just gave this some thought....

**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.

I am totally against abortion, but then again, I have friends who have only been able to have children because of invitro fertilization.

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