about Bush, but that is how the media portrayed it here, that he was indeed against stem cell research, it did not elaborate futher, typical bad media reporting, not telling the full story.

For some people like Guster Girl for example who are not sure whether to vote or who for, it may indeed be one simple difference as this, that sways her decision.

I can only say, that if indeed my own life and that of my children can be saved, through this, I am all for it, dying a slow, horrible death is not something I want for myself or my children,if maybe you had the prospect of this being a reality, one might feel somewhat different, but again it all comes down to what you believe, and its obvious what I believe.

aly

10-25-2004, 12:18 AM

Thsi is a big issue for me ... a really big one close to my heart. I feel that I can have a greater quality of life because I do have a disease that could potentially be cured with this research. It is one of the main reasons I am for Kerry. It is by far not the only reason, but maybe the most important one.

I am Pro-life though. It is a huge moral struggle that I just don't have the right answer to. I do think that abortions should happen if the mother's health is at risk though. I just strongly disagree with them used as a form of birth control.

Myself, along with millions of others, can be saved from these terrible chronic illnesses that interrupt our normal daily lives. I am so tired of being sick all the time and I just want to get better.

heinz57_79

10-25-2004, 01:12 AM

I've been busy as all get out the past few weeks, what with a new job, and moving and all, but I keep browsing the threads RE. voting, etc. This one caught my eye, and I actually have a few spare minutes so I thought I'd jump in.

Carole made a very good point about it may be one issue that sways a vote. I've actually already voted (via mail) and I put in my vote for Kerry. There were several things that swayed me - my rights as a lesbian, tax-paying American citizen being the most important. But Bush's views on women and women's rights were another.

On Oct. 13th, Bush refused to join 85 other countries in signing a statement that endorsed a 10 year old UN plan to ensure every woman's right to education, health care and choice about having children. The plan was to ensure "an action plan to ensure universal access to reproductive health information and services; uphold fundamental human rights, including sexual and reproductive; alleviate poverty; secure gender equality; and protect the environment". Why did he refuse to sign? Because the statement included a reference to "sexual rights". The US Deputy Asst. Secretary of State Kelly Ryan said, "The United States is unable... to endorse the world leaders' statement because it includes the concept on 'sexual rights', a term that has no agreed definition in the international community." This administration has raised objections on numerous occasions to the phrase "sexual rights", speaking out against abortion, Gay rights, and what they see as the promotion of promiscuity by giving condoms to young people to prevent AIDS.

To me, the stem cell issue is tied very closely to the right to choose. And it is my opinion that politics should not be ruled by opinions, but by what is right. And what is right is NOT taking away people's rights, whether it's the right to choose to end a pregnancy (as long as it is not used frivilously), the right to love whoever you want and to marry them if you want to. In this country, we all pay the same taxes, we all have to abide by the same laws, so why shouldn't each and every one of us be given ALL the same rights?

I know this got a wee bit off topic, but it's kinda the same idea. :)

guster girl

10-25-2004, 01:19 AM

Originally posted by lizbud
I believe that if you really don't have a clear idea about the
issues & each candidates views on the issues,by now, you should not vote blindly. I certainly don't mean for this to be a slam on you
personally. It is very hard to get a clear picture of someone's
intentions if elected President, but is very easy to check into
pass actions to predict future ones.

I've been researching it for several months now, and, it just doesn't get any clearer to me. I'm trying to find one issue that makes sense and that I have no doubts on. I wouldn't vote blindly, I can assure you that. It's something I've said a few times already, I'd rather people not vote if they don't know. But, I'm still studying....we'll see.

moosmom

10-25-2004, 08:08 AM

I just strongly disagree with them used as a form of birth control.

Absolutely! That's why we have Planned Parenthood. To teach people how to act responsibly.

Heinz,

And it is my opinion that politics should not be ruled by opinions, but by what is right. And what is right is NOT taking away people's rights, whether it's the right to choose to end a pregnancy (as long as it is not used frivilously), the right to love whoever you want and to marry them if you want to. In this country, we all pay the same taxes, we all have to abide by the same laws, so why shouldn't each and every one of us be given ALL the same rights?

You hit the nail right on the head on that one!

carole

10-25-2004, 02:15 PM

I so understand where you are coming from Aly, I share your view, it is a difficult one for me too, but facing the uncertainty of inheriting an awful fatal disease and that for my children as well, I can only but support the stem cell research, I am sure if many were in my shoes they would see it differently too.

It is one that I have trouble with too,and so I can see it from both points of view for sure.

