Skip to comments.
Dr. Dobson: Media Hiding Truth on Stem Cells
Newsmax.com ^
| 6/28/04
| Carl Limbacher
Posted on 06/28/2004 5:16:15 PM PDT by truthandlife
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-47 next last
To: truthandlife
Perhaps James's approach is better ... I've been pounding on the Truth that the stem cells targeted (in ESC research) are the body parts of the fetus at his or her earliest age. America doesn't seem to care that such exploitation is cannibalism, so perhaps they'll react to being lied to and disdained by not being given the facts on adult stem cells.
2
posted on
06/28/2004 5:20:49 PM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
Comment #3 Removed by Moderator
To: truthandlife
"Embryonic stem cells are not going to be the source of a cure for Alzheimer's,How does he know? Can he see into the future?
4
posted on
06/28/2004 6:58:49 PM PDT
by
raybbr
(My 1.4 cents - It used to be 2 cents, but after taxes - you get the idea.)
To: raybbr
Alzheimer's Disease is a whole-brain disorder. It isn't remotely under serious consideration for a cure at the cellular level. By the time Alzheimer's manifests, the plaque structures are beyond cellular level treatment to remove.
May I ask if you would approve of cannibalism to cure Alzheimer's Disease? Ronald Regan would not have, by his own professions regarding the sanctity of human individual life from conception onward.
5
posted on
06/28/2004 7:16:22 PM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
To: MHGinTN
Invoking Reagan's name means nothing to me.
As far as calling it cannibalism is concerned I don't agree. You must be against organ donation and blood donation too if you are to call yourself intellectually honest.
6
posted on
06/28/2004 7:24:21 PM PDT
by
raybbr
(My 1.4 cents - It used to be 2 cents, but after taxes - you get the idea.)
To: raybbr
Nice try, but no soup for you. Organ 'donation' is a consent arrangement; in the case of a living donor, the alive individual consents; in the case of a deceased donor, the person is no longer alive and the family decides or the once alive individual's donor card decides the issue. You favor taking organs from alive humans?
7
posted on
06/28/2004 7:57:01 PM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
To: truthandlife
8
posted on
06/28/2004 8:08:34 PM PDT
by
Salvation
(†With God all things are possible.†)
To: truthandlife
"Embryonic stem cells are not going to be the source of a cure for Alzheimer's," Dobson told the capacity crowd. "Are you aware that not one human being anywhere in the world is being treated with embryonic stem cells? There is not a single clinical trial going on anywhere in the world, because (embryonic) stem cells in laboratory animals ... create tumors. Nobody will use them."I heard about this over a year ago. In fact, a canadian university actually has made great progress in the use of adult stem cells, IIRC. But junk science supports the death agenda, so there you go.
And as far as Reagan goes, Ron Junior is an uneducated opportunist with his recent whining about religious presidents and stem cells.
9
posted on
06/28/2004 8:14:44 PM PDT
by
ovrtaxt
(Save soldiers' lives: nuke the terrorists!)
To: MHGinTN
I thought this was an ethical decision on your part? Cannibalism, according to your definition, means using parts of one human on another. Blood and organs, whether the person donates, falls under your definition. I am all for stem cell research. Of all kinds. Why not? We have no idea what they could be used for until we try.
An unborn fetus, whether through abortion or miscarriage provides those cells and I think we should use them. I don't see your distinction between organs and stem cells. If you are opposed to one on ethical grounds you must be opposed to the other. Your excuses don't fly with me.
10
posted on
06/29/2004 4:25:32 AM PDT
by
raybbr
(My 1.4 cents - It used to be 2 cents, but after taxes - you get the idea.)
To: raybbr
I want your stem cells. I have a right to them, even if it kills you, since it will help me.
11
posted on
06/29/2004 5:14:19 AM PDT
by
Theo
To: truthandlife
My arguement against stem cells is this:
Can you imagine if I came up to you and said: "I want your eyes so I can see better?"
12
posted on
06/29/2004 6:16:23 AM PDT
by
Big Guy and Rusty 99
(You are the gayest thing since gay came to gaytown.)
To: raybbr
I don't see your distinction between organs and stem cells. I know someone I like better than you who needs your heart, so we're coming to get it.
THAT is the difference.
13
posted on
06/29/2004 6:31:24 AM PDT
by
hopespringseternal
(People should be banned for sophistry.)
To: hopespringseternal
I know someone I like better than you who needs your heart, so we're coming to get it.Huh? Are saying that they are taking stem cells by force? That's the first I heard of this. Can you point to some evidence?
14
posted on
06/29/2004 9:57:06 AM PDT
by
raybbr
(My 1.4 cents - It used to be 2 cents, but after taxes - you get the idea.)
To: Big Guy and Rusty 99; Theo
Can you imagine if I came up to you and said: "I want your eyes so I can see better?"Where does this come from. Are you saying that they are taking stem cells by force? Can you point to evidence of this?
15
posted on
06/29/2004 9:59:39 AM PDT
by
raybbr
(My 1.4 cents - It used to be 2 cents, but after taxes - you get the idea.)
To: raybbr
"How does he know? Can he see into the future?"Read the rest of the article. He tells why.
16
posted on
06/29/2004 10:01:31 AM PDT
by
MEGoody
(Kerry - isn't that a girl's name? (Conan O'Brian))
To: raybbr
"Huh? Are saying that they are taking stem cells by force?"Uh, yeah, I'd call killing an embryo to get stem cells taking them by force. It's not as though the child had a say in the matter. (Hey, you can have them when I'm done with them.)
17
posted on
06/29/2004 10:04:06 AM PDT
by
MEGoody
(Kerry - isn't that a girl's name? (Conan O'Brian))
To: raybbr
The embryonic stem cells are harvested by immunologically stripping the trophoblast - chemicals are used to destroy the placenta. This necessarily ends all ability for the embryo to continue to develop, at least with our current technology.
http://www.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/08/09/stem.cell.alternative/
18
posted on
06/29/2004 10:11:40 AM PDT
by
hocndoc
(Choice is the # 1 killer in the US)
To: raybbr
Still no soup for you. But it was a nice try on your part.
19
posted on
06/29/2004 10:31:12 AM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
To: raybbr
Embryonic stem cells are not obtained by harvesting the products of an abortion. They are obtained from embryos that are the result of IVF or Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer and other cloning methods.
In the case of humans, the embryos must be at least at the 5 day or 250 cell stage in order to harvest sufficiently differentiated cells. Otherwise, the potential is twinning rather than stem cell lines.
http://www.healthnewsdigest.com/news/hlth_stemcell-17.html
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,167245,00.html
(Really, there's so much information available from Google, this site and Medline that there is no excuse for posting when you're so poorly informed.)
20
posted on
06/29/2004 10:34:13 AM PDT
by
hocndoc
(Choice is the # 1 killer in the US)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-47 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson