Stem Cell Research

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates

Besides -- we don't need to shred human beings to get pluripotent stem cells.

Abortion has been here well before this stem cell debate, and will be here long after your ideology passes into history.

My ideology that all human life is worthy of respect?

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates


My ideology that all human life is worthy of respect?

You've never had that as part of your ideology.  I was actually talking about that part of your ideology that requires deception.  The idea that:

quote:we don't need to shred human beings to get pluripotent stem cells.

Is deceptive rhetoric.  We don't "shred" human beings for stem cells.  The stem cells exist, will exist, and will eventually be used with or without your approval.

There's only one "pro-Life" movement I've found consistent, that can honestly, without any reservation, claim to be "pro-Life".  You're not part of it.

http://www.democratsforlife.org/

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates


My ideology that all human life is worthy of respect?

You've never had that as part of your ideology.  I was actually talking about that part of your ideology that requires deception.  The idea that:

quote:we don't need to shred human beings to get pluripotent stem cells.

Is deceptive rhetoric.  We don't "shred" human beings for stem cells.  The stem cells exist, will exist, and will eventually be used with or without your approval.

There's only one "pro-Life" movement I've found consistent, that can honestly, without any reservation, claim to be "pro-Life".  You're not part of it.

http://www.democratsforlife.org/

We don't need to shred human beings for stem cells, but extracting stem cells from embryos involves destroying embryonic human life.

And an embryo is a living organism by any scientific definition of life. Unless someone interferes to destroy it or to deprive it of shelter and nutrition, a human embryo will develop into a human fetus, into a human baby, and into a fully-grown human adult. The same cannot be said for a skin cell or a hair follicle.

Of course, you can choose to redefine human life so as to exclude extremely small, extremely young human life, but redefining classes of humans as subhuman and unworthy of respect and protection is nothing new.

[Conan71]

Embryos in a petri dish (or whatever glassware they are kept in) are not sustainable human life.  Embryos left over from a couple who have accomplished their fertility goals will wind up destroyed.  Why not utilize them so that a better quality of life might be attainable for another human being.

If it's about monkeying around with God's domain, isn't in-vitro fertilization in the first place really challenging God's omnipotence and will for a couple who would otherwise be sterile?

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates

We don't need to shred human beings for stem cells, but extracting stem cells from embryos involves destroying embryonic human life.

Not exactly, you don't need to because it's already "destroyed."  How can you destroy something that's already destroyed?  You can't, but you can complain, and be deceptive.  This really isn't about stem cells.

quote:Of course, you can choose to redefine human life so as to exclude extremely small, extremely young human life, but redefining classes of humans as subhuman and unworthy of respect and protection is nothing new.

Certainly, you of all people should know that.  Your ideology thinks it's hilarious to descriminate between one form of life and another.  The Jews survived Hitler and Stalin, Islam Mexicans and lots of other folks will survive you.  The Nazis and Soviets had plenty of ideology, if nothing else.

Then again, as before, I don't care whether abortion is legal or not.  It is legal, and will remain legal.  You can't get over it, or much of anything.

[cannon_fodder]

I do not believe he has any intention of acknowledging that point Conan.  I have brought it up two times now and he has ignored it.  He wants to legally define the combination of sperm and egg as human life.  

Thus:  if before knowing she is pregnant a mother does an unhealthy activity and causes a miscarriage she is guilty of negligent homicide. A  fertility doctor is guilty of mass murder when he culls the extra 6 embryos ("its a gift from god that we had a litter children" - no, its called irresponsible medicine).  If a lab tech spills petri dish...  There will probably be exceptions to the rule that embryos are human life and they wont get "full" rights.  So I guess they are subhuman after all.

Anyway, I do not expect an answer to the "they are better off in the garbage" point. Then again, ignoring arguments that have merit and are not in line with your point of view is nothing new.

(side note, I think he implicitly called us Nazis [subhuman...nothing new]. Does that count for Godwin?)