Miranda_Rae

10-25-2004, 02:29 PM

Originally posted by Pam
I think the thing that I have the hardest time dealing with here at Pet Talk is the extraordinary measures that people will go to for pets who are in such fragile states from abuse and such (and I am not minimizing this nor am I in disagreement). The thing that amazes me is that when we are dealing with a human life at its most fragile we are so quick to say “it’s only a few cells.” It is not. It is a beating heart!

I don't think life should be created to be destroyed. I can understand those who would like this research to continue but I do not believe that killing the innocent to accomplish this is morally correct. I know the flames will come, and if they do so be it. Be aware that once the young and innocent are no longer vauable in a society the next will be the elderly and infirm. There is much to this debate and I won't get involved as I am not really an argumentative person. My heart bleeds for this country and the path it will go down if John Kerry should be elected. End of rant.

I agree with you Pam 100%. I also do not want to start an arguement, but i would like to state my views without offending anyone.

I am Pro-Life. I can not concieve the idea of killing a baby before its born simply because the mother didn't want it or something to that extent. As for a person being raped, I do not believe a person should punish the baby for someone elses evil deed. I know with all my heart that if I was raped and I got pregnant I would NEVER have an abortion, that is something my heart is set upon. Also, if I was a mother and my life was at risk because of the baby inside of me, and I had the choice to abort the baby to save my life I would NOT do it. I can not justify killing a innocent baby to save myself. If that is the way that I would die then I would die that way, because I can not, and would not kill a baby so that I could live.

I do not know the whole scoop on stem cell research, so I will not comment on it, as I do not know a whole lot on it.

I can understand how people love animals, but to put them before a human life, an innocent baby's life, to get upset over the horrible crimes against animals, but that killing a baby just rolls off their back, that saddens me deeply. :(

I did not and do not intend to offend or upset anyone, JMHO. :)

carole

10-25-2004, 02:38 PM

Miranda Rae, I competely understand your stance on this and I am not saying you are right or wrong here.These are your beliefs and you feel strongly about them, and thats great,mine just differ is all,and I am certainly NOT offended by them, as I hope no-one is by mine..

For me I just have a different opinion,I don't consider cells to be a human life, thats just MO, therefore if taking a few cells can cure incurable horrible diseases, and save the life of my children, who I adore and love and have personalitys, then sorry I am all for it.

cells to me have no personality, I have not grown to love them, hold them, cherish them or given birth to them, and nutured them for many years.

I certainly am NOT for abortions left right and center.

P.S I admire your stance,but hopefully you have not been in either situation, I think that can make a difference, we can say what we will and won't do,but when we are actually in the situation we may feel different,just a thought.

Miranda_Rae

10-25-2004, 02:42 PM

Originally posted by carole
Miranda Rae, I competely understand your stance on this and I am not saying you are right or wrong here.These are your beliefs and you feel strongly about them, and thats great,mine just differ is all.

For me I just have a different opinion,I don't consider cells to be a human life, thats just MO, therefore if taking a few cells can cure incurable horrible diseases, and save the life of my children, who I adore and love and have personalitys, then sorry I am all for it.

cells to me have no personality, I have not grown to love them, hold them, cherish them or given birth to them, and nutured them for many years.

I certainly am NOT for abortions left right and center.

I was not speaking about the cells mainly, I was speaking about abortion and how when a baby is growing in a mothers stomache where you can see its heart beating, and people just go "oh its a fetus...its not a baby until its born!" but it IS a baby. You can see its little heart beating. Thats what I was talking about mainly. I don't know much about the stem cell research, but I should read up on it. :)

Miranda_Rae

10-25-2004, 02:44 PM

Originally posted by carole
P.S I admire your stance,but hopefully you have not been in either situation, I think that can make a difference, we can say what we will and won't do,but when we are actually in the situation we may feel different,just a thought.

What situations are you talking about, may I ask? If you are talking about if I was raped and got pregnant, I KNOW with ALL my heart that I would NEVER get an abortion.

Kfamr

10-25-2004, 02:44 PM

VERY well said JC. I agree with everything you've said.

As for a person being raped, I do not believe a person should punish the baby for someone elses evil deed. I know with all my heart that if I was raped and I got pregnant I would NEVER have an abortion, that is something my heart is set upon.

I'm in no way saying you're wrong for what you said, but just think...
Wouldn't a child knowing that his/her father raped his/her mother, be punshiment?

Without saying names, I have a friend who's father she's never met. Her mother was raped, and her mother chose to have the child. My friend is now 16 and has had the worst emotional problems any 16 year old has to deal with.
It's even worse for her when people ask why she lives with her grandparents instead of her mother and father.

