"In the future, many specialists believe, most in vitro fertilizations will be performed for fertile couples seeking genetic diagnosis, not as a treatment for infertility." >>>>
the slippery slope, the end does not justify the means.
Once government begins to define life and humanity, there is no end to the possibilities for subjective and selective determination as to who will be allowed to live.
1 posted on
09/03/2006 1:55:47 PM PDT by
Coleus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
To: Coleus
Oh, isn't this a heartwarming story? They choose the kids they want, and kills those that they don't. Pelosi's heart must be warmed by this great news.
2 posted on
09/03/2006 1:57:04 PM PDT by
The Cuban
To: 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; annalex; ...
3 posted on
09/03/2006 2:05:32 PM PDT by
Coleus
(I Support Research using the Ethical, Effective and Moral use of stem cells: non-embryonic "adult")
To: Coleus
4 posted on
09/03/2006 2:06:01 PM PDT by
neverdem
(May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
To: Coleus
I wonder if dad Chad wishes he'd been "culled."
7 posted on
09/03/2006 2:12:21 PM PDT by
Clara Lou
(Only a fool creates ill will unnecessarily.)
To: Coleus
Anyone see Gattaca ? The slippery slope of eugenics. Once you get down that path... it's pretty scary.
9 posted on
09/03/2006 2:13:06 PM PDT by
farlander
(Strategery - sure beats liberalism!)
To: Coleus
Typical. Someone else's life isn't worth living if they (may) have a set of circumstances you wouldn't want. I wonder if the guy thinks his parents shouldn't have lived since they have colon cancer. I wonder if he develops it, will he regret having lived. I wonder what these people think sometimes. We are all going to die some day. Even if you can prolong it for decades, there's always the possibility of you just getting killed by younger people to get you out of the way. I guess you can live with principles or rationalizations.
To: Coleus
This is just Eigenics at an earlier stage than was available before. Oh I know they will say it does prevent human suffering including that of the child, parents and society.
20 posted on
09/03/2006 2:31:51 PM PDT by
therut
To: Coleus
To: wagglebee; little jeremiah
28 posted on
09/03/2006 2:40:13 PM PDT by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: leda
I think I am going to be ill. Crohn's, anyone? ADHD?
38 posted on
09/03/2006 2:55:54 PM PDT by
patton
(Sanctimony frequently reaps its own reward.)
To: Coleus
You can dress eugenics up all you want, it is still murder.
49 posted on
09/03/2006 3:07:26 PM PDT by
TheDon
(The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON!)
To: Coleus; american colleen; Lady In Blue; Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; ...
By subjecting Chloe to a genetic test when she was an eight-cell embryo in a petri dish, Mr. Kingsbury and his wife, Colby, were able to determine that she did not harbor the defective gene. That was the reason they selected her, from among the other embryos they had conceived through elective in vitro fertilization, to implant in her mothers uterus. Slippery slope, indeed. Chloe did not harbor the colon cancer gene, so she is allowed to be born. When Chloe reaches puberty, she may very well develop AIDS or leukemia or breast cancer .. or ... she may end up like the 20 year old son of a friend, dead, from a head on collision.
Yes, the new age process of selective breeding resolves one problem. Who knows what magnificent contributions to medicine her 'siblings' might have contributed, had they been allowed the same lease on life.
Can you just imagine the parents telling Chloe how special she is! It's no longer the stork story but "we chose you" over the other fertilized embryos because you didn't carry the colon cancer gene.
Catholic Ping List
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
72 posted on
09/03/2006 4:05:39 PM PDT by
NYer
("That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the whole Torah." Hillel)
To: Coleus
We are witnessing the very early stages of the what will be a dramatically increasing difference between children created "on purpose" and children created "by accident".
Like it or not, within two generations it will be the minority of highly "imperfect" naturals who are regarded with pity by everyone else.
75 posted on
09/03/2006 4:10:47 PM PDT by
M. Dodge Thomas
(More of the same, only with more zeros at the end.)
To: Coleus
Let's pose a different question here for a minute.
Many people on this thread feel very very strongly that life begins at conception. At least one poster believes that it begins at implantation. Another won't say what she believes, but has studied fetal development to come to her views. And others feel that life begins when there is some sort of neural development. In every case, we all agree that life begins no earlier than AT conception.
Medical science is at an awkward stage in which one can test a blastosphere for a genetic defect, but cannot test a sperm and an egg prior to conception.
Within a few years it is highly probably that both eggs and sperm will be able to be tested (and even in fact engineered) PRIOR to conception.
Would either a). testing of naturally occurring eggs and sperm or b). engineering eggs and sperm prior to fertilisation be morally acceptable to those of you who oppose the destruction of embryos?
It either case, there would be no destruction of life or of potential life.
Does this resolve all moral problems AND solve the problem here where parents with genetic disorders want to bear children without those disorders?
jas3
87 posted on
09/03/2006 4:31:54 PM PDT by
jas3
To: Coleus
Our God is a jealous God, He will have no other Gods before Him.
And chastisement will increase.
104 posted on
09/03/2006 5:02:39 PM PDT by
franky
(Pray for the souls of the faithful departed.)
110 posted on
09/03/2006 5:29:11 PM PDT by
Coleus
(I Support Research using the Ethical, Effective and Moral use of stem cells: non-embryonic "adult")
To: Coleus
WOW, a better example of BOLD NEW WORLD does NOT come to mind.
To: Coleus
According to the link in the article, their aborted children could have lived 40 years or more, before diagnosis.
The parents are control freaks, willing to kill their offspring instead of doing the hard work of pushing for a cure.
Few advances in medicine come from people who consider abortion or euthanasia to be cure.
160 posted on
09/03/2006 7:25:45 PM PDT by
syriacus
(Why wasn't each home in New Orleans required to have an inflatable life boat?)
To: Coleus
wow. just imagine what happens when your "genetic score" can be had by anyone from some internet huckster for $29.95.
Imagine the possibilities for class warfare! The leftist politicians will think they're in heaven.
To: Coleus
Well, we're all gonna die from something. They may think they have kept their daughter from ever contracting colon cancer, but what if she contracts a different cancer? What if she's hit by a car on her way home from school one day? How will they handle that? Will they feel cheated that they went through all that to save her, but still couldn't?
We ain't God, and we shouldn't try to play Him.
193 posted on
09/03/2006 11:21:18 PM PDT by
SuziQ
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson