Jump to content
Accelerated Evolution

Science Delivers An F-U To Religious Conservatives!


Recommended Posts

Yay. Now we get to hear the naturalists and other anti-artificialists whine.

Religious conservatives are the primary opposition to embryonic stem cell research. They can't hide behind their religious morality to prevent advances in medicine this time because now we can simply transform skin cells.

............. :|

You have to be joking. Now they can't bitch about the morality of the research.

Yeah, they have nothing to bitch about now. But how the hell would this constitute an "F-U" to them?!

Link to comment

Yeah, they have nothing to bitch about now. But how the hell would this constitute an "F-U" to them?!

Why get caught up in the colorful language?

It's obviously just a fun way of saying HAH, this debate is over.

The fact of the matter is that this is a religious indifferent solution.

As opposed to a spiritual answer or moral revolution.

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

It's obviously just a fun way of saying HAH, this debate is over.

The fact of the matter is that this is a religious indifferent solution.

Nope, the debate will always continue. Ok, so you're not using stem cells anymore, but to use skin cells to clone people would still be bad. That's what the conservatives are saying, anyway.

Fact of the matter is, what people consider to be cloning is an erroneous sci-fi dream anyway. Using stem cells, or cells with the properties of stem cells to potentially grow organs ("spare parts") or treat diseases/tumors sounds rad to me.

To try to clone a whole entire person from one cell is ludicrous. Sure it works in nature, because it's done the "right way" with a sperm and an ovum. To think one skin cell could be split repeatedly into a whole new person may be possible but seems HIGHLY improbable. Even IF such a feat were accomplished, we'd still have to figure out how to map and copy brain patterns to make a "perfect" clone and possibly re-define immortality. And IF we accomplish THAT feat...I think we'd have another 3-4 hundred years before that happens.

Link to comment

But I don't think there's much of a will to clone a human, nor much of a reason, as humans are certainly not something we're running low on.

Shortage of humans? No. Shortage of readily available, compatible human-parts? Yes.

It could become a question of "should it be legal or is it ethical to clone humans, to carve them up for kidneys, livers, and hearts?"

But again, I imagine that won't be for another few centuries...

Link to comment

I fail to see how this is an F-U to people who are opposed to the destruction of life as they view it in embryonic stem cells.

You are using cells from something entirely different - which means you aren't destorying life.

What am I missing here? Or is the OP so invested in trying to strike out at people who have a moral position that embryonic stem cells represent life that he can't read the article he posted and understand it?

Link to comment

I fail to see how this is an F-U to people who are opposed to the destruction of life as they view it in embryonic stem cells.

You are using cells from something entirely different - which means you aren't destorying life.

What am I missing here?

I am not in any way taking sides....but this is exactly what I thought when I opened this thread.

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...