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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kevin Rose who wrote (14667)	11/13/2006 7:16:05 PM
From: ManyMoose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

It's a Pandora's Box situation, Kevin. Once the door is opened, all hell will break loose. Your example of atomic physics is a great example, and even those who developed the A-Bomb do not agree that it should have been done. I suppose one could argue that better America develop the bomb than the Japanese or Germans of that era. I personally agree with that, and if it hadn't been done I have no doubt I would not be here discussing it with you. Unfortunately, human beings are way too clever for their own good. We start delving in to God's purview, and all we're left with is hubris and a bad memory.

To: Kevin Rose who wrote (14667)	11/13/2006 7:35:52 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

"I agree that we should discuss what these moral lines are, but I don't think we should stop research in a promising area because of hypothetical areas of abuse." I can agree with you that not all ethical lines are clear. It is my understanding that much embryonic stem cell research to date has been more effective at promoting cancerous growth than anything else. There is currently little private investment going into that area. Most private investment in stem cell research is going into adult stem cell medical research. People invest more money in more promising areas. When you couple the appearance of low reward with the actuality of using the cells from aborted babies, you take a small potential good and tie it to a large actual bad. When you get into destroying ova you get into another ethical dilemma. What about babies trimmed during reproductive enhancement reductions? Another ethical dilemma that the Pope has ruled against. Why are the forces that move against Pro-Life the most loyal supporters of it? Ockham’s razor implies that they think it will further their goals. The abortion on demand argument does not appear to be tied to any serous medical or life ethics, only to peoples' desire to avoid taking responsibility for their own reproduction.