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

Anyway, I do not expect an answer to the "they are better off in the garbage" point. Then again, ignoring arguments that have merit and are not in line with your point of view is nothing new.

It may not help coming from me, but you're right.

quote:(side note, I think he implicitly called us Nazis [subhuman...nothing new]. Does that count for Godwin?)

Eh, iffy?  I threw one back at him.

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC


Certainly, you of all people should know that.  Your ideology thinks it's hilarious to descriminate between one form of life and another.  The Jews survived Hitler and Stalin, Islam Mexicans and lots of other folks will survive you.  The Nazis and Soviets had plenty of ideology, if nothing else.

MichaelC, since you're an expert on my ideology, could you kindly define it, perhaps as a 10-point manifesto? And are you claiming that I support the dismemberment of Muslims or Mexicans for the purpose of scientific research?

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

I do not believe he has any intention of acknowledging that point Conan.  I have brought it up two times now and he has ignored it.  He wants to legally define the combination of sperm and egg as human life.  

I haven't said anything about law in this thread. The definition of human life is not a matter of law. It's a matter of science.

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates

MichaelC, since you're an expert on my ideology, could you kindly define it, perhaps as a 10-point manifesto?

Sure, why not.

The Michael Bates Manifesto, by MichaelC

1.  Life is life, unless it's committed a crime.
2.  Terry Schiavo is my hero.
3.  Follow me lest you rot in hell.
4.  Islam, Fascism, what's the difference?
5.  Homos be gone!!
6.  It's definitely a conspiracy.
7.  Hating Democrats can be both a job and a hobby.
8.  I vote based on Ideology.
9.  I hated LaFortune, until I loved him.  Oh how I loved him!
10.  KFAQ is the definition of news.

How's that?

quote:And are you claiming that I support the dismemberment of Muslims or Mexicans for the purpose of scientific research?

 

Yes?  I don't know.  Actually it WOULD surprise me.

Just a little bit.

Are you?

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates

MichaelC, since you're an expert on my ideology, could you kindly define it, perhaps as a 10-point manifesto?

Sure, why not.

The Michael Bates Manifesto, by MichaelC

1.  Life is life, unless it's committed a crime.
2.  Terry Schiavo is my hero.
3.  Follow me lest you rot in hell.
4.  Islam, Fascism, what's the difference?
5.  Homos be gone!!
6.  It's definitely a conspiracy.
7.  Hating Democrats can be both a job and a hobby.
8.  I vote based on Ideology.
9.  I hated LaFortune, until I loved him.  Oh how I loved him!
10.  KFAQ is the definition of news.

How's that?

Nice straw man. You've combined just about every negative stereotype of conservative Republicans and evangelical Christians, but I think you forgot the one about eating spotted owls at the church picnic.

quote:

quote:And are you claiming that I support the dismemberment of Muslims or Mexicans for the purpose of scientific research?

 

Yes?  I don't know.  Actually it WOULD surprise me.

Just a little bit.

Are you?

Of course not.

Michael, I continue to be puzzled by your bitter, angry attitude toward me. I figure I must have done something to offend you personally, and if that's so, I want to make amends, and I ask your forgiveness.

We first met when we were protesting the demolition of the Skelly Building, and we seem to be in agreement on other issues regarding urban development and historic preservation. I'd like to think that, even though we won't agree on every issue, we can at least be civil so that we can work together when we are in agreement.

[MichaelC]

quote:Nice straw man. You've combined just about every negative stereotype of conservative Republicans and evangelical Christians, but I think you forgot the one about eating spotted owls at the church picnic.

You did ask for a manifesto didn't ya?  Just thought I'd help ya out there.  []

Liked that "Straw Man" eh?  Now that I've impressed you, can I "join the club."  I wasn't aware of the spotted owl thing, thanks.  I'll use it later.

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates

Michael, I continue to be puzzled by your bitter, angry attitude toward me. I figure I must have done something to offend you personally, and if that's so, I want to make amends, and I ask your forgiveness.

