@nonlinearmind Thanks for the comment. Was just trying to establish that I am empathetic to people with disabilities, did not intend to win the argument with an emotional appeal. At the time, people were saying folks with opinions like mine were heartless blanketyblanks who couldn't relate, was trying to counter that misconception.
I think you really need a reality check, for more information on the morality of embryonic stem cell research, check the video in my profile about it.
PS Many of the vaccines you and your children were vaccinated with are made using fetal tissue. Its amazing what knowledge endows on us,how it can so easily raise us from ignorance, the ignorance of blindly following someone else's ideology.
Comparing ESCR to nazi experiments is beyond my comprehension. How can you compare experiments done on live human beings to those done on cells? That is digusting and dehumanizes the live's of all those people who suffered and died in the nazi experiments. Using this distorted logic, you would find it an equal decision to rescue a live human or an embryo from the hands of nazi scientists? I sure hope not because otherwise you would be as sick as the nazis.
actually, Bush isnt the first to authorize federal funding for Stem Cell research. There's also no logic to discontinue stem cells lines where the decision has already been made... and you didn't really point out any "lies" in Michael's ad.
Please read this if your against Embryonic Stem cell research, not saying I am, but this is just a fact. Embryonic stem cells are taking a possible life. But when a woman has a "test tube" baby, they take about 5 Embryos. Use however many they need for it to work, and THROW the rest away. So a potential life is being taken everytime that happens! I would support Embryonic stem cell research IF they took those embryos that were going to be tossed, and used it to find a cure.
The problem is that in vitro clinics needlessly discard unused/unwanted embryos every year. These could serve a greater purpose than filling trash cans. However, I am against developing embryos just for research. For the most part I disagree with you, but I appreciate your position and the way you expressed it.
...Don't worry about it man, two more baby shakes will fix me up nice and Christian like. I guess you could say that statement was childish though, but whatever. Pray for me Raptor.
How are you sleeping knowing Michael J Fox gets to eat babies whole now Raptor? I'm sleeping good, nice and good because I know, eventually, there has to be a back to the future 4.
George Soros could feed several small countries with the money he spent to unseat Bush and Republicans. It seems funny that a man who made a lot of money off his skillful business maneuvers would try to overthrow the leadership of the country tha epitomises freed om and capitalism. If he did that in Nazi Germany, Hussein's Iraq China or north Korea he would have been imprisoned or killed for dissent.
The recession under Bush 41 was already over with and recovered when Clinton was elected. People somehow thought that a broken promise(tax hike) should be punished. But we got tax hikes galore. Clinton vetoed the budget 3 times before he finally passed the budget submitted by REPUBLICANS. W. inherited a slumping economy and terrorism. We have a record-high dow, unemployment at record lows, deficits lower and treasury income higher. J.F.K., REAGAN, & W. lowered taxes and the people did better.
Private funding will not achieve results as quickly as a combination of public and private funding. If the research on embryonic stem cells is unethical then it should be banned, if it is ethical then it should proceed as quickly as possible by all available means. Whether or not the research is ethical is not affected by the means of funding.
Sorry, I have to leave the discussion. I am in the mortgage business and our phones are ringing off the hook with calls from people in a panic wanting to refinance before the Market tanks and rates soar as a result of the Democrats winning Congress. The Dems track record on the economy does support their concerns but the rush of panic is not just surprising, it is amazing. It looks like we will be very busy for quite some time. Best wishes to all for a Merry Christmas & Happy New Year.
6) But in the mean time, thank you for posting. Nobody should ever be mocked for making a genuine effort to explain their opinion or stand up for what they believe in, particularly in a democratic society that champions free speech. (Sorry for the tedious response, I'm just always taken aback and impressed by anyone who takes the opportunity to speak up on any important issue, and I always feel compelled to respond. 'Hope you don't mind. Thanks for humouring me.)
6) I like Michael J. Fox, agree with his position and I'm grateful that he came forward for an important cause, but it was also interesting to hear from a reasonable person on the other side of the argument.
Please do try to understand the potential benefits of stem cell research, until, god-willing we find another equally effective way to cure disease that doesn't involve testing on stem cells, torturing animals or doing nothing at all...
5) I do, however, respect your beliefs and appreciate your input, particularly the way you put forth your response; without insult or prejudicial, reactionary comments. If all positions were presented respectfully and articulately, perhaps we'd all be able to find common ground more often. I stumbled upon your video by accident when I looked up Mr. Fox's add because I couldn't remember the name of the Missouri candidate who supported stem cell research.
4) I've seen too many wonderful people suffer and die from Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and other diseases to try to weigh the life of a fully developed, suffering animal, such as a human with Alzheimer's Disease or another innocent species in a lab against an undeveloped stem cell.
3) Unfortunately, the issue is more complicated than the "taking of innocent life," only because these stem cells are destroyed after a time in fertility clinics no matter what, so I believe it's best that they not be lost in vain.
2) I understand and sympathize with all of the arguments against stem cell research, but these cells are being destroyed either way, so I'd rather they at least be used to help cure disease before they're wasted. I also take some comfort in the fact that stem-cells, to the best of our knowledge have no awareness of their surroundings or pain receptors.
1) I have a long response so I'll post it in a few parts-- damn this 500 character limit! I appreciate your perspective, but I still have to stand by stem cell research. I, too deeply value all life. I'm an animal rights activist, vegetarian, fairly religious person and I'm dead set against cloning anything larger or more developed than a single cell, organ or graft of tissue.
Although i do understand that the issue is an amazingly senstive one, i do feel that your title for this video was wrong. With a 30 second spot, how can a person ever hope to summate the entirety of a debate that will most likely go on for at least several more decades. It's with that in mind that i think it's not fair that you allow yourself more time and not only that, but you are clearly reading from a screen which makes me question as to whether or not the thoughts were even your own.
It seems to me that you have paid no attention to what is actually the issue, stem cell research in Missouri. I also think your actual problem is with the practice of artificial insemination. Many more embryos are produced than are actually placed in the woman's euterus. These extra embryos at present time are wasted. Why not gain something from this waste? Get your information correct, maybe take a little bit of time to research the subject.
You boneheads need to research the concept of "separation of church and state". First, there is NOTHING about it in the Constitution. Second, it was intended to prevent the government from interfering in the expression of religion or establishing one official religion for the country. It has NOTHING to do with this issue.
So technically what you're saying OMCX is that religious organizations should be free to pollute politics with a set of undetermined, prehistoric fairytales that have absolutely nothing to do with this nation's economy? You do realize that there are only two ten commandments that are laws right? It's against the law to kill someone, and you can't steal, that's it!
Your simplistic view exposes a lack of knowledge. We are not talking about religion controlling politics, we are talking about government controlling religion, and government devoid of morality. Morality has always been considered in legislation. I know you atheists would love a society where you were not held responsible for your actions but thankfully we have not sunk to your level yet.
You can add adultery and perjury to the list of laws based on the 10 commandments, and some areas still have "blue laws" preventing business on Sunday.
Lying and cheating on your wife? That's not a crime. Making the entire state shut their business down because they want their citizens to attend Church should be against the law. It's not Governments place to control religion, nor is its religions place to control government (thus the separation of church and state). Just because I'm man enough to say "I DON'T KNOW" doesn't make me an atheist, it makes me open minded.
I don't know where you live but perjury and adultery are both illegal everywhere I have lived. I agree with you on the laws about working on sunday. That should be left up to the individual, not the government.
What makes you so sure that we wouldn't have a set of laws without the bible? That statement was moronically absurd. If you can't figure out that stealing, murder, and untruthfulness are BAD things without looking them up in a book (that's the equivalent to a dungeon masters guide) then you're a fucking retard.
So you're admiting those Christian valueus were stealing, slavery, genocide, rape, and pillaging !? Last time I read that's how we came about to being such a great nation.
Awesome, lets talk. Ted Haggard, a man that preached the "gospel" and spoke out against homosexuality occasionally boned another man up the ass at a massage pallor. Talk about a hypocrite. I guess those good Christian values only held up at Sunday sermons. What's sad about this whole thing is:
if Ted Haggard was any other person this wouldn't even have been in the news, however thankfully for our entertainment he isn't any other person, he's the poster boy for the New Life Church. It's funny how people that call themselves religious turn out having the most skeletons in their closets.
Anyone who mistakenly believed, even before his exposure,that he, or any other similar bogus money-grabbing "preacher" was a true Christian does not know what Christianity is all about.And just so you know, christianity is not about being perfect. Christians are the first ones to admit they are prone to sin as all humans are.
What a tool. I love how the "sanctity of life" is so selective. They care so much about the unborn but once they're born they're on their own, even moreso if it's a minority or poor. Like the person said above, Separation of Church and State!
