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.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (110157)	4/19/2005 10:03:18 AM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793912

There we go conflating issues again. No one opposes stem cell research. There are moral questions about destroying fertilized human eggs for any kind of research. As I understand it, the most exciting research had been done on adult stem cells. He was saying that, if folks understood stem cell research better, they wouldn't be opposed to it.

To: Lane3 who wrote (110157)	4/19/2005 10:04:21 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793912

if folks understood stem cell research better, they wouldn't be opposed to it Not sure what he means but he sounds rather patronizing. The issue is very simple, both scientifically and morally -- if you believe that human life begins at conception, then it's immoral to conceive a child for the purpose of harvesting its component parts, just as it would be immoral to harvest your own component parts until you were dead (leaving aside such non-harmful parts as blood donations, marrow donations, and the like.) Is it ethical to kill, say, prisoners or retarded people in order to harvest their organs? No. So how can it be ethical to kill an innocent child? Now, you may not agree that destroying an embryo is killing a child, but that doesn't make the people who do believe that stupid.