I AM thankful that her mother brought her into this world, she is one of the most wonderful friends i've ever had, but with all of the pain and suffering she's been through, knowing that she was created in such a way, she has had SO many mental and emotional issues I can't help but to feel bad for her... and think -- would it have been better if her mother chose abortion??

carole

10-25-2004, 02:54 PM

Miranda Rae, yes I was meaning what you quoted,I guess you know your'e own mind, but maybe and I hope it never does happen, if it did are you 100 percent sure you would make that choice,? especially if it was early enough that the baby was not at the stages you mentioned, I too could not go ahead and abort a baby that far on.

This thread is going a bit off topic, its more about stem cell research than abortion, but its all kinda wound up in one.

I am guessing you have strong religious beliefs, whereas I have none, but my own conscience would not let me do that either.

kay I also know of a person who was raped and kept their child, they also have emotional problems, but who's to say they would not anyhow, could just be a coincidence. It is a tough call either way.

I certainly have the utmost respect for your opinion and admire your comittment to your beliefs.

Miranda_Rae

10-25-2004, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by Kfamr
VERY well said JC. I agree with everything you've said.

I'm in no way saying you're wrong for what you said, but just think...
Wouldn't a child knowing that his/her father raped his/her mother, be punshiment?

Without saying names, I have a friend who's father she's never met. Her mother was raped, and her mother chose to have the child. My friend is now 16 and has had the worst emotional problems any 16 year old has to deal with.
It's even worse for her when people ask why she lives with her grandparents instead of her mother and father.

I AM thankful that her mother brought her into this world, she is one of the most wonderful friends i've ever had, but with all of the pain and suffering she's been through, knowing that she was created in such a way, she has had SO many mental and emotional issues I can't help but to feel bad for her... and think -- would it have been better if her mother chose abortion??

I understand what you mean, but as for what I believe and something that I very much am set on I could not with a clean concious kill my baby, even though I was raped. Because inside me would be a baby that is part of ME, not only part of the rapist but of me. I also have emotional and mental issues but I grew up in a VERY loving home. Say someone was raped and they had the baby and put it up for adoption and the baby was adopted by a very loving and caring family. My aunt was adopted (I don't know the circumstances surrounding her birth and parents) but I know that she makes my life SO much more special, and if her life was ended before she was able to live it, I know that I wouldn't have such a wonderful aunt. I can understand that having the child know that the her father is a rapist can be VERY hard and punishing to the child, but to choose to end that childs life before it even got to life it is something I could not do. Also, a person whose mother is raped and it has a lot of emotional/mental issues, can get over those (I am in NO way say that its like "oh just get over it!" because I KNOW how hard it is), and become a help for other people, for the world and can become someones dear friend (not saying that they can't do that while they are hurting/struggling) but when a person has sorted through all their issues they can help other people much better, trust me. I hope I made myself clear. And I am in no way trying to start an arguement etc. :)

Miranda_Rae

10-25-2004, 02:56 PM

Originally posted by carole
Miranda Rae, yes I was meaning what you quoted,I guess you know your'e own mind, but maybe and I hope it never does happen, if it did are you 100 percent sure you would make that choice,? especially if it was early enough that the baby was not at the stages you mentioned, I too could not go ahead and abort a baby that far on.

This thread is going a bit off topic, its more about stem cell research than abortion, but its all kinda wound up in one.

I am guessing you have strong religious beliefs, whereas I have none, but my own conscience would not let me do that either.

kay I also know of a person who was raped and kept their child, they also have emotional problems, but who's to say they would not anyhow, could just be a coincidence. It is a tough call either way.

I certainly have the utmost respect for your opinion and admire your comittment to your beliefs.

Yes, I have strong religious beliefs, and they are important to me. Also, yes that is something that i would choose. I don't think anyone could change my mind on that, no matter if it was my dearest, closest friend, family, etc. I am sorry that I kind of took it away from the stem cell research. :(

carole

10-25-2004, 03:00 PM

You raise some good points Miranda Rae, many that I simply cannot disagree with.:)

carole

10-25-2004, 03:02 PM

No need for an apology, because it is really all tied up together in a way.

aly

10-25-2004, 03:04 PM

But its not like they go out and abort babies for the stem cell research. They use already aborted fetuses that would otherwise be thrown away. Right?