I do not think it was that well thought out. RaptorSixOn reads a quote from NIH about Bush, but the MJF ad DID NOT mention Bush at all. The only names mentioned were Talent and McCaskill. Watch it again and see for yourself.
You're right, I was responding more to the comments posted on the MJF ad, where Bush, repubs, Christians were being falsely accused. My 1st video effort didn't make that as clear as it should. go see my 2nd.
This guy isn't even worth the time it takes to make a comment. I really enjoy how he threw in his families disabilities in an attempt to pretend his "sympathetic". That was just a sorry excuse for sympathy. Sympathetic you are not. Pathetic is a better word. Try reading up on the 'actual' facts from non-partisan sources, not your comfy right-winged web sites
No, was an attempt to show someone like me, who opposes HeSC research, could also have a 'vested' interest in it, and could sympathize with MJF's condition, which I do.
Oh what the fuck ever. The guy is right, the only reason you mentioned your autistic son, your handicapped mother, and your wife's bout with breast cancer is because you wanted to play the "Feel sorry for a Christian" in need card. How can I feel sorry someone that isn't willing to vote for the proper science that could cure his wife, or possibly even cure his son? Only a coward would let his wife and child suffer because of what some prehistoric doctrine says.
So, it is okay for Michael J. Fox to make inaccurate statemants and hide behind his disability so as to escape criticism. The issue they are voting on is concerning CLONING, so bringing up an issue that BOTH candidates are against(embryonic stem cell research) in an election in which that subject is not relevant.
How is Michael J fox hiding behind his disability? I believe you meant Michael J fox is fighting for a cure for his disability! Raptor on the other hand is using the misfortune of his family to back his prehistoric ideology. That's just disgusting.
taking a human life...the kid is allready dead dumbass...im sure u wouldnt care about him anyway especially since you are the people that shun people in poorer areas. lemme guess all the conservatives cry about every baby that is killed in abortion? yeah fucking right alot of abortions are by minority groups and i for one know u conservatives dont give a damn about the minorities as it is the only way you guys care about us is when we give you votes.
You know nothing you idiot. "Conservative" Bush has put many minorites in major positions of power in his cabinet. Liberal, all-caring Clinton had none. Conservatives want to give the poor the tools they need to succeed on their own, liberals want to keep them poor and dependent on government. Pull your head out of your ass and take a look around.
Liberals like Kerry want free-speech so they can say whatever they want without consequence.
The real question is can Kerry say whatever he wants and have nobody question him. Every action you make has a reaction. That is the American way we are free to live by our actions. We can prosper by them or suffer by them.
I was actually going to give this guy a chance untill I realized it he was actually reading off of something...YOU CAN SEE HIS FUCKING EYES MOVE YOU JACKASS!!
Yes, he is reading off of something. But it is something that he wrote. I find it admirable because he did his research and actually took the time to make sure what he was saying didn't sound stupid. He wanted to get his point across eloquently. In essence, he was giving a speech,written by himself, referencing the research that he did.
Michael J. Fox said in the ad that Talent is opposed to "exanding stem cell research" and that is what his vote against HR 810 indicates. HR 810 would have allowed federal funding of stem cell research on new embroyo lines derived from embroyos that would otherwise have been destroyed by fertility clinics. I see nothing wrong with that. Do you? What are doing to save those "babies" being destroyed by the fertility clinics?
I've had some very pleasant and reasonable discussions, both in the comments, and via private messages, with those who disagree with me. But many of the comments are very disappointing, which is what motivated me to make this in the first place.
Excellent job. The fact that you only have a 2 star rating and many idiotic responses to your video prove only one thing, it is that Liberals do not want facts and that they are not as open minded as they claim to be. They call us the party of hate!? Look in the mirror.
embryonic stem cell research is not shown to be any more beneficial than other forms of stem cell research using mesenchymal or other forms of adult stem cells.
i think to my knowledge, that this ad was trying to support stem cell research, not only embryonic. correct me if im wrong.
The ad was supporting the Democratic Senatorial candidate from Missouri, since she would vote in favor of overriding Bush's veto on expanding embryonic stem cell research beyond what he authorized in 2001. I strongly support stem cell research that does not involve the destruction of human embryos, and hope science finds a cure.
My video was an attempt to more the YouTube comments I was reading denigrating Christians and republicans, claiming things that just were not true, such as we outlawed stem cell research. If you have time, please see my 2nd video, I try to elaborate a bit.
There's a HUGE difference b/w Nazi testing and the use of embryonic stem cell research...I don't understand how you see a similarity between the two. Just by saying that you are severely understating the horrendous nature of Nazi testing.
You're right, I need a teleprompter like most we see on TV use. But other than the NIH quote, those were my words, written by me in MS Word, on my PC screen.
Would it only be viable to do this in a fertility-clinic setting where most likely there would be excess embryos anyway? And even if the embryo the new line was derived from survived, current legislation would still prohibit government funding for research using that line.
There's a possibility to obtain embryonic stem cells without harming the embryo. I had a link to a BBC Aug '06 article. But in practice it might not have much practical application. Who would volunteer their embryos to have this done? Would it put the fetus at a risk (the embryos this experiment was performed on were, ironically, destroyed - and does that make it ethical to use that knowledge)?
The debate isn't whether stem cells could be people - they can't. The debate is that embryonic stem cells are derived from embryos, which can develop into fetuses; as far as I know the embryos must be destroyed in order for the stem cells to be obtained.
So you're saying that the proof that the Bush administration isn't "backward" or "anti-science" is that they support (federally fund) the stem-cell research using embryos from fertilization measures that would be destroyed? But you yourself don't personally support that? Then aren't you describing your own views as "backward" and "anti-science"?
I'm neither a Christian nor a Republican but I appreciate the way you chose to discuss a topic based on facts you collected rather than espouse emotions and insults. What I really don't understand is why not the stem cell lines we have now are sufficient, and why more need to be made. I feel that most US media just skims the surface of this debate. Perhaps if we knew more about it, science could in one way or another make some advances.
I appreciate your comments, and in case no one from the other side answers, I'll attempt to, hopefully without distortion. Some (I don't think all, but I'm not certain) of the lines proved to not be usable for a variety of reasons, but visiting NIH website, it appears there are still lines and funding available, but not as much or as easy to set up as they would like.
If a lab wants to use both cells from approved and unapproved lines, they must set up accounting to show fed funds aren't being used for the unapproved lines (or separate facilities). Somewhat like working from home, if you want the tax break, you have to document % for business vs. personal use. Govt (public) money, you have to follow govt rules, which can be a pain. Would be nicer, more productive, not to have to worry about that.
Someone from the other side is certainly free to explain better than I have, but I do understand their desire for a change in the policy, and their reasoning behind it; I just don't agree with it. But that's not really important, I just wanted to try to provide some facts that were apparently missing to many, based on the comments I was reading on the MJF video.
SuperSIXone: And I'm sure you mean using research I'm arguing against vs. research I have no problem with. I've posed hypotheticals in trying to make my point, so this is a valid question. I honestly don't know how I would act in that situation, but would very possibly try to rationalize the decision to do it, violating my conscience.
Hypothetically speaking raptor, if someday scientist do suceede in developing a viable procedure to cure autism, alzheimers, parkinsons, etc. and say your wife one day is diagnosed with something like schizophrenia(knock on wood), would you prohibit your wife and son from going through with it?
"Research in the stem cell field grew out of findings by Canadian scientists Ernest A. McCulloch and James E. Till in the 1960s."
Uh, technology not so new after all. Know your info buddy. Bush was the first to authorize fnding. You guys have to get a clue and start thinking instead of responding with emotions. Amazing!
"Research in the stem cell field GREW OUT OF findings by Canadian scientists Ernest A. McCulloch and James E. Till in the 1960s."
It didn't just appear in the 1960s, it started there... by your logic you could say any modern innovation isn't new, because the ideas that led to it are older!
Wow, do I really need to explain this? Go check out Wikipedia, they give a timeline or a list of milestones if you will. Stem Cell research has been taking place for years.
Oh, and you might find this tidbit interesting:
1995 - President Bill Clinton signs into law the Dickey Amendment which makes it illegal for Federal money to be used for research where stem cells are derived from the destruction of the embryo.
Groveadelicrelic (like that ID): Thanks. Hope people take the time to read the comments and look at the 2nd video, I appreciate reasonable debate in the marketplace of ideas. Sure know I don't have all the answers, but all have right to their opinion.
