If it's not being limited to one germ layer, I doubt that all of these cells are still totipotent.
Posted on 05/25/2005 11:57:15 PM PDT by neverdem
President Bush seems determined to thwart any loosening of the restrictions he has imposed on federal financing of embryonic stem cell research, despite rising sentiment in Congress and the nation at large for greater federal support of this fast-emerging field. His actions are based on strong religious beliefs on the part of some conservative Christians, and presumably the president himself. Such convictions deserve respect, but it is wrong to impose them on this pluralistic nation.
Mr. Bush threatened this week to veto a modest research-expansion bill that was approved by the House and is likely to be passed by the Senate. The reason, he said, is that the measure would "take us across a critical ethical line" by encouraging the destruction of embryos from which the stem cells are extracted. Never mind that this particular ethical line looms large only for a narrow segment of the population. It is not deemed all that critical by most Americans or by most religious perspectives. Rather, the president's intransigence provided powerful proof of the dangers of letting one group's religious views dictate national policy.
The president's policy is based on the belief that all embryos, even the days-old, microscopic form used to derive stem cells in a laboratory dish, should be treated as emerging human life and protected from harm. This seems an extreme way to view tiny laboratory entities that are no larger than the period at the end of this sentence and are routinely flushed from the body by Mother Nature when created naturally.
These blastocysts, as they are called, bear none of the attributes we associate with humanity and, sitting outside the womb, have no chance of developing into babies. Some people consider them clumps of cells no different than other biological research materials. Others would grant them special respect...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Slimes indeed.
These blastocysts, as they are called, bear none of the attributes we associate with humanity...
...EXCEPT UNIQUE HUMAN DNA and THE PROPENSITY TO DEVELOP INTO AN ADULT HUMAN PERSON IF NOT MAIMED OR KILLED.
This is what is so sad about the whole fertility clinic industry.
Except for the part of not having attributes we associate with humanity, a baby at 20 weeks gestation would not have any chance outside it's mother's womb, if there were not human intervention.
They NYT has been trying to dehumanize unborn children since before Roe v Wade. I guess they'd hoped they wouldn't have to do this again, and are pretty pi$$ed at President Bush for making them have to work so hard at it again.
And we can rely on the N.Y. Slimes to tell us what is right or wrong? Since when do we need their misguided opinions and who are they to sit in judgment of our nation's traditional values?
If it's not being limited to one germ layer, I doubt that all of these cells are still totipotent.
It seems like the ghouls are everywhere these days, neverdem. I'm sickened by it all.
Given their druthers the NYT crowd would use discarded embryos as caviar with their champagne breakfasts.
Dehumanization ping.
Kind of like New York Times reporters.
Rather than forcing employees to donate to United Way the Slimes can force their employees to donate human embryos.
What the New York Times studiously fails to recognize is that Roe vs. Wade did not make any utilitarian judgement on the value of human life. That decision was all about the right to privacy. We may not agree with the logic, but at least it has a basis in something that is not ghoulish.
This business about havesting embryos, however, is all about utility. "They are just going to be thrown away, after all, and the potential is so great" goes the argument. They are worth so much more dead than alive.
But that can be said about a lot of folks, can't it? The President is rightly holding the line against applying any utilitarian valuation of human life. He is right to do this, even if 90% of the people in the Coliseum give the embryo the old "thumbs down". We just don't decide matters of life and death that way in this country.
Only two bold-faced lies in this sentence. The Times must be slipping.
Theraputic cloning is when a genetic copy of an individual is created in order to provide stem cells or spare parts for the diseased individual. So, say, if Teddy Kennedy needs a new liver, doctors can grow a little Teddy foetus and kill it, extract the liver cells, and grow Teddy a new one. Of course, the question becomes one of how long the foetus is permitted to grow before transplantation. Three months? Up to gestational maturity? Until the child learns to express himself (as some so-called ethicists have proposed)? Where does one draw the line?