Lizzie? Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

carole

10-25-2004, 03:22 PM

Aly that is my understanding as well, and of course from the umbilical cord too.
I am sure we will be corrected if we are indeed wrong. lol.;)

lizzielou742

10-25-2004, 03:26 PM

OK I am no expert by far......but I think embryonic stem cells are grown in labs only, although I think they have used stem cells from already aborted fetuses (embryonic germ cells?) to research also, as well as cells from umbilical cords and such.

http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics3.asp

carole

10-25-2004, 03:33 PM

Yes that is my understanding as well.

aly

10-25-2004, 03:40 PM

Originally posted by lizzielou742
OK I am no expert by far......but I think embryonic stem cells are grown in labs only, although I think they have used stem cells from already aborted fetuses (embryonic germ cells?) to research also, as well as cells from umbilical cords and such.

http://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/basics3.asp

Then I don't understand why people have problems with it :confused:

Can someone explain why they wouldn't want it funded?

Miranda_Rae

10-25-2004, 03:43 PM

Originally posted by aly
Then I don't understand why people have problems with it :confused:

Can someone explain why they wouldn't want it funded?

I never said I didn't want it funded. I was simply talking about the abortion and other things. If you will read some of my posts you will notice that i said I didn't know a whole lot about stem cell research so I wasn't going to comment on it. :)

guster girl

10-25-2004, 03:47 PM

Originally posted by aly
Then I don't understand why people have problems with it :confused:

Can someone explain why they wouldn't want it funded?

Yeah, I'm confused as well! I'm sure it's cuz I don't know, but, I'd like to. :)

aly

10-25-2004, 04:06 PM

Originally posted by Miranda_Rae
I never said I didn't want it funded. I was simply talking about the abortion and other things. If you will read some of my posts you will notice that i said I didn't know a whole lot about stem cell research so I wasn't going to comment on it. :)

I didnt mean you :) Just anyone in general who didn't want it funded (as Bush doesnt).

Miranda_Rae

10-25-2004, 04:07 PM

Originally posted by aly
I didnt mean you :) Just anyone im General who didn't want it funded (as Bush doesnt).

Oh ok, I was confused for a minute, lol. That happens a lot. :o :rolleyes:

Pam

10-25-2004, 04:58 PM

To those of us who believe that life begins at conception destroying an embryo for any reason is morally wrong, whether it is conceived in a petri dish (or wherever) or inside a womb. Those who have been able to conceive through invitro fertilization will tell you that what was implanted in them was the beginning of their son or daughter.

Embryo - In humans, the prefetal product of conception from implantation through the eighth week of development.

God is the giver of all life. When the angel told Joseph not to be afraid to take Mary as his wife because *that which is conceived in her* is of the Holy Spirit I don't believe we were talking many months' gestation. Mary was obviously very early on in her pregnancy and God had a special plan for this Child as he does for every child.

What bothers me is the criticism of the president because of his religious faith. How is it that some can't see that he has a right to his beliefs as much as anyone else and there are many that support his beliefs as well. I thought America was a land of religious freedom. How can those of you without religious faith fault a man because he is following his, as are millions of others.

aly

10-25-2004, 05:08 PM

But what I don't understand is why you can be against something when they use a fetus that would be otherwise thrown away IN THE TRASH? Wouldn't it be better to use it to find out ways to cure diseases?

I'm not bringing religious beliefs into it at all. If an abortion already happened, why can't we put the fetus to use instead of throw it away?

Pam

10-25-2004, 05:16 PM

Aly, my own personal answer to this would be that it further gives an impetus for abortion. After all, many would say, when we kill an embryo/fetus we are saving others. I just don't think God sees it that way. I can't speak for the President but I do have enormous respect for him to be able to stand against the tide for his convictions. Forgive me for this, as I am really not an argumentative person, but Kerry doesn't seem to stand for anything at all. He vacillates with the tides.....errr, polls/public opinion. I should stop now before everyone hates me, especially you for whom I have the utmost respect. :)

Miranda_Rae

10-25-2004, 05:19 PM

Originally posted by Pam
Aly, my own personal answer to this would be that it further gives an impetus for abortion. After all, many would say, when we kill an embryo/fetus we are saving others. I just don't think God sees it that way. I can't speak for the President but I do have enormous respect for him to be able to stand against the tide for his convictions. Forgive me for this, as I am really not an argumentative person, but Kerry doesn't seem to stand for anything at all. He vacillates with the tides.....errr, polls/public opinion. I should stop now before everyone hates me, especially you for whom I have the utmost respect. :)

I agree that people would see it as, "Well since we are using the aborted babies we can save others so there really isn't anything wrong with it." I agree that it might encourage abortion. JMHO. Oh, and Pam, I don't hate you. ;)

aly

10-25-2004, 05:27 PM

Thanks Pam. I wasn't trying to argue with you and I have complete respect for you as well. (That is why I haven't replied to anything you wrote in the other political threads! :D :D ) I can agree to disagree on this one. I was just curious about the reasoning.

