Re: stem cell--there was a nice piece by Michael Kinglsey I think it was Time or Newsweek, can't recall. Point being that Christians opposing this are opposing an abstraction. They're saying a clump of cells is a human being, ensouled. There are so many contradictions to that. For instance, the # of spontaneous abortions at that point is enormous, probably at least 25% of all conceptions, & women never even notice, just think its a late period. So nature or God or whatever they choose to call it already does this all the time, gets rid of that little clump of cells. It's not an embryo. IT's not a living being. Second, they can hunt, kill, endorse wars, & the right of every citizen to bear arms including children who borrow their parents' weapons & kill each other; & yet at the same time endorse the suffering of children and adults who will die of agonizing diseases when they could be saved by stem cell therapy. What's that about? It's fighting for an abstractoin that they are interpreting so literally. "God", whatever GOd is to anyone, never asked that you interpret everything to the letter rather than the spirit. The spirit here is to amelerioate suffering.
Meanwhile, Vendit's excellent analysis of NAZ
Message 16171186 |