This is the House of Horrors that lies before us if we take this path, and the New York Times can hardly wait...
I do wishbhe would listen to the hue and cry about imigration.
The "ethics" ghouls are doing the same:
http://blog.bioethics.net/
letter to letters@nytimes already sent. Thanks for the early morning ping!
Have you noticed how often the "no bigger than the period at the end of this sentence" or similar phrases are popping up"
You could "push poll" the number of people opposed to this research to 70% with only three questions:
QUESTION #1: Do human beings have a soul?
QUESTION #2: At what point does the gift of the soul come to reside in the human being?
QUESTION #3: Are you sure about that answer to Question #2?
I'm sickened and disgusted.
Except for the fact that they have parents and a full human genetic code.
Distribution of talking points has been noted.
Never ceases to amaze me how the servants of Evil lie so blatantly: "These blastocysts, as they are called, bear none of the attributes we associate with humanity ..." Yet even the bastard ghoul who wrote the article was once the same age as these tiny beings ... and in fact the writer called them 'entities' in a previous paragraph! Cannibalism is now to be 'enlightened medical advancement'. And we of faith are not to 'impose our beliefs upon this secular (pluralist) nation? So Cannibalism is to be permitted so long as the elitists want it in one form or another ... yeah, this nation is on the rapid decline and it is ghouls such as the writer of the article who are greasing the skids down the slippery funnel.
Even a few days old embryo-aged human is building the first organ for his or her survival (yes, the sex of the little one can already be discerned), the placenta. THAT is the attribute of a living being, and since that being is of the human species, we may confidently call that 'entity' a human being at earliest age in a human lifetime.
ProLife Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
exactly! and not to mention the fact that this is the way that every single one of us started even the so called human that wrote this op piece
A modest proposal: Perhaps science has caught up with the black arts. These unwanted embryos could be put to good use spread on a cracker and eaten to achieve extended life as is the case presented in the lore of the black arts. There is no law in existence to prevent such activity. Perhaps they have grown tired of their old fashioned technique of ceremonially sacrificing and consuming the fetus. This would be the real state of the matter. Demonic forces are seeking public funding for human sacrifice to achieve extended life. Certainly, government funding has no place in such matters. Black craft has beeen doing this for ages and now they demand it be legal and paid for by all, so that all may be damned. This is undoubtedly judgement day for this country. Each embryo has a distinctly differentiated genetic code. It is a unigue individual human life albeit in a vulnerable and dependant form. To sacrifice these humans to science, the god of the secular humanist, while ignoring the scientific fact of their humanity is simply insanity. Lusting for eternal or extended life these beasts would steal life from the most defenseless with no evidence, no promise, only a hope that they might achieve a goal which we are already promised by God.
| ***ACTION ALERT*** | Saturday, May 28, 2005 |
Romney delivers on promise to veto stem cell bill
By Theo Emery, Associated Press Writer | May 27, 2005
BOSTON -- Gov. Mitt Romney vetoed a bill Friday that would expand embryonic stem cell research in Massachusetts, but the measure has more than enough support in the Legislature to override the governor's veto.
The House and Senate passed the bill with veto-proof margins, and both chambers were expected to vote next week to override the veto.
You must encourage your fellow parishoners (family, friends) to contact their legislators by calling the State House switchboard at 617-722-2000 or by e-mailing your state senator (click here)and state representative (click here), urging them to support the Governor's final veto before a vote (likely Tuesday, May 31st) and this legislation becomes law!
To find your elected officials:
www.wheredoivotema.com/bal/myelectioninfo.php
See: Timeline (including Roll Call Votes) -- What's Happened So Far
FORWARD THIS E-MAIL ON TO FAMILY AND FRIENDS IN MASSACHUSETTS!!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional Resources:
Catholic Citizenship is a non-partisan organization which promotes public policy education and Catholic laity involvement in the political process. Catholic Citizenship is headed by former U.S. Ambassador to the Vatican, Raymond Flynn.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.