As I said before, I personally think abortion is wrong unless the mother is at risk. But I do support stem cell research because the fetus has already been aborted and would be in the trash otherwise. It affects me very personally. I just wonder if Bush would have the same stance on it if (heaven forbid) he had one of the diseases that could possibly be cured from it. Things are so much different when you are experiencing them yourself :(

carole

10-25-2004, 05:34 PM

Pam I certainly would not condemn Bush because he has religious beliefs and I don't, but then again I would not want his beliefs rammed down my throat, but even though I am not an american and eligible to vote, the president voted in could well have an affect on my life and indeed does worldwide really.

Am I so wrong in wanting continuing life for myself and my children, we have all made a contribution to this world ,and to me it is not at the expense of another, because that if NOT my belief,because this is so personal , and close to my heart, I just have to say what I am thinking.

No-one hates you here, I respect your opinion and beliefs, mine are just different.

So far this thread has remained calm and no-one has become nasty, and that is the way I would prefer it to stay, we can all share points of views , even one as contoversial as this and not result to mean-ness.

Aly you and I are on the same wave length here, I guess until you walk in our shoes, you never really know what its like.:)

Pam

10-25-2004, 05:35 PM

Originally posted by aly
I just wonder if Bush would have the same stance on it if (heaven forbid) he had one of the diseases that could possibly be cured from it. Things are so much different when you are experiencing them yourself :(

Aly I obviously can't answer this for the president, but I think I might have told you quite some time ago that my daughter, while pregnant, developed gestational diabetes. Having first hand knowledge of this disease now, if only for the nine month period, I can totally understand your feelings. I wish there was some other way and some other research that we could turn to for this as well as other diseases. Maybe we can agree to pray for a cure in the meantime. :) Thanks for being so kind in your response. :)

carole

10-25-2004, 05:40 PM

Now wouldn't that be a wonderful thing.!!!:)

Pam

10-25-2004, 05:42 PM

Originally posted by carole

Carol, thank you also for keeping this civil. My only reply is that President Bush is not ramming anything down anyone's throat. He is acting on what he believes is morally correct and many agree with his stance. You can't expect him to betray himself can you? If the majority of the citizens find his beliefs not in alignment with theirs he will be voted out of office. Unfortunately I feel this would be a grave mistake. JMHO.

carole

10-25-2004, 05:50 PM

You raised good points there Pam, of course you are right, he cannot betray himself, everyone should stick up for what they believe, which is exactly what you and I have done here right?

I really don't know too much about either candidate, but I do take an interest, the president of America is a mighty powerful man, and what he does and says affects many countries.

My only point in the beginning was really that the fact Kerry supports something very important to me and Bush does not, would sway my voting if I were an american, and indeed it may well do for many.

Here's to whoever the American public vote in and may the best man win.;)
Cheers everyone.:)

Lady's Human

10-25-2004, 05:53 PM

Again, the president has not banned funding on stem cell research. He has banned Federal funding for EMBRYONIC stem cell research that is done outside the 76 lines of viable stem cells.

Senator Kerry, with all his preaching about funding for medical research has in fact tacitly blocked funding for a disease by not co sponsoring a bill for it after one of his constituents brought the bill to his attention and requested that he co sponsor it so it could go to committee for a vote. He refused, and in doing so blocked funding for ALS (Lou Gerhig's Disease). The reply I got from his office after I wrote to him asking him to co sponsor the bil was "ALS is not of National importance at this time". This is the person that we want in charge of the country? A Senator who's staff refuses to acknowledge the importance of a disease which Kills 30,000 people every year?

carole

10-25-2004, 05:58 PM

Thanks for the info, I was not aware of this, you only get half the picture here, media reports only what it wants.

Hmm well certainly gives food for thought, guess I probably would have to re-consider if I were an american voter, and really toss up who is the better man for the job.

aly

10-25-2004, 06:05 PM

Originally posted by Lady's Human
Again, the president has not banned funding on stem cell research. He has banned Federal funding for EMBRYONIC stem cell research that is done outside the 76 lines of viable stem cells.

That is what I was referring to .. sorry, I just didn't clarify well enough.

I remember that from the debates. Kerry did mention that Bush had also cut WAY back on the stem cell research budget to where they could do almost nothing anyway. I wish I could explain it more clearly, but my brain is mush today.

tatsxxx11

10-26-2004, 09:18 AM

Let me start off by stating that I am not here to promote my stance on this issue, in this forum. But I do have a question(s) for you all and I hope that the responses will be measured, thoughtful and most especially, without flaming or invective. My hope is that an intelligent discussion, an exploration of our perhaps differing thoughts and ideas on this issue might ensue.

Bringing the subject of abortion into any converstion naturally inflames passions. But in regards to embryonic stem cell research, aborted fetus' and embryos are not the sole source of embryonic cells for research, though the debate here currently seems to be primarily focused around the abortion issue.

But leaving the subject of embryonic stem cell research out of the equation for a moment, I'm curious to hear how you all feel about the efficacy of in vitro fertilization in and of itself; a decades old procedure that unlike abortion, has helped hundereds of thousands of otherwise infertile couples conceive and create life. Eggs are harvested from the woman during each cycle then fertilized with the husband's sperm in a laboratory, in a petrie dish, and kept frozen for future implantation. Once a successful implantation is acheived, the remaining frozen, fertilized embryos are discarded; thrown away.

For those perhaps unfamiliar with the procedure, here's a brief overview

Taken from the website http://www.religioustolerance.org/res_stem.htm which presents all sides of the issues in a balanced forum.

Overview:
A stem cell is a primitive type of cell that can be coaxed into developing into most of the 220 types of cells found in the human body (e.g. blood cells, heart cells, brain cells, etc). Some researchers regard them as offering the greatest potential for the alleviation of human suffering since the development of antibiotics. Over 100 million Americans suffer from diseases that may eventually be treated more effectively with stem cells or even cured. These include heart disease, diabetes, and certain types of cancer.

Stem cells can be extracted from very young human embryos -- typically from surplus frozen embryos left over from in-vitro fertilization procedures at fertility clinics. There are currently about 100,000 surplus embryos in storage. However, a minority of pro-lifers and a majority of pro-life organizations object to the use of embryos. They feel that a few-days-old embryo is a human person. Extracting its stem cells kills the embryo -- an act that they consider murder. Stem cells can now be grown in the laboratory, so (in a pinch) some research can be done using existing stem cells. No further harvesting needs to be made from embryos. However, existing stem cell lines are gradually degrading and will soon be useless for research.

So, my question(s) for you all are these:

Do you believe there is an ethical difference between abortion and in vitro fertilization and if so, what is it and how do you suporrt your conclusion?

Can you be against abortion but support in vitro fertilization? Both result in the "death" of potentially viable embryos.

If you do find a distinction between the two, and support in vitro fertilization, would you rather see these potentially viable, unused, fertilized, embryonic cells simply discarded after successful implantion or donated by the couple for medical research.

Thanks. I look forward to reading your responses.

aly

10-26-2004, 09:58 AM

Wow Sandra, thank you so much for that post. It is full of interesting points and information. I am going to read that site some more before I comment, but I really hope that people are still reading this thread and will see your post. I am very interested to hear peoples' opinions.

Kona & Oreo's mom

10-26-2004, 09:59 AM

Sandra, I hadn't thought about that topic before. Now that I think about it I do see a similarity between abortion and the disposal of excess in vitro fertilized embryos. Thank you for raising this point in such a eloquent way--it is good food for thought and discussion.

tatsxxx11

10-26-2004, 10:35 AM

Thanks ladies. I look forward to hearing your thoughts. Having worked in the medical profession the majority of my adult life and having been witness to more than my share of heartwrenching suffering and as well, having strong religious beliefs, it is an issue that has been in the forefront of my thinking for some time now and conflicted me too.

Pam

10-26-2004, 10:54 AM

Sandra as I said I personally am not in favor of “disposing” of life no matter how it is done. In our lifetime new technology breaks on the scene everyday and with it comes the dilemma of ethics. I can tell you that a couple that I knew a few years ago tried to adopt a baby and there were none available (white, healthy, etc.) They were told they would be on the waiting list for years because, due to the legalization of abortion, there were just not that many available. What a web we weave. *sigh* They then attempted invitro fertilization. Of course its purpose is to bring forth life. The embryos that are discarded after the procedure has been successful are a tragedy and I feel that it is morally wrong to do so. We will be faced with many more challenges in the years ahead. In the past God decided when people were to be born and when they were to die. As we live longer and technology explodes there will be more dilemmas and man will have to continue to play God. When faced with such issues I grieve for where we have been and where we are going. I cannot support killing the unborn or 'mercy killings' for the elderly.

Logan

10-26-2004, 11:24 AM

Thank you, Sandra, for posting such a thought provoking message. Once again, I am confused. :o I am totally against abortion, but then again, I have friends who have only been able to have children because of invitro fertilization. :confused: And what wonderful parents they are, and how blessed those children are!

I guess it is ok to be "on the fence" about this whole issue, which I am. More thoughts later, if I get some enlightenment!

Logan

RICHARD

10-26-2004, 11:52 AM

Again, Cah lee fuh nee ah leading the way.

http://calvoter.org/voter/elections/2004/props/prop71.html

aly

10-28-2004, 04:59 PM

I saw on the news today how Mel Gibson is being very vocal about how he doesn't support stem cell research. He and Arnold are a little bit at each other's throats right now.

Mel was saying that even if he had a disease and embryotic stem cell research offered a cure for it, he would rather die than use it.

For those who are against the embryotic stem cell research, do you agree with Mel? Would you die before you used it to cure your disease?

carole

10-28-2004, 08:09 PM

NO aly I would not rather die than find a cure this way, I have a husband and two children and two furbabies who need me in their life very much, and besides I want my life to continue for as long as possible.

Some would agree and say yes, but the proof would be in the pudding as the saying goes, when and if they were actually faced with this situation, talk is cheap., I have to wonder if it were Mel's children faced with this, if he would still feel the same way?

Because I believe in this research, does not mean I would go to any lengths to save my life, but for me there is no conscience, I have no problem with it, and my beliefs don't interfere with that in any way.

heinz57_79

10-29-2004, 11:05 AM

Jumping back in again... :)

Pam, regarding Bush acting on what HE believes to be morally right, etc the whole thing is what HE thinks to be morally right may not be what everyone else believes to be right. Hence my point on Presidential decisions should not be coloured by personal biases.

I do think that most stem cell research comes from the already aborted fetus, and/or discarded umbilical cords, which is why I said it is tied very closely to the right to choose. If a woman chooses, either for health reasons or whatever else, to abort the fetus why shouldn't that fetus then be used for research that may one day save millions of lives? THe way I see it, women will ALWAYS have abortions, whether safely and legally, or with drugs in their bathroom. It's going to happen. So why not embrace the right to choose, make sure the women have a safe, clean environment, then use the fetus for good?

Saying definitely what you would do if ever faced with the possibility of an abortion is very hard to do unless you've actually been there. I had often told myself I would NEVER do it. I have a friend who was SO against abortion, until something happened to her and she had to make the choice. It is one of the hardest decisions to make.

shutterbug0303

11-01-2004, 10:50 PM

I was just scrolling around and happened upon this thread. I hate to start this going again since the last post was a few days ago, but after reading the posts, I did a bit of research on fetuses in general. Just FYI, I am pro-life, and am against stem cell research and in vitro fertilization, but that is totally in my own opinion and do not want to try and change anyones. Also, I am quite impressed about the nature of the discussion on this thread! :D So civil, and everyone is bringing up great points. I hope the information I am about to post is enlightening....

After researching a few different websites, I was able to decipher that the heartbeat of "fetus" (for argument's sake) begins at about 18-21 days. At this point, the fetus is in a worm-like shape, not resembling a human in most forms.

12 or so days after conception, the cells that are forming into the fetus begin to produce hormones that can be detected in the urine. Shortly after this time, women may tend to notice that their menstural cycle is late, brining them to use a home-pregnancy test.

So, if someone noticed they were "late" on the 12th day and there were enough hormones to detect a positive pregnancy...there is a slim (but possible) chance that they would be in to have an abortion before the 18-21st day of pregnancy, when the heartbeat begins.

I don't want to impose my views on this subject to anyone, but thought that the timing in conception, development, and abortion was interesting. URL=http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_fetu.htm]http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_fetu.htm[/URL] is one of the websites I used, but this one was the most comprehensive.

Thank you for allowing me to post this information. Like I said, I am very impressed with the make-up of this "debate" and find everyone's opinions very interesting and worth-while! This issue is very deep and there will never be an "agreement" on the topic, but to be able to discuss all the sides in such a civil manner will really help to clear up a lot of confusion from both sides. :D

carole

11-01-2004, 11:01 PM

Thank you so much for your valuable input, I started the thread and I too am happy to see it going so well, with everyone keeping their cool and debating this in an adult matter.,especially as it is a very controversial one.

I find what you say very interesting indeed and not something I was aware of.

Yes a lot of us will just have to respectfully agree to disagree on this subject, as we all have our views and although I am not prepared to change mine, I do accept others and respect them.

