The definition of andrology I found is “the study of male reproductive system,” the male equivalent of gynecology (study of female reproductive system). It seems reasonable for the priest to have such a book on his shelf. He is using science, as it relates to the beginnings of human life, to explain the Church’s position. Is your point to indicate that the priest seems knowledgeable on this subject?
The biological standpoint is contrary to yours. The embryo when used for stem cell research consists of 100 cells. While they have the potential to become human life they cannot be seen as equivalent until embryo is attached to the womb. At this stage it is not.
The biological standpoint is contrary to yours. The embryo when used for stem cell research consists of 100 cells. While they have the potential to become human life they cannot be seen as equivalent until embryo is attached to the womb. At this stage it is not.
Yes, and Man was NEVER supposed to fly, all those flight failures PROVE IT...Oh wait, they perfected that, didn't they ??
In universities everywhere, studies continue, it never stops. Cures are found, new medicines are tried, DNA research, surgery techniques, etc etc, etc. Do they fail sometimes=YES . Do failures PREVENT humans from " finding a way" = NO. Stop living in the past when jesus supposedly roamed the earth. Or, you can wait for death and be with Jesus & be healthly 4 ever.
Hmmm. Perhaps. But I'm ceratin any fine preist who has had his share of the taste of young same sex flesh (or otherwise) might VERY WELL side with you !
Ever notice the ONLY ones knocking stem cell research are healthy religious people ?
Once these people reach the point in their lives where and when they or someone they care for becomes gravely ill, they don't talk all this crap against it.
i am christian myself, every1 in my school knocks stem cell research, it is so good to hear some sense in it. No1 has the ryt to speek for God, who are we to determin when a baby gets a 'soul' anyway? It isnt ryt to bring a child into the world knowing it will suffer genetic pass downs of disablities/disease, it'll suffer, or even in an untwanted home... stem cell research simply takes donated embroys ppl! Come on!
BTW "theology" is not science. It is theoretic philosophy based on several givens: first, that there is a supreme being; second, that there is an indivisible spiritual essence that is called a soul; third,that there is a separation between what is physical and what is spiritual.
Your Women r Lesbian you Homo And Country of Israel as foretold inSodom gomorh will be infested with Aids as prophesied for u r annhilation nin compooops
culture dish of hiv virus thats what isarel is destined to be
what a bunch of hypocrites, I heard on the news that more than 100 preachers have child-molested their followers. :)
Why can't the catholics "amend" their beliefs in the way the protestants clearly have. Make suicide okay, so the whole bunch of them can just die and do the world one helluva favour!
ARBITRARILY set another time? I stopped watching there. How is setting "by the time the embryo has a consciousness to lose" as a time arbitrary?
Here's a question for those who would consider an embryo a human life; if you were in a fertility clinic that was on fire and there was a child in one corner and a tray of embryos in the other, and you could only save one, which would you save? Remember, if an embryo is a human life, you would be saving more human lives by saving the tray of embryos.
The goo can be replicated 100 times. If it were, would the 99th be as important as the 1st? You have to understand, that by "an individual" the scientist really mean the genome. Of course if you use different embryos made from different eggs, they would be different, but do you really want to call that microscopic goo an INDIVIDUAL? It's like calling an egg a chicken, but clearly you can't grill it.
The church shouldn't care so much about the moral life of embryos and much more about the ethics of letting children die of hunger everyday. If it was for them we wouldn't even know that the world goes round and round!
The Church cares about both. The embryo is already a human life, pre-born, and deserves respect and protection. Some day this embryo will be a child. I would encourage you to do your research about the amount of money that Catholic Charities gives for relief services... I think you'll be pleasantly surprised
WOW, if I had the means to do so I'd be really please. But I really doubt I'd be surprised. I definitely think we can do much much more good here than harm.
The longer I live and hear people of religion profess some moral stance, the more I believe that religion is actually an immoral belief system. They will not let anything stand in the way of what their leaders teach. Religious leaders sold out most of the teachings of Jesus like forgivness and giving to the needy to the Republican party simply to get closer to the ear of government. Religious leaders today represent true evil.
they never even knew which way the blood went round,they never knew about cells ,they never knew about germs,nothing did they know ,scientists only told them,now they think they know better,fuck them and their made up god...
What the hell? So because scientists say it is "alive" it should be protected just as much as a human who has feelings, who has something to lose from dying? Trees are "alive" too, should they be protected as much as humans?
We routinely dispose of embryo's in the garbage. If something in the garbage can save millions of lives use it. End of story. Once again religion ruining our lives. Congrats
you guys call him a moron...hes got a doctorate. You people probably attend a junior college.I love it how people on youtube can pretend to be theologians and scholars. GET AN EDUCATION and stop calling people immature names.
Did you guys even listen to what this guy has to say? He discusses all the things that you guys are complaining about. FYI...if you people are trying to look intelligent by talking about big boy subjects like stem cells, then use your big boy language. Curse words are not very sophisticated. But then again you people are probably in your 20's, right?
fucking moron stem cells give people with teminal illnesses a chance TO LIVE the least these mothers can do if there not gonna have that baby is but it the use for the good of mankind. no one can give a single nonethical argument not influinced be religon. and a fetus isnt a living thinking being. its a clump a cells usefull ones there is no reason to ban it
your pay cheques? you have to live too.. you need to do other things either than be in a church, go to a movie, go out for dinner, etc. clothes, shoes, hair cuts, we pay to pray. although of all religions i beleive catholic is alot better since your not obligated to anything really, you do good, go to confession, etc. ya get into heaven (pretty much the run down of the bible
people you help (inn from the cold at my old church was the best i have ever heard of) and where does the church get the money for the reno's? a marble altar? VELVET curtains, 20ft tall crusifix? gold
matt groening. god says in the bible for people to be who they are... and yet its wrong to be homosexual? its wrong to have an abortion? BUT preists have gotten away with molesting children, and what
a father, you should beleive "god has a purpose for all of us" that is thiers, to help those who need it. god wants to help, and if you do things right people wont be sure you did them at all - to qoute an episode of futurama called "godfellas" stupid cartoon but that is best thing i have ever heard on a cartoon show done by
After the sexual molestation scandals in the Catholic Church I absolutely have no respect for priests. I am sorry, I was raised Catholic, but that did for me. If the institution would cover up priests abusing children for decades I just can't take them seriously.
Because a small group of individuals behaved improperly? What about the other 99% who are good, holy priests? Let's not forget the number of doctors, lawyers, and grade school teachers who are sadly committing far more of these awful crimes.
typical religious lunatic it is a fact that most persons afflicted with schizophrenia uniformly have a god delusion!as part of their symptomology therefore this guy needs some medications
Well done. Not only was this upfront jibberish, but it also showed the little intelligence you have in that speech. And also. That bored me. I couldn't help but not listen to it when trying my best to listen to it. Thanks for wasting a while 9:55 seconds of my life.
Wow, this is heartbreaking. This guy makes Catholics look like idiots. When are these priests going to sign up for a science class? He thinks he knows all there is to know. So I can take an embryo and sit it on my desk and it becomes a human.. right with a bit of "nurishment"! I'm sure God is ready to let this hero take the helm since he has all the answers! He appears to have no idea who he's hurting, nor any ability to care.
Actually, he's got a doctorate in moral theology from Rome, 2 Masters degrees as part of a regular ordination program, and also practiced law in Louisiana.. a law degree. Oh yeh, and a bachelor's in philosophy.
With respect - The background music kills me, but moreover this is a lot of jibber jabber, and this gentleman likes to hear himslef speak.
As for twins - you can have a split where twins are created in the embryonic stage and then one cell become dominant and become one embyonic cell AGAIN, so were there two souls? What happened to the other soul?
If you believe in the soul why does it seem impossible for a embryo to have two souls for identical twins and when they split each have one soul after the split. Do you think you have the right to decide which humans can live and which ones can't? And how can you compare your skin cell to a life which has the possibility to become a person? Can your skin cells do that? And your right an apple seed is not an apple ,but an embryo is a life.
How is an undifferentiated ball of cells a human being? If life begins at conception, what happens with identical twins when the blastocyst divides? Does the soul divide then too? Just because a group of cells share DNA with you doesn't mean they ARE you. We lose thousands of skin cells every day; should I be concerned with trying to preserve their "life". An apple seed is not the same thing as an apple?
Science does NOT agree about then life begins. Why should religious views on the issue dictate what everyone in society should be allowed to do. Freedom of religion is also there for others to believe something other than what you believe, or to not believe in religion at all. And since not everyone is opposed to stem cell research, should it be disallowed due to some religious beliefs?
Actually, you're wrong: science does agree on when life begins, and it has since the dawn of the scientific study of embryology. You could google "medical testimony when life begins" or work really hard and look up a medical textbook: the fact of the matter is that any academically accredited medical or embryological textbook would agree that life begins as conception. So you're right that religion shouldn't dictate it: but science should.
NOPE, SCIENCE ***DOES NOT*** AGREE ON WHEN LIFE BEGINS. I suggest YOU spend the time looking this up in further detail ;-) As I have stated, YES, you can find "medical testimony" etc... to SUPPORT one view, but also medical and scientific "testimony" to attest to the OTHER VIEWS also from "academically accredited" sources. There is NOT consensus in the scientific community about this issue.
1.) The Cellular Theory of Biology states that the cell is the basic unit of life and that all cells come from pre-existing cells except for the first cell. Thus, all organisms' lives must start as a single cell.
2.) See if you can find an academically accredited medical textbook, biological embryology textbook, or scientific journal that identifies ANY stage other than the zygote as the beginning of an organism's life cycle.
2)Look up "embryo," you seem confused; when an embryo begins, life begins: an embryo is by definition a multicellular eukaryotic organism.
3)Current perspectives on when human life begins range; biological knowledge of when human life begins doesn't.
Let me know when you find a scientific statement; I was never arguing about "perspectives" or opinions, but the facts. As this video says, "the facts are the same, the judgments of them are what's changing in science."
NO, it is not universally SCIENTIFICALLY accepted as "fact" that "life begins" when an embryo "begins". There are some SCIENTIFIC viewpoints that assert life simply continues at the embryonic stage...ECT....Don't simply state that differing scientific views don't exist because you are too lazy or uneducated to read and resarch anything but your own point of view (the quote below was talking about SCIENTIFIC views (and the book sites sources, as SIMPLE GOOGLE search could find it).
okay all you anti stem cell people - the embryos used for stem cell research are obtained from in vitro fertilzation clinics. the embryos are going to be destroyed anyways because so many extra are created. why dont we just use them for research instead of wasting them? and if theyre already being destroyed why arent you throwing bitch fits about them already being destroyed every day at fertilization clinics?
what the heck why would you sacrifice a a grown person for an embryo. you basically r killing a pottentail human beign wen u jack off so why would u say this is immoral
I think just about everyone comenting here realizes that religion and morals are purely subjective, and in no way should those views be taken into account. Furthermore is'nt there supposed to be a separation of religion from government. Bush's reasoning for the veto further research does not share that supposed standard.
Sure, there should be a separation of church and state. But you don't have to believe in God to oppose killing people for medical research, and we know from science textbooks that our lives began at the moment of fertilization, not birth or some other arbitrary moment.
You should know, if you had really taken a biology class, that to say that life "begins" is fallacious. Life began far longer ago that you can comprehend; has no one ever asked you whether the chicken or the egg cam first? Is a sperm cell alive? Is an ovum alive? What is the definition of life?
Please don't invoke biology, you will only look like a complete moron.
A human BEING'S life begins at the moment of fertilization. I'm really rather surprised you're ignorant of this scientific fact. It's okay if your RELIGION tells you that a person's life begins at birth, but you're not allowed to force that belief on others. Got it?
I don't know if you know this, but there is no such thing as a scientific fact. You do not know enough about fertilization to be able to understand the ambiguity of "when life begins". So I will tell you that to say it begins at fertilization is the same as saying it begins when you get your drivers license; they are both based on criterion that are ARBITRARY.
As there is no mystery third ingredient or component added after sperm and egg unite, we can solidly put the beginning of life right at that moment. What is arbitrary is believing the "non-human embryo" magically "becomes" a human being later, whether at birth, or "quickening," or the ever-moving "viability," or the religious' people's "ensoulment," or when the unborn begins to LOOK cute, or whatever.
And, Science Expert, "criterion" is the singular form of "criteria."
But to make such an assertion is baseless. It makes no scientific progress towards a better understanding of the situation; it's as to claim that the numbers higher than the number 12 are the only ones that we can call "big". The only reason such definitions are used in science is so that people can conveniently communicate system specifics. As such, to use this definition as grounds to claim murder is to have no empirical justification beyond a convenient categorization.
No, it's not okay to throw them out. They are, scientifically, human beings, and human beings should neither be thrown away nor destroyed for medical research. I'm not sure where you're having the mental disconnect.
By that "scientific" rationale, you know what else is 100% human? Sperm. Yup that's right, and its no surprise to you I'm guessing. Killing sperm is the same as killing humans! I really wish you people would go say this to someone that survived a concentration camp. I would also hope that they spit on you.
Sperm is human, but a sperm isn't a HUMAN BEING. We know from the WORLD BOOK ENCYCLOPEDIA and countless science textbooks that the fertilization by a human ovum by a human sperm cells marks the beginning of a new human being's life. So, really, when you continually compare a sperm to an embryo, or deny that embryos are human beings, you only persist in making yourself look like an imbecile.
Unfortunately those books are intro level simplifications. They are simplifying things so that you can understand them, rarely is it the correct model. In terms of definitions everything that is first taught is usually wrong, it just so happens that it works well, and most people never need the deeper understanding.
So when I say, "you don't know what you are talking about," you should appreciate the fact that you cannot without an embryology background.
Translation: "I find the textbook definitions for things to be very inconvenient for what I'm trying to do, and so I'm going to pretend that they don't actually say what they say."
All I have to say to you is that upon a chemistry students third year of instruction (when he reaches physical chemistry) the professor walks into the class and says, "Everything you have learned about chemistry up to this point is basically WRONG." This is the case for most intensive science field. Since your textbooks are very much at the introductory level, they are at the level where the models used are INCORRECT. Ex. Newton's is wrong, but still taught.
i dont get u guys. when does a human life begin? when it comes out the womb? what about caesarian babies? so what abotu in the womb...when they have no arms? what about people born without arms...it keeps going and going! its human from when its born! FUCK!!!
I support stem cell research and I think its about time we let all this religious superstious crap go. This is the 2st century and religion should have been done away with long ago. Life began about a billion years ago and its a continuous process.
HAHAH, this man is not qualified to even understand genetics, furthermore i also studied theology, psychology and genetics and still there is much more to the debate, if you are going to say something, please leave fucking religion out of science, you do your job and we will do ours.
Yeah, I am living in the present. Religion continues to screw us daily. The real reason they are so apposed to it is because they feel if you have a disease you deserve it. The religious morons always ignore adult stem cell.
I am not sure that the Roman Catholic church has too much moral authority to draw on. However, if I follow things to their logical conclusion, letting life start and proceed naturally, then we should dump a large number of therapies, antibiotics, medical treatments, blood transfusions, transplants, etc because they are unnatural. We can go back to very high rates of disease and childhood death, and a very high likelihood of death of women in childbirth. And so on...
No therapies, antibiotics, medical treatments, blood transfusions, or transplants came about from human beings being willfully killed. There's your difference.
Many forms of stem cell investigations have nothing to do with killing an embryo. I am not sure that a clump of half a dozen cells, that does not even have a nervous system, is a human being. And those clumps of cells are killed willfully and have been for decades as part of fertilization techniques. We just do not object to them being killed or discarded since we agree with the end result; potentially more babies and help for infertile couples.
Many of those therapies that you mention did of course result from the death of humans, since they are the result of centuries of efforts and testing and a lot of death. None of this is clean and easy, although I am sure you would like it to be so. If it were clear and simple like some people claim, then there would be no controversy.
Many of those therapies that you mention did of course result from the death of humans, since they are the result of centuries of efforts and testing and a lot of death. None of this is clean and easy, although I am sure you would like it to be so. If it were clear and simple like some people claim, then there would be no controversy.
Embrionic Stem Cell research has not been proven in private clinical trials yet, and therefore should not have millions of our taxpayer's dollars funneled to it. Adult stem cell research has been proven, and promises possible cures for dozens of diseases. Don't let Michael J. Fox's false blanket of "Stem Cell Research" throw you off. There's research going on right now--PROVEN research.
Yes, there is a scientific reason to oppose embryonic stem cell research: scientifically, human embryos are human beings. Some of you seem to have a real problem grasping this concept. Just because a priest says two plus three equals five doesn't make it a religious concept. Just open any biology textbook and you'll see that, in fact, we were NOT brought here by the stork, but rather existed as embryonic human beings before we were born.
hm...I hope you read what you just posted and see your messed up logic...you'er saying adult stemcells are better? now that's complete b.s and realy dude i well i am sad for you buddy.
You really need to educate yourself on the matter. Adult stem cells have already treated patients with multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's, sickle cell anemia, and several types of cancer. Meanwhile, an Australian company has received FDA approval for its adult stem cell therapy to treat spinal cord injury. With embryonic stem cells, they've only been able to replicate (or have an inferior replication of) advances already achieved with adult stem cells.
lol...maybe because embryonic stem cell research isint funded much?.Oh btw korea has had alot more progress in the research then america(i am talking about south korea possibly north but who the hell knows what goes on there)and they use embryonic stem cells.ESC are blanker and cheaper then adult stem cell,they are in bigger suplys and unlike adult cells you dont have to fight them to change.I've done ALOT of research and i am firmly for ALL matters of science and e.s.c is the most reliable.
lol...maybe because embryonic stem cell research isint funded much?.Oh btw korea has had alot more progress in the research then america(i am talking about south korea possibly north but who the hell knows what goes on there)and they use embryonic stem cells.ESC are blanker and cheaper then adult stem cell,they are in bigger suplys and unlike adult cells you dont have to fight them to change.I've done ALOT of research and i am firmly for ALL matters of science and e.s.c is the most reliable.
lol...maybe because embryonic stem cell research isint funded much?.Oh btw korea has had alot more progress in the research then america(i am talking about south korea possibly north but who the hell knows what goes on there)and they use embryonic stem cells.ESC are blanker and cheaper then adult stem cell,they are in bigger suplys and unlike adult cells you dont have to fight them to change.I've done ALOT of research and i am firmly for ALL matters of science and e.s.c is the most reliable.
Hundreds of millions of federal dollars = "isint [sic] funded much"? Adult stem cells are far more workable because they don't turn into tumors in the lab, which embryonic stem cells do.
No it isint dude i mean realy they spent 2trillion on the iraq war so far (f.y.i that's 2000billion or 2 million million;2,000,000 million;2trillion=2,000,000,000,000. Now do you think it's founded much? 40,000,000(forty million) went to E.S.R two trill is 40mill times 50,000. So it's 1\50,000th of what they spent on the war.
No it isint dude i mean realy they spent 2trillion on the iraq war so far (f.y.i that's 2000billion or 2 million million;2,000,000 million;2trillion=2,000,000,000,000. Now do you think it's founded much? 40,000,000(forty million) went to E.S.R two trill is 40mill times 50,000. So it's 1\50,000th of what they spent on the war.
No it isint dude i mean realy they spent 2trillion on the iraq war so far (f.y.i that's 2000billion or 2 million million;2,000,000 million;2trillion=2,000,000,000,000. Now do you think it's founded much? 40,000,000(forty million) went to E.S.R two trill is 40mill times 50,000. So it's 1\50,000th of what they spent on the war.
So? They happen to be spending a great deal of money on the war in Iraq. I've noticed that so many supporters of embryo-destructive research just can't help bringing in other issues like Iraq or Galileo. I guess they realize they don't have much of an argument on this topic so they bring in others.
Dude my point is that you are an idiot for thinking that 40m is alot of money, Bill gates makes 40m in a few hours dude, it just isint that much money at all. You are also a idiot for thinking that embryos are humans because no they are not they are human *cells* and if not in a whoom they will die so they have as much potential al my snot.
I wonder what it means when an idiot calls me "idiot." "Embryo" is merely one of the first stages of life. You, too, are mere "cells" except that you have more of them. An embryo is a human being whether in a womb (please note the spelling) or not.
Oh? and who says? an embryo has no brain, no muscle, no bones, tini traces of skin, it's mostly complete snot and is worthless outside an womb. I'll never consider an embryo human especially over a full grown human with memories, thoughts, feelings, and a family. That's what you are saying that these embryos are more important them humans dude you are a virus, makes me sick.
Apparently you are one of those people who believes that a pregnant woman swallows a pill that will "add" a brain, muscles, and skeletal system to an embryo. In actuality, all of those things are already present in that first cell; only development and growth need to take place, just as they still need to do AFTER birth. A newborn baby doesn't have memories yet, either. According to your "logic," newborns aren't human beings, either. Pretty dumb.
I can from your statement deduce that you have no understanding of developmental biology. The Blastula contains a chemical colloid of these things: proteins, DNA, and phospholipids. These on their own will never produce a human being. It is the sequential supplying of transcription signal cofactors and metabolic high energy chemicals that allow development to proceed.
You really should not try to invoke embryology, when you know nothing about it.
Did you know that when you eat a carrot, it becomes you!!! OH MY GOD!! WE HAVE TO STOP THEM FROM KILLING THOSE CARROTS!! THEY BECOME HUMAN; THEY'RE JUST AN EARLIER STAGE OF US!!
Please don't try to invoke biology to back you up on this, just stick to your bullshit religious appeals. Science sees you for what you really are, because it's not stupid.
I'm rather sorry for you if you cannot distinguish between a carrot and a human embryo. Hopefully you have been equipped with clamps to keep you from losing your mittens.
Whether you like it or not, science supports my side, not yours.
That depends on your definition of science. If you define it as whatever your background is, then maybe you have grounds to argue. Sadly this science is defined by my background: biochemistry and cellular biology. Just about everything you have said, I can point out how ignorant it is in a number of my course texts.
Some advice: never go into this field, you're are predisposed to screwing it up.
It's not illogical to point out the religious right's proven track record condemning advancements in science and medicine. I pointed out similarities in the hypocracy spewed out 200 years ago with regards to the smallpox vaccination, their condemnation of it as an abomination and against the will of God, and their condemnations today. Reading the sermons, you wouldn't know they weren't talking stem cell research!Yes, I'm intolerant and emotive, no more than the comments above, both sides.
bhd282, your comments are illogical and overly emotive. You've said nothing useful to the argument, but only spewed your intolerant bigotry. Nice work.
Two hundred years ago, British and American preachers in churches all over condemned vaccination against the scourge of smallpox, as against the will of God. Happily this is an example of just how stupid the religious right can be, how selfish they are with regard to human suffering. We need not be disheartened by their shrill hypocracies. They marginalize themselves everyday, the future is that they make their faith irrelevant to actuality. "...and no religion too."
He doesn't get through the first minute without making false assumptions. This man cannot be taken seriously. The only valid pro-life position is one that saves lives, and this man would let cures wither on the vine to save things that aren't alive or human.
Likewise, all Catholic Bishops and churchgoers today did not kill the peoples of the Inquisitions and the Crusades hundreds of years ago. They would hope you could trust them.
Mistakes do not define who we are today, unless we do not learn from them. The Church protects life today. She has learned from her mistakes.
Mistakes in the past, although bad, do not falsify a true statement. True, they can undermine that organization's credibility.
With that said, we do have to ask ourselves a question: do we trust Germany today? (After all, she killed millions of Jews in the 1900s whereas the Church killed thousands 400+ years ago). I would assume that you trust Germany-- and Germans would hope so too (given that they, personally, and for the most part, did not kill the Jews of the 30s).
Matt, your logic seems to be off: the Church has a thought on life and that same Church has killed life in the past, therefore you conclude that the Church is wrong about its thought on life. Let's take this logic and apply it to another organization: Germany. Let's say that Germany has a thought on life today, but Germany exterminated millions of Jews in the 1930s; therefore (according to your logic) Germany's current thought on life must be false.
wow. didn't your organized church KILL thousands of innocent "human's". I think that all the cromozones were present there in those poor fucks that your church killed. Bottom line, you are a zigot, and haven't got much farther than that. deal.
Those in favor of embryonic stem cells are not godless freaks, and those against it are not dark aged fools either. Deal with practicality, we have millions suffering right now, and we have the ability to save them. You say an embryo is destroyed, I say a life is saved. I can't gaurantee all Park. & Alz. will be saved, but nobody can gaurantee me that all embryos will grow into fully, happy lives either. Common sense, the rest of the world sees it...We can't use God as an excuse anymore.
Ask yourselves this. How many people are Anti-Abortion, but Pro-Death Penalty? Faith is something private between you and whomever. Science is learning the truth that was set out and waiting to be discovered. Some discoveries were done poorly, but necessary. Embryos are better than Adult Stem cells, scientific fact. Parkinsons and Alz. are among those that benefit.
5 stars. This man was calm, diginified, and well educated. He put forth some clear ideas and supported them as much as could be expected. To be honenst, when I clicked on this link, I was expecting to see a boiling pot of righteous indignation in an attempt to smother the facts with the volume of his voice.
I was pleasantly suprised to find that he did not assume the role of "stereotypical simple-minded victim of satan and his scientifically-inclined minons," but peacefully laid his beliefs on the table without damning all others in the process.
BTW, I try not to get into who's a "bad person," Leia, but maybe you should bear that in mind the next time someone on one of these message boards suggests that those opposed to ESCR are opposed to ALL research, or that they're unsympathetic to afflicted people. There's a lot of mud getting flung -- from BOTH sides.
Think about it. I'm not sure exactly how it is done, but if cell lines could be established they may not need to keep taking from embryos. This research could possibly end the need for it. Nobody knows. I really think this is one of those things that people look back on and say, "Well of course all races are equal, of course stem cell research is a good thing and not murder" We shall see. ..but it's been nice debating with you BoyGenteel. Peace.
I'm pretty sure you won't be able to find something that "disproves" the WORLD BOOK's definition of "embryo," because you'd need to find what that mystery third ingredient/component is (after sperm an egg) that transforms a non-person into a person. But none exists. All else an embryo needs is nutrition and a hospitable environment, just like WE do.
An embryo doesn't just have DNA; (s)he is an already existing human being. In order to engage in research cloning, you must combine that skin cell of yours with an ovum in order for the creation of the new embryo to occur. This means: that skin cell is not analogous to an embryo but rather (if anything) a sperm.
Yes, but a stem cell is a cell with human DNA just like a skin cell, only it hasn't become specialized into a skin cell or a liver cell..etc. What researchers use are some particular cells that happen to come from an embryo.
Yes, Leia, and that embryo is a human being. You can take stem cells from ME without harming me, but you must destroy an embryo in order to take his or her stem cells. That's the problem. It's not the research itself, per se, but rather the destruction of embryonic human beings that is the problem.
An embryo will become a human being, but it is not a human being unless it grows into one. Embryos can be made in ways other than sperm and egg joining (as done with animals). If done with humans, would these embryos be human beings?
An embryo created via cloning is exactly equivalent to one created via fertilization, in vitro or otherwise. And I've already quoted the WORLD BOOK and other sources that make it quite clear that an embryo is NOT a potential human being (or other animal in the case of other species), but rather an actual one.
Well, time has shown, they are not exactly equivalent. Dolly, the cloned sheep had aging problems related to the telomeres on chromosomes (but I understand that you mean she should not be treated differently or inhumanely). Bottom line is I don't think a group of unspecialized cells is a human being. You think otherwise. If so in-vitro should be illegal because they actually destroy more "lives" than create. We will never agree, but that is ok. ..nothing we can do about it.
Once again, science is not made up of FACTS. There is no such thing as a scientific FACT. If you think there is, you should not be allowed in the field. Evidence, Hypothesis, and Theory make up science. If facts were part that zeitgeist we would still be in the dark ages.
The problem here is how the layman uses the word fact. Scientists do not use the word to mean what is absolute; they use the word to mean data that is subject to inaccuracy and change. The general public sees facts as what cannot be argued incorrect, which is a notion that would bankrupt the scientific process.
So in this context, nothing especially not arbitrary definitions, can be argued to be absolute as the statement "scientific fact" implies.
The definition of andrology I found is “the study of male reproductive system,” the male equivalent of gynecology (study of female reproductive system). It seems reasonable for the priest to have such a book on his shelf. He is using science, as it relates to the beginnings of human life, to explain the Church’s position. Is your point to indicate that the priest seems knowledgeable on this subject?
dbeall 3 months ago
Notice the book off of his right shoulder .... Andrology....if you don't know what it is google it
snattereri 3 months ago
Allright when you christians are about to die, pray...
We people with sense, will use medical advances...
Let's see who lives longer... To the finnish line!...
Southparkateer2 9 months ago
The biological standpoint is contrary to yours. The embryo when used for stem cell research consists of 100 cells. While they have the potential to become human life they cannot be seen as equivalent until embryo is attached to the womb. At this stage it is not.
bwplouise 11 months ago
The biological standpoint is contrary to yours. The embryo when used for stem cell research consists of 100 cells. While they have the potential to become human life they cannot be seen as equivalent until embryo is attached to the womb. At this stage it is not.
bwplouise 11 months ago
LET'S SEE a religious person who very ill say " "No I don't want it, I'd rather die"
gblueslover2 2 years ago
"I don't want a malignant teratoma( from implanted embryonic cells) that will make me very ill and die."
There, I said it.
oran6es 2 years ago
Nice "try", but very obviously biased.
gblueslover2 2 years ago
Biased via truth. Neurology, volume 46-patient receives fetal cell into brain for Parkinson's disease, gets brain tumor containing bone, teeth, and hair(teratoma).
Dude, they're just another developing human's cells. They have no magic cures written in them. They're not made to be "harnessed."
oran6es 2 years ago
Yes, and Man was NEVER supposed to fly, all those flight failures PROVE IT...Oh wait, they perfected that, didn't they ??
In universities everywhere, studies continue, it never stops. Cures are found, new medicines are tried, DNA research, surgery techniques, etc etc, etc. Do they fail sometimes=YES . Do failures PREVENT humans from " finding a way" = NO. Stop living in the past when jesus supposedly roamed the earth. Or, you can wait for death and be with Jesus & be healthly 4 ever.
gblueslover2 2 years ago
Or......perhaps......it is YOU that are living in the past, the past of:
Human ownership/humans as property
Human experimentation
Human cannibalism and sacrifice
The future should not consist of the cannibalization of the youngest of our species.
oran6es 2 years ago
Hmmm. Perhaps. But I'm ceratin any fine preist who has had his share of the taste of young same sex flesh (or otherwise) might VERY WELL side with you !
lol
gblueslover2 2 years ago
Pedophilia is disgusting no matter the perpetrator.
Treating any living human as a commodity is fundamentally unethical.
I'm not laughing.
oran6es 2 years ago
Well indeed you're not, but the perpetrators aformentioned would no doubt still agree with your stance on stem cell harvesting.
I find that rather peculiar.
gblueslover2 2 years ago
Cell corporations that grow infant parts in dishes would take your side, abortionists would as well.
Abe Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Jr., millions of religious and non religious alike , many atheists, physicians, etc. agree with me.
oran6es 2 years ago
That's what makes the world go round 'n round...
gblueslover2 2 years ago
Love is eternal.
oran6es 2 years ago
You hope it is.
gblueslover2 2 years ago
Religious people for some reason believe in life BEFORE birth and forget there is life AFTER birth. The "christian" right hate s the poor.
wju365 2 years ago
Ever notice the ONLY ones knocking stem cell research are healthy religious people ?
Once these people reach the point in their lives where and when they or someone they care for becomes gravely ill, they don't talk all this crap against it.
What a bunch of excrement.
gblueslover2 3 years ago
i am christian myself, every1 in my school knocks stem cell research, it is so good to hear some sense in it. No1 has the ryt to speek for God, who are we to determin when a baby gets a 'soul' anyway? It isnt ryt to bring a child into the world knowing it will suffer genetic pass downs of disablities/disease, it'll suffer, or even in an untwanted home... stem cell research simply takes donated embroys ppl! Come on!
22WatashiKouhyou22 2 years ago
BTW "theology" is not science. It is theoretic philosophy based on several givens: first, that there is a supreme being; second, that there is an indivisible spiritual essence that is called a soul; third,that there is a separation between what is physical and what is spiritual.
tonygem 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Your Women r Lesbian you Homo And Country of Israel as foretold inSodom gomorh will be infested with Aids as prophesied for u r annhilation nin compooops
culture dish of hiv virus thats what isarel is destined to be
Gawadar2 3 years ago
How about every time a guy masturbates he wastes billions of potential life. Should we ban that too? :)
xxxshar 3 years ago
The catholic church considers masturbation a serious sin. lol.
tonygem 3 years ago
what a bunch of hypocrites, I heard on the news that more than 100 preachers have child-molested their followers. :)
Why can't the catholics "amend" their beliefs in the way the protestants clearly have. Make suicide okay, so the whole bunch of them can just die and do the world one helluva favour!
brianng999 3 years ago
Well, of course they'd LOVE to do that. But it can't be banned, imagine the SIZE of prisons then , LOL.
gblueslover2 3 years ago
ARBITRARILY set another time? I stopped watching there. How is setting "by the time the embryo has a consciousness to lose" as a time arbitrary?
Here's a question for those who would consider an embryo a human life; if you were in a fertility clinic that was on fire and there was a child in one corner and a tray of embryos in the other, and you could only save one, which would you save? Remember, if an embryo is a human life, you would be saving more human lives by saving the tray of embryos.
HiddenFacedMatt 3 years ago
This is nuts. The goo is not an individual.
The goo can be replicated 100 times. If it were, would the 99th be as important as the 1st? You have to understand, that by "an individual" the scientist really mean the genome. Of course if you use different embryos made from different eggs, they would be different, but do you really want to call that microscopic goo an INDIVIDUAL? It's like calling an egg a chicken, but clearly you can't grill it.
batukhan 3 years ago
The church shouldn't care so much about the moral life of embryos and much more about the ethics of letting children die of hunger everyday. If it was for them we wouldn't even know that the world goes round and round!
lovelylady20 3 years ago
The Church cares about both. The embryo is already a human life, pre-born, and deserves respect and protection. Some day this embryo will be a child. I would encourage you to do your research about the amount of money that Catholic Charities gives for relief services... I think you'll be pleasantly surprised
20oracleprophecy 3 years ago
WOW, if I had the means to do so I'd be really please. But I really doubt I'd be surprised. I definitely think we can do much much more good here than harm.
lovelylady20 3 years ago
es la verdad?
ChristChurch77 3 years ago
id say the Church knows what she's talking about, it's been around for 2,000 years.
20oracleprophecy 3 years ago
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
&&&&&&
20oracleprophecy 3 years ago
The longer I live and hear people of religion profess some moral stance, the more I believe that religion is actually an immoral belief system. They will not let anything stand in the way of what their leaders teach. Religious leaders sold out most of the teachings of Jesus like forgivness and giving to the needy to the Republican party simply to get closer to the ear of government. Religious leaders today represent true evil.
padraicbg 3 years ago
fucking church,
they never even knew which way the blood went round,they never knew about cells ,they never knew about germs,nothing did they know ,scientists only told them,now they think they know better,fuck them and their made up god...
jesicanatailaromero 3 years ago
What the hell? So because scientists say it is "alive" it should be protected just as much as a human who has feelings, who has something to lose from dying? Trees are "alive" too, should they be protected as much as humans?
HiddenFacedMatt 4 years ago
We routinely dispose of embryo's in the garbage. If something in the garbage can save millions of lives use it. End of story. Once again religion ruining our lives. Congrats
vlperjoe 4 years ago
you guys call him a moron...hes got a doctorate. You people probably attend a junior college.I love it how people on youtube can pretend to be theologians and scholars. GET AN EDUCATION and stop calling people immature names.
GlenMatthewisawsome 4 years ago
Did you guys even listen to what this guy has to say? He discusses all the things that you guys are complaining about. FYI...if you people are trying to look intelligent by talking about big boy subjects like stem cells, then use your big boy language. Curse words are not very sophisticated. But then again you people are probably in your 20's, right?
GlenMatthewisawsome 4 years ago
fucking moron stem cells give people with teminal illnesses a chance TO LIVE the least these mothers can do if there not gonna have that baby is but it the use for the good of mankind. no one can give a single nonethical argument not influinced be religon. and a fetus isnt a living thinking being. its a clump a cells usefull ones there is no reason to ban it
roxas12590 4 years ago
What moron would label this video a debate. I was expecting a debat. This is jus one asshole's opinion.
ValCelis 4 years ago
Why would anyone be interested in what this guy has to say about morality or science??
wrap99 4 years ago
dude why everybody wiht a white collar has to be a moron ??
arconus 4 years ago
moron? He's earned a doctorate in Rome in moral theology, 2 masters degrees, and a law degree. (Let's not forget a bachelor's in philosophy).
kautzkyz 3 years ago
everywhere?
your pay cheques? you have to live too.. you need to do other things either than be in a church, go to a movie, go out for dinner, etc. clothes, shoes, hair cuts, we pay to pray. although of all religions i beleive catholic is alot better since your not obligated to anything really, you do good, go to confession, etc. ya get into heaven (pretty much the run down of the bible
rainbowfairy420 4 years ago
continued x4 -
sorry it keeps telling me they are all over 500
people you help (inn from the cold at my old church was the best i have ever heard of) and where does the church get the money for the reno's? a marble altar? VELVET curtains, 20ft tall crusifix? gold
rainbowfairy420 4 years ago
continued x3 - does the money you get from collection and donations go to, yes some goes to the
rainbowfairy420 4 years ago
continued x2 - XD
matt groening. god says in the bible for people to be who they are... and yet its wrong to be homosexual? its wrong to have an abortion? BUT preists have gotten away with molesting children, and what
rainbowfairy420 4 years ago
continued -
a father, you should beleive "god has a purpose for all of us" that is thiers, to help those who need it. god wants to help, and if you do things right people wont be sure you did them at all - to qoute an episode of futurama called "godfellas" stupid cartoon but that is best thing i have ever heard on a cartoon show done by
rainbowfairy420 4 years ago
mmkay
i was born and raised roman catholic
and i support everything you guys dont
stem cell is much more needed than you could ever immagine
what do the doctors do with aborted children?
throw them out pretty much
i think that is wrong... EVERYONE HAS A USE, if you are
rainbowfairy420 4 years ago
After the sexual molestation scandals in the Catholic Church I absolutely have no respect for priests. I am sorry, I was raised Catholic, but that did for me. If the institution would cover up priests abusing children for decades I just can't take them seriously.
Julietjeske 4 years ago
Because a small group of individuals behaved improperly? What about the other 99% who are good, holy priests? Let's not forget the number of doctors, lawyers, and grade school teachers who are sadly committing far more of these awful crimes.
kautzkyz 3 years ago
hmm.
ChristChurch77 3 years ago
He's got a degree from a university in Rome.
20oracleprophecy 3 years ago
yes.
20oracleprophecy 3 years ago
typical religious lunatic it is a fact that most persons afflicted with schizophrenia uniformly have a god delusion!as part of their symptomology therefore this guy needs some medications
wabenzitu 4 years ago
The guy could use a little brain cells... LOL
AxFreak 4 years ago
his educational background:
Doctorate in Rome in moral theology
2 Masters degrees... 1 is Master of Arts
Law degree in Louisiana
Bachelor's of philosophy.
but you knew all this already..
kautzkyz 3 years ago
gooo8dsa
ChristChurch77 3 years ago
He probably didn't already.
20oracleprophecy 3 years ago
you destroy the life of living life you priests! pedophile! church out of science and civil issues!
max10wonderboy 4 years ago
Well done. Not only was this upfront jibberish, but it also showed the little intelligence you have in that speech. And also. That bored me. I couldn't help but not listen to it when trying my best to listen to it. Thanks for wasting a while 9:55 seconds of my life.
XxHowDareYouxX 4 years ago
whole*
XxHowDareYouxX 4 years ago
Wow, this is heartbreaking. This guy makes Catholics look like idiots. When are these priests going to sign up for a science class? He thinks he knows all there is to know. So I can take an embryo and sit it on my desk and it becomes a human.. right with a bit of "nurishment"! I'm sure God is ready to let this hero take the helm since he has all the answers! He appears to have no idea who he's hurting, nor any ability to care.
Barbara5001 4 years ago
Actually, he's got a doctorate in moral theology from Rome, 2 Masters degrees as part of a regular ordination program, and also practiced law in Louisiana.. a law degree. Oh yeh, and a bachelor's in philosophy.
kautzkyz 3 years ago
82395u32892
ChristChurch77 3 years ago
He says this in the video?
20oracleprophecy 3 years ago
With respect - The background music kills me, but moreover this is a lot of jibber jabber, and this gentleman likes to hear himslef speak.
As for twins - you can have a split where twins are created in the embryonic stage and then one cell become dominant and become one embyonic cell AGAIN, so were there two souls? What happened to the other soul?
Big words only confuse me!
STOPtheNIGHTMARE 4 years ago
If you believe in the soul why does it seem impossible for a embryo to have two souls for identical twins and when they split each have one soul after the split. Do you think you have the right to decide which humans can live and which ones can't? And how can you compare your skin cell to a life which has the possibility to become a person? Can your skin cells do that? And your right an apple seed is not an apple ,but an embryo is a life.
sexpanther99 4 years ago
Yeah, but they don't know the difference. All the activists are holding scientific advancement back. LAY OFF!
Malus23 4 years ago
How is an undifferentiated ball of cells a human being? If life begins at conception, what happens with identical twins when the blastocyst divides? Does the soul divide then too? Just because a group of cells share DNA with you doesn't mean they ARE you. We lose thousands of skin cells every day; should I be concerned with trying to preserve their "life". An apple seed is not the same thing as an apple?
Proneural 4 years ago
Science does NOT agree about then life begins. Why should religious views on the issue dictate what everyone in society should be allowed to do. Freedom of religion is also there for others to believe something other than what you believe, or to not believe in religion at all. And since not everyone is opposed to stem cell research, should it be disallowed due to some religious beliefs?
Lucyisfive 4 years ago
Well said, Lucyisfive. I agree. You took the words right out of my mouth.
Malus23 4 years ago
Actually, you're wrong: science does agree on when life begins, and it has since the dawn of the scientific study of embryology. You could google "medical testimony when life begins" or work really hard and look up a medical textbook: the fact of the matter is that any academically accredited medical or embryological textbook would agree that life begins as conception. So you're right that religion shouldn't dictate it: but science should.
scraffdawg 4 years ago
NOPE, SCIENCE ***DOES NOT*** AGREE ON WHEN LIFE BEGINS. I suggest YOU spend the time looking this up in further detail ;-) As I have stated, YES, you can find "medical testimony" etc... to SUPPORT one view, but also medical and scientific "testimony" to attest to the OTHER VIEWS also from "academically accredited" sources. There is NOT consensus in the scientific community about this issue.
Lucyisfive 4 years ago
1.) The Cellular Theory of Biology states that the cell is the basic unit of life and that all cells come from pre-existing cells except for the first cell. Thus, all organisms' lives must start as a single cell.
2.) See if you can find an academically accredited medical textbook, biological embryology textbook, or scientific journal that identifies ANY stage other than the zygote as the beginning of an organism's life cycle.
scraffdawg 4 years ago
"Current ****Scientific Views**** of When Human Life Begins"
____
"Current perspectives on when human life begins range from fertilization to gastrulation to birth and even after."
_(note this is when LIFE begins, not when an embryo begins ;-) I suspect you are confusing the issues).
__
This particualr quote taken from a Developmental Biology Textbook ;-)
Lucyisfive 4 years ago
1)Which textbook?
2)Look up "embryo," you seem confused; when an embryo begins, life begins: an embryo is by definition a multicellular eukaryotic organism.
3)Current perspectives on when human life begins range; biological knowledge of when human life begins doesn't.
Let me know when you find a scientific statement; I was never arguing about "perspectives" or opinions, but the facts. As this video says, "the facts are the same, the judgments of them are what's changing in science."
scraffdawg 4 years ago
NO, it is not universally SCIENTIFICALLY accepted as "fact" that "life begins" when an embryo "begins". There are some SCIENTIFIC viewpoints that assert life simply continues at the embryonic stage...ECT....Don't simply state that differing scientific views don't exist because you are too lazy or uneducated to read and resarch anything but your own point of view (the quote below was talking about SCIENTIFIC views (and the book sites sources, as SIMPLE GOOGLE search could find it).
Lucyisfive 4 years ago
- By definition, an embryo is a living organism; putting quotation marks around every other word in your statement doesn't change that.
- A view of an object doesn't alter the object; these "views" of the embryo just don't match up to the definition of the embryo.
- Uneducated? Please... Your "viewpoint" of my education is unfounded.
Jonathan Scrafford
Stanford University, Biological Sciences
scraffdawg 4 years ago
okay all you anti stem cell people - the embryos used for stem cell research are obtained from in vitro fertilzation clinics. the embryos are going to be destroyed anyways because so many extra are created. why dont we just use them for research instead of wasting them? and if theyre already being destroyed why arent you throwing bitch fits about them already being destroyed every day at fertilization clinics?
cabbage2400 4 years ago
Would you feel the same if you knew that you would never walk,stand,use the restroom again,ect.Basicly sit in a chair and wait to die?
kickingber 4 years ago
what the heck why would you sacrifice a a grown person for an embryo. you basically r killing a pottentail human beign wen u jack off so why would u say this is immoral
agingshoe 4 years ago
Jecking off sperm as u said agingshoe, is not same as embryo. Embryo consist of 2 different cells egg and sperm fused together to create life.
kennyhez 4 years ago
well shit im going to go adopt a bunch of embryo's. I could probably get a sweet tax write-off. I'll just keep them in my freezer
rubey2378 4 years ago
U would adopt a bunch of embryos' for tax purposes!!! that my friend does not make any sense.
kennyhez 4 years ago
Well my friend i think you missed the point, the joke, and the punchline. Mull it over and get back to me.
rubey2378 4 years ago
I think just about everyone comenting here realizes that religion and morals are purely subjective, and in no way should those views be taken into account. Furthermore is'nt there supposed to be a separation of religion from government. Bush's reasoning for the veto further research does not share that supposed standard.
FarArtMunkey 5 years ago
Sure, there should be a separation of church and state. But you don't have to believe in God to oppose killing people for medical research, and we know from science textbooks that our lives began at the moment of fertilization, not birth or some other arbitrary moment.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
You should know, if you had really taken a biology class, that to say that life "begins" is fallacious. Life began far longer ago that you can comprehend; has no one ever asked you whether the chicken or the egg cam first? Is a sperm cell alive? Is an ovum alive? What is the definition of life?
Please don't invoke biology, you will only look like a complete moron.
videorprologic 4 years ago
A human BEING'S life begins at the moment of fertilization. I'm really rather surprised you're ignorant of this scientific fact. It's okay if your RELIGION tells you that a person's life begins at birth, but you're not allowed to force that belief on others. Got it?
BoyGenteel 4 years ago
I don't know if you know this, but there is no such thing as a scientific fact. You do not know enough about fertilization to be able to understand the ambiguity of "when life begins". So I will tell you that to say it begins at fertilization is the same as saying it begins when you get your drivers license; they are both based on criterion that are ARBITRARY.
videorprologic 4 years ago
As there is no mystery third ingredient or component added after sperm and egg unite, we can solidly put the beginning of life right at that moment. What is arbitrary is believing the "non-human embryo" magically "becomes" a human being later, whether at birth, or "quickening," or the ever-moving "viability," or the religious' people's "ensoulment," or when the unborn begins to LOOK cute, or whatever.
And, Science Expert, "criterion" is the singular form of "criteria."
BoyGenteel 4 years ago
But to make such an assertion is baseless. It makes no scientific progress towards a better understanding of the situation; it's as to claim that the numbers higher than the number 12 are the only ones that we can call "big". The only reason such definitions are used in science is so that people can conveniently communicate system specifics. As such, to use this definition as grounds to claim murder is to have no empirical justification beyond a convenient categorization.
videorprologic 4 years ago
Whatever jack ass, the world need to move on, dont be a pain and move on together!
tigadynagiga 5 years ago
Wow... what a tard. most of these embryeos get thrown out. So its ok to throw away a human, but you cant use it??? Wow
Bradly1337 5 years ago
No, it's not okay to throw them out. They are, scientifically, human beings, and human beings should neither be thrown away nor destroyed for medical research. I'm not sure where you're having the mental disconnect.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
By that "scientific" rationale, you know what else is 100% human? Sperm. Yup that's right, and its no surprise to you I'm guessing. Killing sperm is the same as killing humans! I really wish you people would go say this to someone that survived a concentration camp. I would also hope that they spit on you.
videorprologic 4 years ago
Sperm is human, but a sperm isn't a HUMAN BEING. We know from the WORLD BOOK ENCYCLOPEDIA and countless science textbooks that the fertilization by a human ovum by a human sperm cells marks the beginning of a new human being's life. So, really, when you continually compare a sperm to an embryo, or deny that embryos are human beings, you only persist in making yourself look like an imbecile.
BoyGenteel 4 years ago
Unfortunately those books are intro level simplifications. They are simplifying things so that you can understand them, rarely is it the correct model. In terms of definitions everything that is first taught is usually wrong, it just so happens that it works well, and most people never need the deeper understanding.
So when I say, "you don't know what you are talking about," you should appreciate the fact that you cannot without an embryology background.
videorprologic 4 years ago
"rarely is the correct model"
Translation: "I find the textbook definitions for things to be very inconvenient for what I'm trying to do, and so I'm going to pretend that they don't actually say what they say."
BoyGenteel 4 years ago
All I have to say to you is that upon a chemistry students third year of instruction (when he reaches physical chemistry) the professor walks into the class and says, "Everything you have learned about chemistry up to this point is basically WRONG." This is the case for most intensive science field. Since your textbooks are very much at the introductory level, they are at the level where the models used are INCORRECT. Ex. Newton's is wrong, but still taught.
videorprologic 4 years ago
i dont get u guys. when does a human life begin? when it comes out the womb? what about caesarian babies? so what abotu in the womb...when they have no arms? what about people born without arms...it keeps going and going! its human from when its born! FUCK!!!
StephenKuma 5 years ago
I support stem cell research and I think its about time we let all this religious superstious crap go. This is the 2st century and religion should have been done away with long ago. Life began about a billion years ago and its a continuous process.
Animal556 5 years ago
Do you think one needs to be religious or superstitious in order to be opposed to killing people for the sake of medicine?
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
this guy is a real loser
monkeyboy8me 5 years ago
You stupid shithead,the embryos that are to be used are heading to the landfill,unless you want to take those millions of eggs and adopt them!
nicenonya2 5 years ago
HAHAH, this man is not qualified to even understand genetics, furthermore i also studied theology, psychology and genetics and still there is much more to the debate, if you are going to say something, please leave fucking religion out of science, you do your job and we will do ours.
pattom136 5 years ago
i hate you
monkeyboy8me 5 years ago
your of piece of crap you know nothing and you such at life. where did you get your degree at dumb loser college
monkeyboy8me 5 years ago
Is there another way to have cells copy other cells without using stem cells?
lanciafiamme2002 5 years ago
Yeah, I am living in the present. Religion continues to screw us daily. The real reason they are so apposed to it is because they feel if you have a disease you deserve it. The religious morons always ignore adult stem cell.
KurtangleTN 5 years ago
Totaly agree remember the library of alexandria? christians burned it and set us back 500years or so in knowlage ahh such is the bless of god.
daiitokumyouou899 5 years ago
how many little boys does he have in his closet?
cdurfee99 5 years ago
This is inappropriate!!! changing the topic!!!
SMHruns4Christ 5 years ago
Not as many as you do, A-hole.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
I am not sure that the Roman Catholic church has too much moral authority to draw on. However, if I follow things to their logical conclusion, letting life start and proceed naturally, then we should dump a large number of therapies, antibiotics, medical treatments, blood transfusions, transplants, etc because they are unnatural. We can go back to very high rates of disease and childhood death, and a very high likelihood of death of women in childbirth. And so on...
filll111 5 years ago
No therapies, antibiotics, medical treatments, blood transfusions, or transplants came about from human beings being willfully killed. There's your difference.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
Many forms of stem cell investigations have nothing to do with killing an embryo. I am not sure that a clump of half a dozen cells, that does not even have a nervous system, is a human being. And those clumps of cells are killed willfully and have been for decades as part of fertilization techniques. We just do not object to them being killed or discarded since we agree with the end result; potentially more babies and help for infertile couples.
filll111 5 years ago
Many of those therapies that you mention did of course result from the death of humans, since they are the result of centuries of efforts and testing and a lot of death. None of this is clean and easy, although I am sure you would like it to be so. If it were clear and simple like some people claim, then there would be no controversy.
filll111 5 years ago
Many of those therapies that you mention did of course result from the death of humans, since they are the result of centuries of efforts and testing and a lot of death. None of this is clean and easy, although I am sure you would like it to be so. If it were clear and simple like some people claim, then there would be no controversy.
filll111 5 years ago
Embrionic Stem Cell research has not been proven in private clinical trials yet, and therefore should not have millions of our taxpayer's dollars funneled to it. Adult stem cell research has been proven, and promises possible cures for dozens of diseases. Don't let Michael J. Fox's false blanket of "Stem Cell Research" throw you off. There's research going on right now--PROVEN research.
rlwiggs 5 years ago
But there are several diseases that have not been cured by adult stem cells that MAY be cured by embrionic stem cell research.
In Missouri, the research is funded fully by donations from individuals and different foundations, and is not funded by taxpayers at all.
There is no reason scientifically or fiscally to oppose embrionic stem cell research.
JesiDangerously 5 years ago
Yes, there is a scientific reason to oppose embryonic stem cell research: scientifically, human embryos are human beings. Some of you seem to have a real problem grasping this concept. Just because a priest says two plus three equals five doesn't make it a religious concept. Just open any biology textbook and you'll see that, in fact, we were NOT brought here by the stork, but rather existed as embryonic human beings before we were born.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
So let's just give up and forget we ever thought about a cure for millions of people? Riiiiiiight.
Androxxx 5 years ago
hm...I hope you read what you just posted and see your messed up logic...you'er saying adult stemcells are better? now that's complete b.s and realy dude i well i am sad for you buddy.
daiitokumyouou899 5 years ago
You really need to educate yourself on the matter. Adult stem cells have already treated patients with multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's, sickle cell anemia, and several types of cancer. Meanwhile, an Australian company has received FDA approval for its adult stem cell therapy to treat spinal cord injury. With embryonic stem cells, they've only been able to replicate (or have an inferior replication of) advances already achieved with adult stem cells.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
lol...maybe because embryonic stem cell research isint funded much?.Oh btw korea has had alot more progress in the research then america(i am talking about south korea possibly north but who the hell knows what goes on there)and they use embryonic stem cells.ESC are blanker and cheaper then adult stem cell,they are in bigger suplys and unlike adult cells you dont have to fight them to change.I've done ALOT of research and i am firmly for ALL matters of science and e.s.c is the most reliable.
daiitokumyouou899 5 years ago
lol...maybe because embryonic stem cell research isint funded much?.Oh btw korea has had alot more progress in the research then america(i am talking about south korea possibly north but who the hell knows what goes on there)and they use embryonic stem cells.ESC are blanker and cheaper then adult stem cell,they are in bigger suplys and unlike adult cells you dont have to fight them to change.I've done ALOT of research and i am firmly for ALL matters of science and e.s.c is the most reliable.
daiitokumyouou899 5 years ago
lol...maybe because embryonic stem cell research isint funded much?.Oh btw korea has had alot more progress in the research then america(i am talking about south korea possibly north but who the hell knows what goes on there)and they use embryonic stem cells.ESC are blanker and cheaper then adult stem cell,they are in bigger suplys and unlike adult cells you dont have to fight them to change.I've done ALOT of research and i am firmly for ALL matters of science and e.s.c is the most reliable.
daiitokumyouou899 5 years ago
Hundreds of millions of federal dollars = "isint [sic] funded much"? Adult stem cells are far more workable because they don't turn into tumors in the lab, which embryonic stem cells do.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
No it isint dude i mean realy they spent 2trillion on the iraq war so far (f.y.i that's 2000billion or 2 million million;2,000,000 million;2trillion=2,000,000,000,000. Now do you think it's founded much? 40,000,000(forty million) went to E.S.R two trill is 40mill times 50,000. So it's 1\50,000th of what they spent on the war.
daiitokumyouou899 5 years ago
No it isint dude i mean realy they spent 2trillion on the iraq war so far (f.y.i that's 2000billion or 2 million million;2,000,000 million;2trillion=2,000,000,000,000. Now do you think it's founded much? 40,000,000(forty million) went to E.S.R two trill is 40mill times 50,000. So it's 1\50,000th of what they spent on the war.
daiitokumyouou899 5 years ago
No it isint dude i mean realy they spent 2trillion on the iraq war so far (f.y.i that's 2000billion or 2 million million;2,000,000 million;2trillion=2,000,000,000,000. Now do you think it's founded much? 40,000,000(forty million) went to E.S.R two trill is 40mill times 50,000. So it's 1\50,000th of what they spent on the war.
daiitokumyouou899 5 years ago
So? They happen to be spending a great deal of money on the war in Iraq. I've noticed that so many supporters of embryo-destructive research just can't help bringing in other issues like Iraq or Galileo. I guess they realize they don't have much of an argument on this topic so they bring in others.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
Dude my point is that you are an idiot for thinking that 40m is alot of money, Bill gates makes 40m in a few hours dude, it just isint that much money at all. You are also a idiot for thinking that embryos are humans because no they are not they are human *cells* and if not in a whoom they will die so they have as much potential al my snot.
daiitokumyouou899 5 years ago
I wonder what it means when an idiot calls me "idiot." "Embryo" is merely one of the first stages of life. You, too, are mere "cells" except that you have more of them. An embryo is a human being whether in a womb (please note the spelling) or not.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
Oh? and who says? an embryo has no brain, no muscle, no bones, tini traces of skin, it's mostly complete snot and is worthless outside an womb. I'll never consider an embryo human especially over a full grown human with memories, thoughts, feelings, and a family. That's what you are saying that these embryos are more important them humans dude you are a virus, makes me sick.
daiitokumyouou899 5 years ago
Apparently you are one of those people who believes that a pregnant woman swallows a pill that will "add" a brain, muscles, and skeletal system to an embryo. In actuality, all of those things are already present in that first cell; only development and growth need to take place, just as they still need to do AFTER birth. A newborn baby doesn't have memories yet, either. According to your "logic," newborns aren't human beings, either. Pretty dumb.
BoyGenteel 4 years ago
I can from your statement deduce that you have no understanding of developmental biology. The Blastula contains a chemical colloid of these things: proteins, DNA, and phospholipids. These on their own will never produce a human being. It is the sequential supplying of transcription signal cofactors and metabolic high energy chemicals that allow development to proceed.