Stand up for what you believe in without all the mud-slinging politics. Hey if you believe something it is just as valid as the voice that disagrees. A lot of people here call you a hypocrite, but all I see is the other side creating a hypocracy of their own world view by saying yours is wrong, unintelligible, and using curse words to further reveal their lack of maturity. God bless America. Voice your beliefs, that's what America is about! Be as Christian as you can be.
Christian neo-conservatist keep on indoctrinating the American public. I am not against religion. But the way American atheists are discriminated upon is just criminal while even a number of the founding fathers were to belief atheists.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm not trying to indoctrinate or discriminate, was trying to point out some facts regarding the admin's policy on stem cell research people didn't seem to be aware of, and did explain why I am personally opposed to human embryonic stem cell research. My personal views are not the current policy, which outlaws nothing and does provide funding (but not as expansive has Michael & others would like).
You are welcome to your beliefs, Mr Raptor, but they might be different if you had gotten the facts first then formed your opinions rather than the other way around.
I think we all have 'baggage' when learning new facts that impact how we view those facts, religious or not. So you're right, they might be different, but then, so might yours.
If 8 years your senior makes me an 'old asswipe', I guess I'm guilty. As to appearance, I explain mine in my 2nd video, linked above. It's sad you don't have something more meaningful to add to this discussion.
"Ethically & Morally" in your world. Not everyone is Christian. Are you a hypocritic Christian who believes in murder for war? Same difference. Help MJF. I would do more to help HIM than a HYPOCRITIC CHRISTIAN.
I agree, not all have same beliefs. But all have right to be involved in public policy, and ethics and morals are involved, else no laws at all. See my other replies regarding defense of innocent vs. dealing with aggressors. It's not hypocrisy.
Not to mention that your concluding statements are completely false. I work in a cancer research lab, and getting funding to do stem cell research on lines which have been shown to have cancer relevance is impossible. Not that you would care. You care more about the rights of a clump of cells sitting in a freezer than you care about your own wife and son, apparently. If God is opposed to stem cell research, he's opposed to fertility clinics. I suggest you start complaining about those, too.
And I do care. But if you had the money I needed for a life-saving procedure for my wife, I'm not acting ethically if I rob you to get it, even though it saves my wife's life. And I've always been against IVF, would support it if it didn't need the extra embryos bound for destruction. Knew something like this was coming 20 yrs ago.
Man then you're just a chicken shit because I'd kill to save someone I loved from a terminal illness. I thought Christians were suppose to have compassion?
Sorry to burst your bubble, but we do use NAZI advancements, every day, & we enjoy it. It would be an absurd & stagnant society that refuses to embrace improvements that would save lives because it came from an evil regime. If we did that for the NAZIs, we should go further back & wipe out every medical advancement we have. I don't know where you're getting your information, but research is allowed only on existing cell lines which is definitely not adequate as there are only 64.
I wasn't referring to things like jets/rockets, etc., but about 'research data' from involuntary human experimentation on concentration camp prisoners. I'd always heard we didn't use it. I did just do a bit of looking, and found this article that argues in support of using the data in some cases, but it is clear that there is still great debate whether it should be done. "www jlaw com/Articles/NaziMedEx html" (periods removed)
That would be Christian of you! Don't they kill for religion? But thou shall not kill? All you gotta do is ask God for forgiveness. That's the Christian way! Not helping parkinson victims like Michael J Fox!
Oh by the way...I'm not supporting this topic from a liberal standpoint. I agree that there is some serious inconsistencies within the stem cell research and if you're going to draw a clear line know every aspect of the topic.
"Liberal propoganda"? "...an ethically or morally wrong process"? How about the hundreds of thousands of cells left over from invitro fertilization that are LITERALLY destroyed and wasted...and have been for the last 20 years?? Where is the "moral outcry" for those cells??? Could we not use those?? Give me a break with the lecture in morality and the "Rah Rah" speech for Bush.
Forgot to mention, I was referring primarily to the comments from posters saying Bush outlawed research, or denied funding, when that wasn't true. As a YouTubeNoob, I should have edited my comments better. If you have 10 minutes, please see my 2nd vid, I try to explain better.
sorry typo that was You "can't" touch it - within part two.
Part three: Consequently, if you say don't believe in God or you're not sure if you do. You may want ask yourself the questions I've posted and stew on it for a moment. Consequently, if you believe in love...well I guess I can only put it out there I can't end this sentence for you. You decide because no matter what or who we believe in we always have a choice.
So according to your theory a non believer should just fake believing in God to gain some sort of bonus extra added bonus? This conversation has nothing to do with God, in fact I'm sure if Jesus was alive today he'd have no qualms with embryonic stem cell research since those cells are basically thrown out anyway.
There is a saying out there; try God, if it doesn't work out for you don't worry Satan will welcome you back with open arms. Substitute out Satan if you don't believe in Satan, you can always return to yourself.
So in short I should stop believing what I believe and adopt your faith on the off chance of God existing? Oh and if I don't choose to buy into your belief system I'm automatically apart of Satan's army right? That's an interesting ideology you got worked out. Let's say I'm just a good person that doesn't know what happens when I die would I be banished to hell for saying "I don't know"? Also what if I choose to believe in a God other than the one you worship.
You should really read what I write. My faith is my faith. You're faith in God isn't going to be equal to my faith because we are different people. And as I said if you don't believe in God or Satan then you may just believe in yourself.
I'm not saying you should stop believing in what or who you believe. All I'm saying is before denouncing God's existence. Look at the facts. There is more history and proof about Christ then any history hero in the world yet the majority believe their American history without ever doubting it. Why is there such defense against believing in God.
Question? What is a "good" person? That is used so regularly and very subjective. Everyone has their definition of a good person, all of them are based and rooted by what's in the bible. The majority stem around not doing any of the ten commandments or at least some and then that means your a "good person". Everything is based on morality and morality stemmed from the Bible. Proof name me one thing that isn't.
American History doesn't talk about talking burning bushes does it? Hrmm maybe that's why people actually believe it! Also the majority of American History (and history in general) is really poorly written and not accurate at all.
No not a lot of miracles in American history. I'd say the fact that some races still exist given the murder, raping, pilaging and inequality that went on. Actually the scriptures have not been altered as much as you think - if you investigate the dead sea scrolls the accuracy still holds pretty strong still today. Greek, Latin and Hebrew. Some literature to check out Case for Christ, Letters from a Skeptic. Solid reads, if your interested.
The Bible was written by man as a tool for man to conquer on man, even if God did have a part in it at its commencement his/her word has been altered greatly by numerous people (that's fact). I'm not saying its right to steal, kill, lie, or cheat; I'm just saying you don't need a book to tell you that's wrong because it should be pretty obvious.
I'm also not denying the existence of a supreme being, hell I hope there is a God or a magical place we all go to when we die, I like the thought because I find it comforting, but if me getting into heaven means I have to take place in organized crime (i.e. religion) then that my friend, is immoral and would be the true sin.
You may find this interesting money is talked about more in the bible than any of the other major subjects (i.e. love). You might think well of course, but not in the sense of give it all to your leader type of instruction. On the contrary. Talks about being good stewards of money, not letting it control you, that its fleeting.
Religion organized crime well every business has corruption Enron proved that, but I wouldn't say all organize religion is organized crime. There is a business to running a church indeed, how its run is what is important. How about a church that has an open book policy to there finances? It exist. You can see where your contributions are going and how they are helping others and what your pastors are making. Doesn't sound like organized crime to me.
If I were to rape a little kid while stocking the shelves at Wal Mart I'd lose my job in a heart beat, I wouldn't have the luxury of being transferred to another Wal Mart because I'd be in jail, so why should we give Catholic priests that right? Sure sounds like organized crime to me.
Christianity as its is meant to be a person who strives to live Christ like. At of all the gods in this world to believe in, Jesus is the only one that comes from nothing. Born in a manger (animal feeder), suffered under pontius pilot and then he is resurrected. But throughout his life he didn't do anything but hang with people that none of us today would even talk to (on average). Some con artist - that's not the type of life or story I would tell to try and conquer mankind.
again its not a fact that's its been greatly altered check the history and original text and todays scripture. The context holds true. You can mince words here and there but its more accurate than the majority of any american or non-american history. Its also still the best selling book in the world. I'm sorry that some Christian leaders and Christians in general have failed to live up to what they preach. Unfortunately, we are all human and all commit hipocrisy at one or more times in our life.
Non stop child molesting, hypocrisy, dishonest preachers that demand their church to contribute 10% of their earnings, the constant wars that start over difference in opinion, and the ridiculous tax exempt status, face it religion has turned into organized crime.
Like you say below man is far from perfect, so your judgement is that if a group of priest and pastors who fail in there service to God and the truth of the scriptures should represent the entire Christian community. That's like taking a few people from your family and summing up what your family is all about based on those people randomly pulled from your family. Is that accurate no way. Misrepresentation of the whole.
Like I said before there is dishonesty in every business-profit or non-profit. The levels are different but there is dishonesty everywhere. A church is a business and an institution, similar to a university. Some people think education is criminal. Rates go up astronomically all the time, but people see value you in it.
You know Chuck, none of that is going to help you when you stand before almighty God. It's just not going to hold up.. You'll stand alone on what YOU did. No finger pointing allowed. He'll ask what YOU did with the gospel that was given to man.
Those who say they haven't ever been a hipocrite are either lying. What a manipulative tool that bible lets. Lets see if I wanted to rule the world and govern over people let me contstruct a book that contains every aspect of life, surround it in self-giving, self-sacrificing love and feed it to people so they will be under complete control of someone they can't see. That's basically what your saying right?
No I'm saying "Let's create book that strikes fear into our citizens so we can scare them into following our rule." That self-giving self sacrificing love is surrounded by outlandish judgmental fairytales that contain a set of "morale" guidelines. Basically it's has the same affect as a children's book. Again I'm not denying that theirs a God, or a Christ, I'm just saying that the Bible itself was written by man, and man is far from perfect.
Outlandish judgemental fairytales? Not sure what you're referring to, can you site an example of one? What about those moral guidlines are absurd? If we were to follow Jesus' example and "moral guidlines", if you will, then we would have quite the uptopia, but God structured in a way that we have a choice to decide. Unfortunately, the results are proof of our bad decision. For example:
Sorry For example: Let's use sex. Now we have so many opinions on what is right and wrong,but if we were to follow what Christ says in his word about sex...how would things be today? Hmmm...let's see, divorce rate would be next to none, if any, VD's and HIV would not exist and if it did it would be contained within the context of marriage relationships not spread worldwide. The list goes on...we could use this example for a multitude of things but I think you get where I'm coming from.
Chuck lets look at all the good things churches do for communities and for people around the world. That is overlooked and never in the media. You just see the sins that are committed. Why is habitat and homemaker over such a phenomena - churches have been doing this type of stuff for ages but no one is looking for accolades. Its not news worthy to them its expected. So I think we need to look at the big picture and reevaluate our outlook on the church and Christians as a whole.
Fear is perceived. Hell? Is that the fear you're referring to. Well okay,hell doesn't sound like pleasure palace. If loving other people more than myself, loving God and trying to live Christ like. The thing that get's everyone is lack of control. Control is perceived. You're decisions shape your life, and that's how God intended it to be "choice". If you choose to follow him then doesn't it makes sense to follow his self God inspired "man"ual.
Not to say anyone who is Christian does the perfect job of giving of oneself. Its what's in your heart and your intent. At no point did I mention faking - just believing was the word I used,trust, reliance etc. My thought is if you didn't believe and try to believe with all your heart and in your actions then living beyond this world is a bonus if you believe heaven exists.
To get to the issue of stem cell research, well I guess it goes back to a word I used earlier 'INTENT'. What is the intent of the research, are you using embryos that will be used to inpregnate someone, etc.. If they are being thrown away then I think God/Jesus would be all for us finding ways to help those that are sick with those embryos. God gave us science (some disagree that's fine) God gave us our intelligence, God gave us choice, how we use these things determines our intent.
Part two: Why does the majority of the world believe love exists? You can touch it, you can't see it, you can't even describe it half the time. Those that don't believe there is a God still believe that love exist. Mmmmm... that's an interesting concept. There is no scientific proof that love exist. It's a belief, a concept of trust, reliance, giving of ones self. Crazy as it sounds if the definition of love is executed accordingly it replicates the essence of God.
Let's see if all of you who don't believe there is a God (which you are free to do) no judgement here. If someone came to you and ask you if you wanted to live forever or if wanted to be damned for eternity, which would you choose? This is hypethetical of course. My thought here is this, if you did believe God and he really doesn't exist then you have loss nothing, but if he does exist, well I guess that's one heck of bonus.
But He's Like This Jewish Cowboy And That's Awesome!
State Rep. Garnet Coleman, former chairman of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus, said it was difficult to find the humor in his joke after his remarks about Katrina evacuees in Houston in which Kinky referred to them as "crackheads and thugs."
I'm trying to be as honest as I can in this, and just read that Billy Graham refuses to take a stand on this issue, so I retract my statement above. I was mistaken.
Right right right, jesus winnie the pooh and other childhood characters would be mad if you used some embryos, that was about to be thrown away to save lives.
I hate to break it to you sat, but there are some very intelligent Christians out there. I don't think I'm one of them, but I'm probably a little above average, based on the grades I've achieved in the past, and what I've done in my career.
@nonlinearmind Thanks for the comment. Was just trying to establish that I am empathetic to people with disabilities, did not intend to win the argument with an emotional appeal. At the time, people were saying folks with opinions like mine were heartless blanketyblanks who couldn't relate, was trying to counter that misconception.
RaptorSixOne 1 year ago
I think you really need a reality check, for more information on the morality of embryonic stem cell research, check the video in my profile about it.
mille666 4 years ago
I'm complited in desagry with you
tmswalter 4 years ago
What...does that mean?
naaf89 4 years ago
what morally wrong things, use of dead fetuses.
It takes no innocent life, it uses fetuses that are already dead, why not use them for life!
dk2853 4 years ago
I stopped watching this video after he said 'As a christian and a republican" that's all I needed to hear :P
Romani1969 4 years ago
PS Many of the vaccines you and your children were vaccinated with are made using fetal tissue. Its amazing what knowledge endows on us,how it can so easily raise us from ignorance, the ignorance of blindly following someone else's ideology.
TTile 5 years ago
Comparing ESCR to nazi experiments is beyond my comprehension. How can you compare experiments done on live human beings to those done on cells? That is digusting and dehumanizes the live's of all those people who suffered and died in the nazi experiments. Using this distorted logic, you would find it an equal decision to rescue a live human or an embryo from the hands of nazi scientists? I sure hope not because otherwise you would be as sick as the nazis.
TTile 5 years ago
You can't speak well like president bush, it seems like you are reading from a script! Dumb american hick!
govibe 5 years ago
actually, Bush isnt the first to authorize federal funding for Stem Cell research. There's also no logic to discontinue stem cells lines where the decision has already been made... and you didn't really point out any "lies" in Michael's ad.
Krazyklown01 5 years ago
Please read this if your against Embryonic Stem cell research, not saying I am, but this is just a fact. Embryonic stem cells are taking a possible life. But when a woman has a "test tube" baby, they take about 5 Embryos. Use however many they need for it to work, and THROW the rest away. So a potential life is being taken everytime that happens! I would support Embryonic stem cell research IF they took those embryos that were going to be tossed, and used it to find a cure.
Kelavmeister 5 years ago
The problem is that in vitro clinics needlessly discard unused/unwanted embryos every year. These could serve a greater purpose than filling trash cans. However, I am against developing embryos just for research. For the most part I disagree with you, but I appreciate your position and the way you expressed it.
quartermick 5 years ago
stfu
MelbaToast454 5 years ago
if you saved lives with cells that'd be horrible.
everettpf3 5 years ago
wow i like you
you're nasty and you are right
embererebus 5 years ago
...Don't worry about it man, two more baby shakes will fix me up nice and Christian like. I guess you could say that statement was childish though, but whatever. Pray for me Raptor.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
How are you sleeping knowing Michael J Fox gets to eat babies whole now Raptor? I'm sleeping good, nice and good because I know, eventually, there has to be a back to the future 4.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
I feel sorry for you Chucki, you keep coming back to spew hate and anger, and now gloating. You've become what you accuse people like me of being.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
People were freaking out that there might be single cell 'LIFE' on Mars. Why is that considered life and not an embryo of a human?
DaveTex2375 5 years ago
George Soros could feed several small countries with the money he spent to unseat Bush and Republicans. It seems funny that a man who made a lot of money off his skillful business maneuvers would try to overthrow the leadership of the country tha epitomises freed om and capitalism. If he did that in Nazi Germany, Hussein's Iraq China or north Korea he would have been imprisoned or killed for dissent.
DaveTex2375 5 years ago
Yeah, the economy really tanked under Clinton! Not.
Gwyka 5 years ago
The recession under Bush 41 was already over with and recovered when Clinton was elected. People somehow thought that a broken promise(tax hike) should be punished. But we got tax hikes galore. Clinton vetoed the budget 3 times before he finally passed the budget submitted by REPUBLICANS. W. inherited a slumping economy and terrorism. We have a record-high dow, unemployment at record lows, deficits lower and treasury income higher. J.F.K., REAGAN, & W. lowered taxes and the people did better.
DaveTex2375 5 years ago
wow what a terrible analogies. i glad you guys loset
platanoman 5 years ago
Private funding will not achieve results as quickly as a combination of public and private funding. If the research on embryonic stem cells is unethical then it should be banned, if it is ethical then it should proceed as quickly as possible by all available means. Whether or not the research is ethical is not affected by the means of funding.
badger5079 5 years ago
Sorry, I have to leave the discussion. I am in the mortgage business and our phones are ringing off the hook with calls from people in a panic wanting to refinance before the Market tanks and rates soar as a result of the Democrats winning Congress. The Dems track record on the economy does support their concerns but the rush of panic is not just surprising, it is amazing. It looks like we will be very busy for quite some time. Best wishes to all for a Merry Christmas & Happy New Year.
omcx1 5 years ago
Oh-- that six was supposed to be a 7. Oops. Thanks again for posting. Have a good morning, (5:30 am) fellow non-sleeper.
woofus42 5 years ago
6) But in the mean time, thank you for posting. Nobody should ever be mocked for making a genuine effort to explain their opinion or stand up for what they believe in, particularly in a democratic society that champions free speech. (Sorry for the tedious response, I'm just always taken aback and impressed by anyone who takes the opportunity to speak up on any important issue, and I always feel compelled to respond. 'Hope you don't mind. Thanks for humouring me.)
woofus42 5 years ago
6) I like Michael J. Fox, agree with his position and I'm grateful that he came forward for an important cause, but it was also interesting to hear from a reasonable person on the other side of the argument.
Please do try to understand the potential benefits of stem cell research, until, god-willing we find another equally effective way to cure disease that doesn't involve testing on stem cells, torturing animals or doing nothing at all...
woofus42 5 years ago
5) I do, however, respect your beliefs and appreciate your input, particularly the way you put forth your response; without insult or prejudicial, reactionary comments. If all positions were presented respectfully and articulately, perhaps we'd all be able to find common ground more often. I stumbled upon your video by accident when I looked up Mr. Fox's add because I couldn't remember the name of the Missouri candidate who supported stem cell research.
woofus42 5 years ago
4) I've seen too many wonderful people suffer and die from Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and other diseases to try to weigh the life of a fully developed, suffering animal, such as a human with Alzheimer's Disease or another innocent species in a lab against an undeveloped stem cell.
woofus42 5 years ago
3) Unfortunately, the issue is more complicated than the "taking of innocent life," only because these stem cells are destroyed after a time in fertility clinics no matter what, so I believe it's best that they not be lost in vain.
woofus42 5 years ago
2) I understand and sympathize with all of the arguments against stem cell research, but these cells are being destroyed either way, so I'd rather they at least be used to help cure disease before they're wasted. I also take some comfort in the fact that stem-cells, to the best of our knowledge have no awareness of their surroundings or pain receptors.
woofus42 5 years ago
1) I have a long response so I'll post it in a few parts-- damn this 500 character limit! I appreciate your perspective, but I still have to stand by stem cell research. I, too deeply value all life. I'm an animal rights activist, vegetarian, fairly religious person and I'm dead set against cloning anything larger or more developed than a single cell, organ or graft of tissue.
woofus42 5 years ago
Although i do understand that the issue is an amazingly senstive one, i do feel that your title for this video was wrong. With a 30 second spot, how can a person ever hope to summate the entirety of a debate that will most likely go on for at least several more decades. It's with that in mind that i think it's not fair that you allow yourself more time and not only that, but you are clearly reading from a screen which makes me question as to whether or not the thoughts were even your own.
forest5934 5 years ago
Jesus told me that he is for the stem cell research. Eat that.
cheapbasterd 5 years ago
It seems to me that you have paid no attention to what is actually the issue, stem cell research in Missouri. I also think your actual problem is with the practice of artificial insemination. Many more embryos are produced than are actually placed in the woman's euterus. These extra embryos at present time are wasted. Why not gain something from this waste? Get your information correct, maybe take a little bit of time to research the subject.
Ender92978 5 years ago
You boneheads need to research the concept of "separation of church and state". First, there is NOTHING about it in the Constitution. Second, it was intended to prevent the government from interfering in the expression of religion or establishing one official religion for the country. It has NOTHING to do with this issue.
omcx1 5 years ago
So technically what you're saying OMCX is that religious organizations should be free to pollute politics with a set of undetermined, prehistoric fairytales that have absolutely nothing to do with this nation's economy? You do realize that there are only two ten commandments that are laws right? It's against the law to kill someone, and you can't steal, that's it!
ChuckImania 5 years ago
Your simplistic view exposes a lack of knowledge. We are not talking about religion controlling politics, we are talking about government controlling religion, and government devoid of morality. Morality has always been considered in legislation. I know you atheists would love a society where you were not held responsible for your actions but thankfully we have not sunk to your level yet.
omcx1 5 years ago
You can add adultery and perjury to the list of laws based on the 10 commandments, and some areas still have "blue laws" preventing business on Sunday.
omcx1 5 years ago
Lying and cheating on your wife? That's not a crime. Making the entire state shut their business down because they want their citizens to attend Church should be against the law. It's not Governments place to control religion, nor is its religions place to control government (thus the separation of church and state). Just because I'm man enough to say "I DON'T KNOW" doesn't make me an atheist, it makes me open minded.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
I don't know where you live but perjury and adultery are both illegal everywhere I have lived. I agree with you on the laws about working on sunday. That should be left up to the individual, not the government.
omcx1 5 years ago
1. Do Not Worship Any Other Gods (bullshit)
2. Do Not Make Any Idols (bullshit)
3. DO Not Misuse The Name Of God
4. Keep The Sabbath Holy (bullshit)
5. Honor Your Father And Mother (bullshit)
6. Do Not Murder (Law
7. Do Not Commit Adultery (Not really a real crime, it's more of a way to get a divorce settlement, and it's not a felony.)
8. Do Not Steal (Law)
9. Do Not Lie (and bull shit)
10. Do Not Covet (and even more bullshit)
ChuckImania 5 years ago
What makes you so sure that we wouldn't have a set of laws without the bible? That statement was moronically absurd. If you can't figure out that stealing, murder, and untruthfulness are BAD things without looking them up in a book (that's the equivalent to a dungeon masters guide) then you're a fucking retard.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
Actually, knowing nothing about the founding of our legal system and the traditioanl christian values of the founders makes you the retard.
omcx1 5 years ago
So you're admiting those Christian valueus were stealing, slavery, genocide, rape, and pillaging !? Last time I read that's how we came about to being such a great nation.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
Awesome, lets talk. Ted Haggard, a man that preached the "gospel" and spoke out against homosexuality occasionally boned another man up the ass at a massage pallor. Talk about a hypocrite. I guess those good Christian values only held up at Sunday sermons. What's sad about this whole thing is:
ChuckImania 5 years ago
if Ted Haggard was any other person this wouldn't even have been in the news, however thankfully for our entertainment he isn't any other person, he's the poster boy for the New Life Church. It's funny how people that call themselves religious turn out having the most skeletons in their closets.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
Anyone who mistakenly believed, even before his exposure,that he, or any other similar bogus money-grabbing "preacher" was a true Christian does not know what Christianity is all about.And just so you know, christianity is not about being perfect. Christians are the first ones to admit they are prone to sin as all humans are.
omcx1 5 years ago
What a tool. I love how the "sanctity of life" is so selective. They care so much about the unborn but once they're born they're on their own, even moreso if it's a minority or poor. Like the person said above, Separation of Church and State!
geofos 5 years ago
Why don't we just compromise and use Iraqi embryos for testing?
