Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Neocon's Seminar Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gao seng who wrote (446)	4/26/2001 4:44:13 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 1112

Thanks......I will try to see the program..... The retort is better argued in this round. However, again, there seems to be some insensitivity to the problem, and an attempt to shift focus from embryo research to fertility problems. If it can be stated firmly that embryos are not human, then they may not have protection. As long as it is arguable, there is something dubious in such practices. If it is argued that embryos are not yet rational beings, we construe the stricture to extend to those who are such in their nature, for example, protecting neonates. On the fertility question, the argument is better grounded, but, again, the necessity of doing research to bridge the gap between animal and human cloning means that there will be a great waste of embryos in the process. Thus, some more discussion would, at a minimum, seem appropriate.......