Now, don't play sweet.  That sweetness stuff just makes you a bigger target.  Besides, you've done nothing that requires my forgiveness.  You are who you are, can't fault you there.  Don't expect you to stop speaking your mind either.  

I just like clubbin baby seals every once in a while.  Heck, you're a three-fer, smackin you around lets me jump on a blogger, KFAQ guy, AND a hard core Medlock Supporter.  Almost irresistable.

I do apologize for being so crude and a bit underhanded, but I don't expect myself to stop any time soon.  It's hereditary.  So, from henceforth please mentally add the words "I apologize for being an ar$e" to every post of mine you read.  Even if I'm being abnormally decent.  And I will seriously consider adding it to my signature.

quote:We first met when we were protesting the demolition of the Skelly Building, and we seem to be in agreement on other issues regarding urban development and historic preservation. I'd like to think that, even though we won't agree on every issue, we can at least be civil so that we can work together when we are in agreement.

Now, you know when we're on the same page, we're going to be on the same page.  That's granted.  Crackin' skulls, slappin' jowls, damn the torpedoes.  

Civility is relative, and depending on your terms, it's existence on this field might be a struggle.  Therefore, I'll go back to the sidelines and leave this location to you.  I'll go contemplate civility, I see no reason why it can't exist in some form.

[tim huntzinger]

Do not back down, MC!  The idiocy you detect is that so-called 'evangelicultists' use the fiction that abortions are all performed on seven month old preborn children, when in their deluded state they believe a blastocyst is a child.

The difference between today's 'evangelicultists' and yesterday's evangelicals is that today's gospel is more about adhering to the public policy doctrine as an extension of theological constructs, and yesterday's was about bringin' lost sheep into the fold.

Medlock said something here last year that was revealing. He said that even as a youth minister at All Souls he was a conservative Republican.  Later he joined the liberal PCUSA thinking he was going 'conservative.' His political beliefs lead him to a church he though was more suitable.

The fiction is that the 'evangelicals' have taken over the GOP.  I contend they have not.  This crowd is a long way from the evangelicals of yesterday.

[cannon_fodder]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates

quote:
I haven't said anything about law in this thread. The definition of human life is not a matter of law. It's a matter of science.

No, you haven't said anything about the law... but that is what you were arguing for.  You are arguing for constitutional protection of embryonic stem cells - that's a legal issue.  Clearly, if you do not think  (as a matter of law) that embryos should be protected, then you discussing a LEGAL matter.

Science does not determine the rights of men.  We are a nation of law enforced within the separation of church and state.  Science is advisory, but LAW controls.  

Currently the law utilizes science to mark its definition.  A human embryo gains the protection of the state when it becomes a viable fetus. The definition clearly references science, but it is a LEGAL definition.

Its interesting to hear someone argue to enforce a religious view in Oklahoma and conjure science as a defense.  I do not know your views on the matter, but I just can not but help remember the creationist exhibit we nearly had at the zoo.  Oh how Letterman loves a good story from Tulsa.
- - - -

Anyway, my main point on the matter stands:

I do not believe he has any intention of acknowledging that point

You have no real intention of debating anything on the merits.  Instead you have managed to turn the discussion into a discussion of Michael Bates.  I would love to hear your thoughts on this matter in the form of a discussion or dialog, you can post all the monologs you want at Batesline,.  The entire point of a discussion is to raise points and counter points - not to ignore the ones you do not like.

[tim huntzinger]

CF must've picketed too . . . (waaaah, why ya'll picking on me, waaaaah, i thought we were buds, waaaahhh)  . . .

Lord, nothing seems to change your mind so what is the point of discussion?  You summated so nicely, why continue? You say you wanted to argue and when two folk put the 'I' in the argument you cry foul.  Your bogeyman man on point was religion, so you kind of threw down the gauntlet.  You say that opposing points of view based on morality are nonsense, and when the Master throws out some scientific points you are silent, so I am curious why you even want to debate the issue.