Seriously, how much is an Iraqi embryo really worth to the right?
gabaman 5 years ago
Separate of church and state. Keep your religious views out of Government. Nobody's interested in them.
soyouwannascript 5 years ago
you dumb ugly fuck, fuck ethics if it saves lives - eat monkey shit and bury yourself under a dolphin testicle pile.
blackkenja 5 years ago
I do not think it was that well thought out. RaptorSixOn reads a quote from NIH about Bush, but the MJF ad DID NOT mention Bush at all. The only names mentioned were Talent and McCaskill. Watch it again and see for yourself.
pbnj130 5 years ago
You're right, I was responding more to the comments posted on the MJF ad, where Bush, repubs, Christians were being falsely accused. My 1st video effort didn't make that as clear as it should. go see my 2nd.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
This guy isn't even worth the time it takes to make a comment. I really enjoy how he threw in his families disabilities in an attempt to pretend his "sympathetic". That was just a sorry excuse for sympathy. Sympathetic you are not. Pathetic is a better word. Try reading up on the 'actual' facts from non-partisan sources, not your comfy right-winged web sites
Orbitalz 5 years ago
No, was an attempt to show someone like me, who opposes HeSC research, could also have a 'vested' interest in it, and could sympathize with MJF's condition, which I do.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
Oh what the fuck ever. The guy is right, the only reason you mentioned your autistic son, your handicapped mother, and your wife's bout with breast cancer is because you wanted to play the "Feel sorry for a Christian" in need card. How can I feel sorry someone that isn't willing to vote for the proper science that could cure his wife, or possibly even cure his son? Only a coward would let his wife and child suffer because of what some prehistoric doctrine says.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
So, it is okay for Michael J. Fox to make inaccurate statemants and hide behind his disability so as to escape criticism. The issue they are voting on is concerning CLONING, so bringing up an issue that BOTH candidates are against(embryonic stem cell research) in an election in which that subject is not relevant.
DaveTex2375 5 years ago
How is Michael J fox hiding behind his disability? I believe you meant Michael J fox is fighting for a cure for his disability! Raptor on the other hand is using the misfortune of his family to back his prehistoric ideology. That's just disgusting.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
taking a human life...the kid is allready dead dumbass...im sure u wouldnt care about him anyway especially since you are the people that shun people in poorer areas. lemme guess all the conservatives cry about every baby that is killed in abortion? yeah fucking right alot of abortions are by minority groups and i for one know u conservatives dont give a damn about the minorities as it is the only way you guys care about us is when we give you votes.
shano58 5 years ago
You know nothing you idiot. "Conservative" Bush has put many minorites in major positions of power in his cabinet. Liberal, all-caring Clinton had none. Conservatives want to give the poor the tools they need to succeed on their own, liberals want to keep them poor and dependent on government. Pull your head out of your ass and take a look around.
omcx1 5 years ago
Liberals like Kerry want free-speech so they can say whatever they want without consequence.
The real question is can Kerry say whatever he wants and have nobody question him. Every action you make has a reaction. That is the American way we are free to live by our actions. We can prosper by them or suffer by them.
Mrlogos 5 years ago
I was actually going to give this guy a chance untill I realized it he was actually reading off of something...YOU CAN SEE HIS FUCKING EYES MOVE YOU JACKASS!!
jonletter 5 years ago
He could have wrote a speech and is just reading it off his computer. YOU are the jackass...
JSRFclutch 5 years ago
Yes, he is reading off of something. But it is something that he wrote. I find it admirable because he did his research and actually took the time to make sure what he was saying didn't sound stupid. He wanted to get his point across eloquently. In essence, he was giving a speech,written by himself, referencing the research that he did.
sunshnlvr 5 years ago
To clarify, I am refering specifically to this comment by "pribnuts," not the video.
whatwasthepointagain 5 years ago
This is offensive on so many levels, I don't even know where to begin.
whatwasthepointagain 5 years ago
Michael J. Fox said in the ad that Talent is opposed to "exanding stem cell research" and that is what his vote against HR 810 indicates. HR 810 would have allowed federal funding of stem cell research on new embroyo lines derived from embroyos that would otherwise have been destroyed by fertility clinics. I see nothing wrong with that. Do you? What are doing to save those "babies" being destroyed by the fertility clinics?
Gwyka 5 years ago
I've had some very pleasant and reasonable discussions, both in the comments, and via private messages, with those who disagree with me. But many of the comments are very disappointing, which is what motivated me to make this in the first place.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
Excellent job. The fact that you only have a 2 star rating and many idiotic responses to your video prove only one thing, it is that Liberals do not want facts and that they are not as open minded as they claim to be. They call us the party of hate!? Look in the mirror.
harryparatesties 5 years ago
Excellent points. Clearly too well thought out for some of the commentators.
nawataipan 5 years ago
A sad attempt at damage control?
7 days to house elections, I can't wait.
Stephen301 5 years ago
No, just trying to get the truth out.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
embryonic stem cell research is not shown to be any more beneficial than other forms of stem cell research using mesenchymal or other forms of adult stem cells.
i think to my knowledge, that this ad was trying to support stem cell research, not only embryonic. correct me if im wrong.
eundaddy 5 years ago
The ad was supporting the Democratic Senatorial candidate from Missouri, since she would vote in favor of overriding Bush's veto on expanding embryonic stem cell research beyond what he authorized in 2001. I strongly support stem cell research that does not involve the destruction of human embryos, and hope science finds a cure.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
My video was an attempt to more the YouTube comments I was reading denigrating Christians and republicans, claiming things that just were not true, such as we outlawed stem cell research. If you have time, please see my 2nd video, I try to elaborate a bit.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
There's a HUGE difference b/w Nazi testing and the use of embryonic stem cell research...I don't understand how you see a similarity between the two. Just by saying that you are severely understating the horrendous nature of Nazi testing.
photoguy937 5 years ago
Fuck u Faggot!!
icablock28 5 years ago
you arent very good at reading on cue
loopy1980 5 years ago
You're right, I need a teleprompter like most we see on TV use. But other than the NIH quote, those were my words, written by me in MS Word, on my PC screen.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
BEWARE TEH FORBIDDEN SCIENCE!
Chukker 5 years ago
Would it only be viable to do this in a fertility-clinic setting where most likely there would be excess embryos anyway? And even if the embryo the new line was derived from survived, current legislation would still prohibit government funding for research using that line.
awsvcs 5 years ago
There's a possibility to obtain embryonic stem cells without harming the embryo. I had a link to a BBC Aug '06 article. But in practice it might not have much practical application. Who would volunteer their embryos to have this done? Would it put the fetus at a risk (the embryos this experiment was performed on were, ironically, destroyed - and does that make it ethical to use that knowledge)?
awsvcs 5 years ago
The debate isn't whether stem cells could be people - they can't. The debate is that embryonic stem cells are derived from embryos, which can develop into fetuses; as far as I know the embryos must be destroyed in order for the stem cells to be obtained.
awsvcs 5 years ago
So you're saying that the proof that the Bush administration isn't "backward" or "anti-science" is that they support (federally fund) the stem-cell research using embryos from fertilization measures that would be destroyed? But you yourself don't personally support that? Then aren't you describing your own views as "backward" and "anti-science"?
awsvcs 5 years ago
I'm neither a Christian nor a Republican but I appreciate the way you chose to discuss a topic based on facts you collected rather than espouse emotions and insults. What I really don't understand is why not the stem cell lines we have now are sufficient, and why more need to be made. I feel that most US media just skims the surface of this debate. Perhaps if we knew more about it, science could in one way or another make some advances.
awsvcs 5 years ago
I appreciate your comments, and in case no one from the other side answers, I'll attempt to, hopefully without distortion. Some (I don't think all, but I'm not certain) of the lines proved to not be usable for a variety of reasons, but visiting NIH website, it appears there are still lines and funding available, but not as much or as easy to set up as they would like.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
If a lab wants to use both cells from approved and unapproved lines, they must set up accounting to show fed funds aren't being used for the unapproved lines (or separate facilities). Somewhat like working from home, if you want the tax break, you have to document % for business vs. personal use. Govt (public) money, you have to follow govt rules, which can be a pain. Would be nicer, more productive, not to have to worry about that.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
Someone from the other side is certainly free to explain better than I have, but I do understand their desire for a change in the policy, and their reasoning behind it; I just don't agree with it. But that's not really important, I just wanted to try to provide some facts that were apparently missing to many, based on the comments I was reading on the MJF video.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
Fuck Christian Morons
ETAmsterdam 5 years ago
SuperSIXone: And I'm sure you mean using research I'm arguing against vs. research I have no problem with. I've posed hypotheticals in trying to make my point, so this is a valid question. I honestly don't know how I would act in that situation, but would very possibly try to rationalize the decision to do it, violating my conscience.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
I mean going through with the procedure to cure their ailments...
superSIXone1993 5 years ago
Hypothetically speaking raptor, if someday scientist do suceede in developing a viable procedure to cure autism, alzheimers, parkinsons, etc. and say your wife one day is diagnosed with something like schizophrenia(knock on wood), would you prohibit your wife and son from going through with it?
superSIXone1993 5 years ago
"I don't have to listen what BS he says. Do I have to?"
No. So why are you posting here? If you are going to ignore him, then go away?
jmcclellan54321 5 years ago
I'm sure he'd prefer others ignore me as well, he can say that if he'd like. But thanks for the support.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
"Research in the stem cell field grew out of findings by Canadian scientists Ernest A. McCulloch and James E. Till in the 1960s."
Uh, technology not so new after all. Know your info buddy. Bush was the first to authorize fnding. You guys have to get a clue and start thinking instead of responding with emotions. Amazing!
jmcclellan54321 5 years ago
"Research in the stem cell field GREW OUT OF findings by Canadian scientists Ernest A. McCulloch and James E. Till in the 1960s."
It didn't just appear in the 1960s, it started there... by your logic you could say any modern innovation isn't new, because the ideas that led to it are older!
Gned11 5 years ago
Wow, do I really need to explain this? Go check out Wikipedia, they give a timeline or a list of milestones if you will. Stem Cell research has been taking place for years.
Oh, and you might find this tidbit interesting:
1995 - President Bill Clinton signs into law the Dickey Amendment which makes it illegal for Federal money to be used for research where stem cells are derived from the destruction of the embryo.
jmcclellan54321 5 years ago
Groveadelicrelic (like that ID): Thanks. Hope people take the time to read the comments and look at the 2nd video, I appreciate reasonable debate in the marketplace of ideas. Sure know I don't have all the answers, but all have right to their opinion.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
Stand up for what you believe in without all the mud-slinging politics. Hey if you believe something it is just as valid as the voice that disagrees. A lot of people here call you a hypocrite, but all I see is the other side creating a hypocracy of their own world view by saying yours is wrong, unintelligible, and using curse words to further reveal their lack of maturity. God bless America. Voice your beliefs, that's what America is about! Be as Christian as you can be.
groovadelicrelic 5 years ago
Christian neo-conservatist keep on indoctrinating the American public. I am not against religion. But the way American atheists are discriminated upon is just criminal while even a number of the founding fathers were to belief atheists.
CR35b 5 years ago
I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm not trying to indoctrinate or discriminate, was trying to point out some facts regarding the admin's policy on stem cell research people didn't seem to be aware of, and did explain why I am personally opposed to human embryonic stem cell research. My personal views are not the current policy, which outlaws nothing and does provide funding (but not as expansive has Michael & others would like).
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
Rapter61, I completely agree with everything you said. Keep it up, and rock rock on.
sewsew88 5 years ago
You are welcome to your beliefs, Mr Raptor, but they might be different if you had gotten the facts first then formed your opinions rather than the other way around.
BennyMike 5 years ago
I think we all have 'baggage' when learning new facts that impact how we view those facts, religious or not. So you're right, they might be different, but then, so might yours.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
who's this old asswipe? looks like a rapist
cddejohn 5 years ago
If 8 years your senior makes me an 'old asswipe', I guess I'm guilty. As to appearance, I explain mine in my 2nd video, linked above. It's sad you don't have something more meaningful to add to this discussion.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
"Ethically & Morally" in your world. Not everyone is Christian. Are you a hypocritic Christian who believes in murder for war? Same difference. Help MJF. I would do more to help HIM than a HYPOCRITIC CHRISTIAN.
elidetreyes 5 years ago
I agree, not all have same beliefs. But all have right to be involved in public policy, and ethics and morals are involved, else no laws at all. See my other replies regarding defense of innocent vs. dealing with aggressors. It's not hypocrisy.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
Not to mention that your concluding statements are completely false. I work in a cancer research lab, and getting funding to do stem cell research on lines which have been shown to have cancer relevance is impossible. Not that you would care. You care more about the rights of a clump of cells sitting in a freezer than you care about your own wife and son, apparently. If God is opposed to stem cell research, he's opposed to fertility clinics. I suggest you start complaining about those, too.
embrodak87 5 years ago
I conclude with the following:
1. This Admin/Congress has never restricted private funding for human embryonic stem cell research.
2. Pres/Admin/Congress never outlawed any funding for stem cell research.
3. Bush is 1st President to authorize federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research.
These are all facts, not in dispute. You getting funding and they outlawing it are 2 different things.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
He's the first President that has had the chance to do so.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
And I do care. But if you had the money I needed for a life-saving procedure for my wife, I'm not acting ethically if I rob you to get it, even though it saves my wife's life. And I've always been against IVF, would support it if it didn't need the extra embryos bound for destruction. Knew something like this was coming 20 yrs ago.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
Man then you're just a chicken shit because I'd kill to save someone I loved from a terminal illness. I thought Christians were suppose to have compassion?
ChuckImania 5 years ago
Sorry to burst your bubble, but we do use NAZI advancements, every day, & we enjoy it. It would be an absurd & stagnant society that refuses to embrace improvements that would save lives because it came from an evil regime. If we did that for the NAZIs, we should go further back & wipe out every medical advancement we have. I don't know where you're getting your information, but research is allowed only on existing cell lines which is definitely not adequate as there are only 64.
embrodak87 5 years ago
I wasn't referring to things like jets/rockets, etc., but about 'research data' from involuntary human experimentation on concentration camp prisoners. I'd always heard we didn't use it. I did just do a bit of looking, and found this article that argues in support of using the data in some cases, but it is clear that there is still great debate whether it should be done. "www jlaw com/Articles/NaziMedEx html" (periods removed)
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
This guy has thought about this alot.
However, an embryonic cell is not a human being.
If you beleive in God, you should beleive in compassion above all else- compassion for living beings, not cell structures.
HamishsRobot 5 years ago
BTW Foley didn't have sex with the page, FYI.
mwmxtra 5 years ago
djswish- never heaard somethin so contrived & twisted in my life
gastroparesis 5 years ago
djswish- If I could believe in virgin births, resurrections, talking snakes, and a 6000 year old earth, I would probably agree with you.
gastroparesis 5 years ago
I think the christians in america are more radical then the christians in Europe.
chrisvo 5 years ago
I am pro killing idots like you. May be we should scan the embryo and see if they are going to be a moron like you. We destroy it. Stupid
televisble 5 years ago
That would be Christian of you! Don't they kill for religion? But thou shall not kill? All you gotta do is ask God for forgiveness. That's the Christian way! Not helping parkinson victims like Michael J Fox!
elidetreyes 5 years ago
Too long didn't listen.
kungfuabuse 5 years ago
Oh by the way...I'm not supporting this topic from a liberal standpoint. I agree that there is some serious inconsistencies within the stem cell research and if you're going to draw a clear line know every aspect of the topic.
djswish 5 years ago
"Liberal propoganda"? "...an ethically or morally wrong process"? How about the hundreds of thousands of cells left over from invitro fertilization that are LITERALLY destroyed and wasted...and have been for the last 20 years?? Where is the "moral outcry" for those cells??? Could we not use those?? Give me a break with the lecture in morality and the "Rah Rah" speech for Bush.
BeachVball32 5 years ago
I've never supported IV fertilization for just that reason, would support it if one 1 fertilized egg was used.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
Forgot to mention, I was referring primarily to the comments from posters saying Bush outlawed research, or denied funding, when that wasn't true. As a YouTubeNoob, I should have edited my comments better. If you have 10 minutes, please see my 2nd vid, I try to explain better.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
sorry typo that was You "can't" touch it - within part two.
Part three: Consequently, if you say don't believe in God or you're not sure if you do. You may want ask yourself the questions I've posted and stew on it for a moment. Consequently, if you believe in love...well I guess I can only put it out there I can't end this sentence for you. You decide because no matter what or who we believe in we always have a choice.
djswish 5 years ago
So according to your theory a non believer should just fake believing in God to gain some sort of bonus extra added bonus? This conversation has nothing to do with God, in fact I'm sure if Jesus was alive today he'd have no qualms with embryonic stem cell research since those cells are basically thrown out anyway.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
There is a saying out there; try God, if it doesn't work out for you don't worry Satan will welcome you back with open arms. Substitute out Satan if you don't believe in Satan, you can always return to yourself.
djswish 5 years ago
So in short I should stop believing what I believe and adopt your faith on the off chance of God existing? Oh and if I don't choose to buy into your belief system I'm automatically apart of Satan's army right? That's an interesting ideology you got worked out. Let's say I'm just a good person that doesn't know what happens when I die would I be banished to hell for saying "I don't know"? Also what if I choose to believe in a God other than the one you worship.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
You should really read what I write. My faith is my faith. You're faith in God isn't going to be equal to my faith because we are different people. And as I said if you don't believe in God or Satan then you may just believe in yourself.
djswish 5 years ago
I'm not saying you should stop believing in what or who you believe. All I'm saying is before denouncing God's existence. Look at the facts. There is more history and proof about Christ then any history hero in the world yet the majority believe their American history without ever doubting it. Why is there such defense against believing in God.
djswish 5 years ago
Question? What is a "good" person? That is used so regularly and very subjective. Everyone has their definition of a good person, all of them are based and rooted by what's in the bible. The majority stem around not doing any of the ten commandments or at least some and then that means your a "good person". Everything is based on morality and morality stemmed from the Bible. Proof name me one thing that isn't.
djswish 5 years ago
American History doesn't talk about talking burning bushes does it? Hrmm maybe that's why people actually believe it! Also the majority of American History (and history in general) is really poorly written and not accurate at all.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
No not a lot of miracles in American history. I'd say the fact that some races still exist given the murder, raping, pilaging and inequality that went on. Actually the scriptures have not been altered as much as you think - if you investigate the dead sea scrolls the accuracy still holds pretty strong still today. Greek, Latin and Hebrew. Some literature to check out Case for Christ, Letters from a Skeptic. Solid reads, if your interested.
djswish 5 years ago
The Bible was written by man as a tool for man to conquer on man, even if God did have a part in it at its commencement his/her word has been altered greatly by numerous people (that's fact). I'm not saying its right to steal, kill, lie, or cheat; I'm just saying you don't need a book to tell you that's wrong because it should be pretty obvious.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
I'm also not denying the existence of a supreme being, hell I hope there is a God or a magical place we all go to when we die, I like the thought because I find it comforting, but if me getting into heaven means I have to take place in organized crime (i.e. religion) then that my friend, is immoral and would be the true sin.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
You may find this interesting money is talked about more in the bible than any of the other major subjects (i.e. love). You might think well of course, but not in the sense of give it all to your leader type of instruction. On the contrary. Talks about being good stewards of money, not letting it control you, that its fleeting.
djswish 5 years ago
Religion organized crime well every business has corruption Enron proved that, but I wouldn't say all organize religion is organized crime. There is a business to running a church indeed, how its run is what is important. How about a church that has an open book policy to there finances? It exist. You can see where your contributions are going and how they are helping others and what your pastors are making. Doesn't sound like organized crime to me.
djswish 5 years ago
If I were to rape a little kid while stocking the shelves at Wal Mart I'd lose my job in a heart beat, I wouldn't have the luxury of being transferred to another Wal Mart because I'd be in jail, so why should we give Catholic priests that right? Sure sounds like organized crime to me.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
Christianity as its is meant to be a person who strives to live Christ like. At of all the gods in this world to believe in, Jesus is the only one that comes from nothing. Born in a manger (animal feeder), suffered under pontius pilot and then he is resurrected. But throughout his life he didn't do anything but hang with people that none of us today would even talk to (on average). Some con artist - that's not the type of life or story I would tell to try and conquer mankind.
djswish 5 years ago
again its not a fact that's its been greatly altered check the history and original text and todays scripture. The context holds true. You can mince words here and there but its more accurate than the majority of any american or non-american history. Its also still the best selling book in the world. I'm sorry that some Christian leaders and Christians in general have failed to live up to what they preach. Unfortunately, we are all human and all commit hipocrisy at one or more times in our life.
djswish 5 years ago
Non stop child molesting, hypocrisy, dishonest preachers that demand their church to contribute 10% of their earnings, the constant wars that start over difference in opinion, and the ridiculous tax exempt status, face it religion has turned into organized crime.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
Like you say below man is far from perfect, so your judgement is that if a group of priest and pastors who fail in there service to God and the truth of the scriptures should represent the entire Christian community. That's like taking a few people from your family and summing up what your family is all about based on those people randomly pulled from your family. Is that accurate no way. Misrepresentation of the whole.
djswish 5 years ago
Like I said before there is dishonesty in every business-profit or non-profit. The levels are different but there is dishonesty everywhere. A church is a business and an institution, similar to a university. Some people think education is criminal. Rates go up astronomically all the time, but people see value you in it.
djswish 5 years ago
You know Chuck, none of that is going to help you when you stand before almighty God. It's just not going to hold up.. You'll stand alone on what YOU did. No finger pointing allowed. He'll ask what YOU did with the gospel that was given to man.
graphik41 5 years ago
Those who say they haven't ever been a hipocrite are either lying. What a manipulative tool that bible lets. Lets see if I wanted to rule the world and govern over people let me contstruct a book that contains every aspect of life, surround it in self-giving, self-sacrificing love and feed it to people so they will be under complete control of someone they can't see. That's basically what your saying right?
djswish 5 years ago
No I'm saying "Let's create book that strikes fear into our citizens so we can scare them into following our rule." That self-giving self sacrificing love is surrounded by outlandish judgmental fairytales that contain a set of "morale" guidelines. Basically it's has the same affect as a children's book. Again I'm not denying that theirs a God, or a Christ, I'm just saying that the Bible itself was written by man, and man is far from perfect.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
Outlandish judgemental fairytales? Not sure what you're referring to, can you site an example of one? What about those moral guidlines are absurd? If we were to follow Jesus' example and "moral guidlines", if you will, then we would have quite the uptopia, but God structured in a way that we have a choice to decide. Unfortunately, the results are proof of our bad decision. For example:
djswish 5 years ago
Sorry For example: Let's use sex. Now we have so many opinions on what is right and wrong,but if we were to follow what Christ says in his word about sex...how would things be today? Hmmm...let's see, divorce rate would be next to none, if any, VD's and HIV would not exist and if it did it would be contained within the context of marriage relationships not spread worldwide. The list goes on...we could use this example for a multitude of things but I think you get where I'm coming from.
djswish 5 years ago
Chuck lets look at all the good things churches do for communities and for people around the world. That is overlooked and never in the media. You just see the sins that are committed. Why is habitat and homemaker over such a phenomena - churches have been doing this type of stuff for ages but no one is looking for accolades. Its not news worthy to them its expected. So I think we need to look at the big picture and reevaluate our outlook on the church and Christians as a whole.
djswish 5 years ago
Fear is perceived. Hell? Is that the fear you're referring to. Well okay,hell doesn't sound like pleasure palace. If loving other people more than myself, loving God and trying to live Christ like. The thing that get's everyone is lack of control. Control is perceived. You're decisions shape your life, and that's how God intended it to be "choice". If you choose to follow him then doesn't it makes sense to follow his self God inspired "man"ual.
djswish 5 years ago
Not to say anyone who is Christian does the perfect job of giving of oneself. Its what's in your heart and your intent. At no point did I mention faking - just believing was the word I used,trust, reliance etc. My thought is if you didn't believe and try to believe with all your heart and in your actions then living beyond this world is a bonus if you believe heaven exists.
djswish 5 years ago
To get to the issue of stem cell research, well I guess it goes back to a word I used earlier 'INTENT'. What is the intent of the research, are you using embryos that will be used to inpregnate someone, etc.. If they are being thrown away then I think God/Jesus would be all for us finding ways to help those that are sick with those embryos. God gave us science (some disagree that's fine) God gave us our intelligence, God gave us choice, how we use these things determines our intent.
djswish 5 years ago
I agree with you there.
ChuckImania 5 years ago
Part two: Why does the majority of the world believe love exists? You can touch it, you can't see it, you can't even describe it half the time. Those that don't believe there is a God still believe that love exist. Mmmmm... that's an interesting concept. There is no scientific proof that love exist. It's a belief, a concept of trust, reliance, giving of ones self. Crazy as it sounds if the definition of love is executed accordingly it replicates the essence of God.
djswish 5 years ago
Let's see if all of you who don't believe there is a God (which you are free to do) no judgement here. If someone came to you and ask you if you wanted to live forever or if wanted to be damned for eternity, which would you choose? This is hypethetical of course. My thought here is this, if you did believe God and he really doesn't exist then you have loss nothing, but if he does exist, well I guess that's one heck of bonus.
djswish 5 years ago
But He's Like This Jewish Cowboy And That's Awesome!
State Rep. Garnet Coleman, former chairman of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus, said it was difficult to find the humor in his joke after his remarks about Katrina evacuees in Houston in which Kinky referred to them as "crackheads and thugs."
willisdyer 5 years ago
I'm trying to be as honest as I can in this, and just read that Billy Graham refuses to take a stand on this issue, so I retract my statement above. I was mistaken.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
no body's useless, not even billy graham
what about doners?
embererebus 5 years ago
Right right right, jesus winnie the pooh and other childhood characters would be mad if you used some embryos, that was about to be thrown away to save lives.
whiteguysamurai 5 years ago
I hate it when Christians try to come across as smart. Jeesh!
satxboi30 5 years ago
I hate to break it to you sat, but there are some very intelligent Christians out there. I don't think I'm one of them, but I'm probably a little above average, based on the grades I've achieved in the past, and what I've done in my career.
RaptorSixOne 5 years ago
It's cool Raptor, you don't need to have much book smarts. Turns out you can be a C student in this country and become President.
ChuckImania 5 years ago