You really should not try to invoke embryology, when you know nothing about it.
videorprologic 4 years ago
Did you know that when you eat a carrot, it becomes you!!! OH MY GOD!! WE HAVE TO STOP THEM FROM KILLING THOSE CARROTS!! THEY BECOME HUMAN; THEY'RE JUST AN EARLIER STAGE OF US!!
Please don't try to invoke biology to back you up on this, just stick to your bullshit religious appeals. Science sees you for what you really are, because it's not stupid.
videorprologic 4 years ago
I'm rather sorry for you if you cannot distinguish between a carrot and a human embryo. Hopefully you have been equipped with clamps to keep you from losing your mittens.
Whether you like it or not, science supports my side, not yours.
BoyGenteel 4 years ago
That depends on your definition of science. If you define it as whatever your background is, then maybe you have grounds to argue. Sadly this science is defined by my background: biochemistry and cellular biology. Just about everything you have said, I can point out how ignorant it is in a number of my course texts.
Some advice: never go into this field, you're are predisposed to screwing it up.
videorprologic 4 years ago
It's not illogical to point out the religious right's proven track record condemning advancements in science and medicine. I pointed out similarities in the hypocracy spewed out 200 years ago with regards to the smallpox vaccination, their condemnation of it as an abomination and against the will of God, and their condemnations today. Reading the sermons, you wouldn't know they weren't talking stem cell research!Yes, I'm intolerant and emotive, no more than the comments above, both sides.
bhd282 5 years ago
bhd282, your comments are illogical and overly emotive. You've said nothing useful to the argument, but only spewed your intolerant bigotry. Nice work.
ankerous88 5 years ago
Two hundred years ago, British and American preachers in churches all over condemned vaccination against the scourge of smallpox, as against the will of God. Happily this is an example of just how stupid the religious right can be, how selfish they are with regard to human suffering. We need not be disheartened by their shrill hypocracies. They marginalize themselves everyday, the future is that they make their faith irrelevant to actuality. "...and no religion too."
bhd282 5 years ago
You are talking about 150 cells three to five days old. You destroy more cells just picking a booger.
geyser 5 years ago
How doesn the number of cells make a difference?
Stephanreyu 5 years ago
He doesn't get through the first minute without making false assumptions. This man cannot be taken seriously. The only valid pro-life position is one that saves lives, and this man would let cures wither on the vine to save things that aren't alive or human.
userb3 5 years ago
Likewise, all Catholic Bishops and churchgoers today did not kill the peoples of the Inquisitions and the Crusades hundreds of years ago. They would hope you could trust them.
Mistakes do not define who we are today, unless we do not learn from them. The Church protects life today. She has learned from her mistakes.
Time to forgive and to live in the present, man.
big70mcgwire 5 years ago
Mistakes in the past, although bad, do not falsify a true statement. True, they can undermine that organization's credibility.
With that said, we do have to ask ourselves a question: do we trust Germany today? (After all, she killed millions of Jews in the 1900s whereas the Church killed thousands 400+ years ago). I would assume that you trust Germany-- and Germans would hope so too (given that they, personally, and for the most part, did not kill the Jews of the 30s).
big70mcgwire 5 years ago
Matt, your logic seems to be off: the Church has a thought on life and that same Church has killed life in the past, therefore you conclude that the Church is wrong about its thought on life. Let's take this logic and apply it to another organization: Germany. Let's say that Germany has a thought on life today, but Germany exterminated millions of Jews in the 1930s; therefore (according to your logic) Germany's current thought on life must be false.
big70mcgwire 5 years ago
wow. didn't your organized church KILL thousands of innocent "human's". I think that all the cromozones were present there in those poor fucks that your church killed. Bottom line, you are a zigot, and haven't got much farther than that. deal.
mattrunninn 5 years ago
Those in favor of embryonic stem cells are not godless freaks, and those against it are not dark aged fools either. Deal with practicality, we have millions suffering right now, and we have the ability to save them. You say an embryo is destroyed, I say a life is saved. I can't gaurantee all Park. & Alz. will be saved, but nobody can gaurantee me that all embryos will grow into fully, happy lives either. Common sense, the rest of the world sees it...We can't use God as an excuse anymore.
NickTC442 5 years ago
Ask yourselves this. How many people are Anti-Abortion, but Pro-Death Penalty? Faith is something private between you and whomever. Science is learning the truth that was set out and waiting to be discovered. Some discoveries were done poorly, but necessary. Embryos are better than Adult Stem cells, scientific fact. Parkinsons and Alz. are among those that benefit.
NickTC442 5 years ago
5 stars. This man was calm, diginified, and well educated. He put forth some clear ideas and supported them as much as could be expected. To be honenst, when I clicked on this link, I was expecting to see a boiling pot of righteous indignation in an attempt to smother the facts with the volume of his voice.
repetitionriot 5 years ago
I was pleasantly suprised to find that he did not assume the role of "stereotypical simple-minded victim of satan and his scientifically-inclined minons," but peacefully laid his beliefs on the table without damning all others in the process.
repetitionriot 5 years ago
BTW, I try not to get into who's a "bad person," Leia, but maybe you should bear that in mind the next time someone on one of these message boards suggests that those opposed to ESCR are opposed to ALL research, or that they're unsympathetic to afflicted people. There's a lot of mud getting flung -- from BOTH sides.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
Think about it. I'm not sure exactly how it is done, but if cell lines could be established they may not need to keep taking from embryos. This research could possibly end the need for it. Nobody knows. I really think this is one of those things that people look back on and say, "Well of course all races are equal, of course stem cell research is a good thing and not murder" We shall see. ..but it's been nice debating with you BoyGenteel. Peace.
leia176 5 years ago
Stem cell research itself isn't the problem; the problem is the destruction of embryos, whether those from IVF clinics or those created via cloning.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
I'm pretty sure you won't be able to find something that "disproves" the WORLD BOOK's definition of "embryo," because you'd need to find what that mystery third ingredient/component is (after sperm an egg) that transforms a non-person into a person. But none exists. All else an embryo needs is nutrition and a hospitable environment, just like WE do.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
An embryo doesn't just have DNA; (s)he is an already existing human being. In order to engage in research cloning, you must combine that skin cell of yours with an ovum in order for the creation of the new embryo to occur. This means: that skin cell is not analogous to an embryo but rather (if anything) a sperm.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
Yes, but a stem cell is a cell with human DNA just like a skin cell, only it hasn't become specialized into a skin cell or a liver cell..etc. What researchers use are some particular cells that happen to come from an embryo.
leia176 5 years ago
Yes, Leia, and that embryo is a human being. You can take stem cells from ME without harming me, but you must destroy an embryo in order to take his or her stem cells. That's the problem. It's not the research itself, per se, but rather the destruction of embryonic human beings that is the problem.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
An embryo will become a human being, but it is not a human being unless it grows into one. Embryos can be made in ways other than sperm and egg joining (as done with animals). If done with humans, would these embryos be human beings?
leia176 5 years ago
An embryo created via cloning is exactly equivalent to one created via fertilization, in vitro or otherwise. And I've already quoted the WORLD BOOK and other sources that make it quite clear that an embryo is NOT a potential human being (or other animal in the case of other species), but rather an actual one.
BoyGenteel 5 years ago
Well, time has shown, they are not exactly equivalent. Dolly, the cloned sheep had aging problems related to the telomeres on chromosomes (but I understand that you mean she should not be treated differently or inhumanely). Bottom line is I don't think a group of unspecialized cells is a human being. You think otherwise. If so in-vitro should be illegal because they actually destroy more "lives" than create. We will never agree, but that is ok. ..nothing we can do about it.
leia176 5 years ago
From a 32-minute video of scientific FACTS, clearly delivered by a PhD scientist AND ethicist, view the most recent video post at www.JoanFalk.com
dbeall 5 years ago
Once again, science is not made up of FACTS. There is no such thing as a scientific FACT. If you think there is, you should not be allowed in the field. Evidence, Hypothesis, and Theory make up science. If facts were part that zeitgeist we would still be in the dark ages.
videorprologic 4 years ago
on earth, objects accelerate at approximately 9.81 meters per second... is this not a scientific fact?
Krazyklown01 4 years ago
The problem here is how the layman uses the word fact. Scientists do not use the word to mean what is absolute; they use the word to mean data that is subject to inaccuracy and change. The general public sees facts as what cannot be argued incorrect, which is a notion that would bankrupt the scientific process.
So in this context, nothing especially not arbitrary definitions, can be argued to be absolute as the statement "scientific fact" implies.
videorprologic 4 years ago
So do you exist or not? "Videoprologic is a human being with rights." Fact, opinion, or falsity? I'm asking you a serious question.
BoyGenteel 4 years ago