Corinna

11-01-2004, 11:51 PM

This has been and I hope it will remain a civil discusstion. Ladys Human had Pam have pretty much stated my feelings.
I just have a couple of thoughts to add. As a diabetic also I would love to be able to wake up every morning feeling like I was a live ,not stiff and confused . They are othe cell researches going on that could help me . But .... the embronic researchers are getting all the funding ( squeeky wheel thing) They are so close and now it has been slowed to a crawl. How do you decide which diseases are more imoprtant that others.
I heard a report (can't remeber from source) that they can only use embronic lines 3 generations then they seem to degrade. But using adult cells they don't . It seems to me that if you need a liver you would use liver cells , pancreas you use those cells. I am a little fuzzy on what is so great about and why embronic cells are being used for all research.
As side note I saw my grandson at 14 weeks he not only had a heartbeat but hands and feet he was evern trying to suck his thumb. I can't imangine any one cuttting him up as a research project . Just becouse he was a spontanious abortion ( daughter had a huge blood infection) He still was a baby. We even got his creamated remains back.
as to invitro, Have lots of freinds whom can't conceive all have opted for not perfect adopted children ,just becouse of the destroying of unused embroys. There are lots of children avalible but if you want PERFECT kids the wait can be long. Most of my freinds lovingly have deaf, blind, downs and kids that have cancers . These kids would have been in stste foster care for ever if not for big open hearts.
My last point , kind of a pet(sorry) peeve . Overseas adoptions when there are lots of not perfect kids here. (Boy I should have stayed away from the dog house on this Thread)

heinz57_79

11-02-2004, 03:56 AM

I, too, am glad this has managed to remain civil. Everyone has put forth some very good points.

I only have one last comment, regarding shutterbug (i think it was you! hehe) being against invitro. Of course, you are entitled to your opinion, I would just like to say in defense of invitro, for someone such as myself it may be that the only way I would be able to have a child with my genes. It's a modern, scientific miracle that allows couples who would normally be unable to conceive to have children. :) Personally, I can't wait!

shutterbug0303

11-02-2004, 09:11 AM

Heinz...that makes total sense to me!! :D I definitely respect that. The only part about invitro I'm not sure about (and I am still debating this point myself) is the fact that science is attempting to "play God" in a sense. Maybe there is a reason why someone is unable to have children...it is God's plan for them. But that is bringing in my religious beliefs...I totally respect your plans though, and good luck!! :D I guess that is my issue with abortion as well. My Bible upbringing gives me great respect for the unborn...and even the "not yet concieved". Jeremiah 29:11 says: "For I know the plans I have for you," declares the LORD , "plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future."" Also, Jeremiah 1:5 says: "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you." So, these are the passages I go on...God has a purpose and plan for each of us. But like I said, I am bringing my religious beliefs into this...and don't want to try and force them on anyone at all. Just more food for thought :D

p.s. I have some other thoughts/questions on this topic (invitro) but I don't think I can post them on here...they may be a bit "graphic" in a sense....?!?!?! :confused:

heinz57_79

11-02-2004, 01:07 PM

Originally posted by shutterbug0303
p.s. I have some other thoughts/questions on this topic (invitro) but I don't think I can post them on here...they may be a bit "graphic" in a sense....?!?!?! :confused:

I say if you have ?'s, start a thread in the dog house and ask away! hehe I'm sure Karen will let us know if it gets too, uh, "too". lol

Lady's Human

11-02-2004, 04:36 PM

Given that adult stem cell research is showing great promise, and embryonic stem cell research is an issue that the jury is still very much out on, I would personaly like to see the research continue on adult stem cell treatments continue as the main effort. My main problem with the embryonic stem cell research issue is that it has been politicized to the point that it has been.
As someone on a military message board said, the reason that the embryonic stem cell research people need federal funding is that so far adult stem cell research has shown more promise, fewer side effects in testing, etc., so all the private money (or the bulk of it) is going toward adult stem cell research. If Glaxco Smith, etc thought they could make money off of it they would be funding the research themselves, much like biotech startups have done with other research projects.

Lady's Human

11-02-2004, 04:38 PM

That having been said, my sincere thanks to the people who have managed to engage in this debate without the vitriol and name calling that I have seen other PT threads devolve into.

:)

carole

11-02-2004, 04:57 PM

I also wish to thank everyone for their opinions and the manner in which this thread has continued, I knew it could be opening up a can of worms so to speak when I started the thread, but it was an issue that is very important to me, it just goes to show we can all have different views, but be adult and civil about it.

If indeed there is more chance of curing diseases using adult stem cells, then yes of course I would be all for that.,but to be honest if a cure is found and offered to my family I will be taking it.

I have valued each and every opinion from you all, and taken things into account I had not even thought about before, so it has been an interesting and informative debate.:)