Turtle Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 Yes, but are there any groups who claim to have ethical problems with funding research using non-embryonic stem cells? i'm sure there are. personally i have no problem with experimenting/studying any of these stem cell types with the proper permissions from donors. nor do i have a problem with goverments funding such studies/experiments, likewise with the proper permissions of legislatures and per se the people of said governments. as for moral objections rooted in religious beliefs, i see the us constitution as clear. ...Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...source ergo, these moral arguments established by religion(s) deserve no respect in laws on stem cell science. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMJones0424 Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 I agree Turtle, that it would be inappropriate, and likely unconstitutional, to prohibit embryonic stem cell research. However, my problem is with federal funding of research, not with legality. I do not feel comfortable with the federal government funding anything that is viewed as unethical by some of its populace, whether I agree or not, when its funding is not necessary for the execution of the constitutional powers of the federal government. It is my view that it is counter productive and even dangerous for an elected government to ignore the ethical concerns of a minority group on matters that are not essential to the execution of governmental powers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 I agree Turtle, that it would be inappropriate, and likely unconstitutional, to prohibit embryonic stem cell research. However, my problem is with federal funding of research, not with legality. I do not feel comfortable with the federal government funding anything that is viewed as unethical by some of its populace, whether I agree or not, when its funding is not necessary for the execution of the constitutional powers of the federal government. It is my view that it is counter productive and even dangerous for an elected government to ignore the ethical concerns of a minority group on matters that are not essential to the execution of governmental powers. plenty of ill-defined terms in all that to spur more discussion, i agree. for example, at what number/threshold does "some of the population" take precedence? seems to me our governance already takes this all into consideration -by structure if not by practice- with elected people performing the appropriate duties in making, enforcing, and adjudicating our laws, while we the voters choose these people. then there is the matter of what "essential" means, and so on. anyway, i am reminded of the anecdote of ben franklin and his invention of the lightning rod. now in that time the tall buildings were pretty much only churches and "government" buildings [where people congregated at risk] and some of the clergy objected to having a lightning rod on their church. often times the church didn't burn and only the bell-ringer warning of a storm was killed after all. :lightning the clergy argued it was imoral to defy god's will. ben replied then they ought not have roofs either as they were defying god's will that they should be wet. well, that's more or less of it as i can remember. anyway, we have since not only used some lightning rods, we have made it law to include them on high buildings, regardless that some minority may object on moral and/or religious grounds. (do the amish use lightning rods i wonder? ) given that stem cell research has the demostrated potential to benefit, if not protect, the people who congregate in our country, then i think governance has a legitmate perogative, if not responsibility , to fund and/or promote it by legislative means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMJones0424 Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 I do not agree that the lightning rod example has much to offer in this situation. As far as I know, building codes are state and local issues, and existing structures are generally grandfathered. Benjamin Franklin did not request federal tax dollars to fund his research. I do not agree that ethical concerns must necessarily come from religious groups, as you seem to be implying. Finally, as those who argue against the research do so on ethical grounds, its utility isn't relevant. However, as I don't share the ethical concerns, I am not going to continue trying to defend that opinion. I spent the evening trying to hash out exactly how I feel about the situation. As far as the subject of this thread is concerned, not only do I not have an ethical problem with stem cell research, including research using cells from embryonic lines, I share the opinion that argument against such research on ethical grounds is weak. My problem is a political one concerning the role of the federal government. There has been no clear, to me, case made for the necessity of federal funds for this research to continue, nor does there seem to me to be constitutional grounds for the federal government to fund the research. I feel as strongly that there is no constitutional grounds to prohibit such research. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 I do not agree that the lightning rod example has much to offer in this situation. As far as I know, building codes are state and local issues, and existing structures are generally grandfathered. Benjamin Franklin did not request federal tax dollars to fund his research. I do not agree that ethical concerns must necessarily come from religious groups, as you seem to be implying. Finally, as those who argue against the research do so on ethical grounds, its utility isn't relevant. However, as I don't share the ethical concerns, I am not going to continue trying to defend that opinion. :lol: well, i gave it a shot. take the story by a broader brush to illustrate a demonstrable positive benefit of a new technology for all the people which was emplemented/authorized by government/authorities in spite of ethical objections from a few. if that still doesn't get it, i withdraw the example, crumple it up, and burn it in my ashtray. the reader is always right. I spent the evening trying to hash out exactly how I feel about the situation. As far as the subject of this thread is concerned, not only do I not have an ethical problem with stem cell research, including research using cells from embryonic lines, I share the opinion that argument against such research on ethical grounds is weak. My problem is a political one concerning the role of the federal government. There has been no clear, to me, case made for the necessity of federal funds for this research to continue, nor does there seem to me to be constitutional grounds for the federal government to fund the research. I feel as strongly that there is no constitutional grounds to prohibit such research. damned if we do & damned if we don't. i agree that stem cell research doesn't qualify as "necessary" and i think that while congress is within its bounds to fund & regulate it, our debt could using some trimming of the unnecessary right now. i guess i now have to spend an evening trying to come up with a scenereo of constitutional grounds to prohibit any research. bioweapons? :shrug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewbalka Posted September 29, 2012 Report Share Posted September 29, 2012 In a sense i don't think it will be an issue whether or not a country choose to or not to research stem cells because there will always be a country willing to take the risk for mass economic growth. The money potential is to great of an issue to pass by... Its just a matter of time before someone just says screw it i want the cash... My views on stem cell research is a toss up i am not for or against and the reasons why are Pro: more technology and understanding human life is optimal more knowledge is always a good thing.Con: we are already living for such a long time as it is do we really want to be extending human life even farther in a world were we are already considering we have too many? I am certain that these are not issues to those who want to live past 100 years of age because they are only thinking of themselves (don't tell me your doing it for your children). I for one will live my life the way it is supposed to be lived when its my time its my time i will not fight it. Why because even though i do not have any children i have nieces and nephews and i do not wish to be a burden on them by draining tax payers dollars to support my half crippled self as well as i have already lived a good life and i have not done everything as it is i don't feel as though i am missing anything and i am not filthy rich i just get by with what i got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
belovelife Posted September 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 29, 2012 yeah, but if we could take a pancreas cell, inject it with a virus that rewrites the dna an it gets rid of diabetes, that would be nice right, so the person can live a full life, and continuing generations would not have the disease? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewbalka Posted September 29, 2012 Report Share Posted September 29, 2012 I agree i just don't want to see 150 year old elderly people complaining because they can't live till 200 lol while the rest of the poor people get to die from silly easily curable illnesses or diseases at normal ages because they cant afford it... Society as a norm tends to lean this way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esbo Posted September 30, 2012 Report Share Posted September 30, 2012 i don't feel comfortable with taking a human life to improve someone else's health.I believe life begins at conception and that is it no ifs no buts.Apart from any thing else we are on the long dark road to eugenics. It's not needed, if you want eternal life become a Christian, not a murderer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esbo Posted September 30, 2012 Report Share Posted September 30, 2012 i don't feel comfortable with taking a human life to improve someone else's health.I believe life begins at conception and that is it no ifs no buts.Apart from any thing else we are on the long dark road to eugenics. It's not needed, if you want eternal life become a Christian, don't take others lives away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewbalka Posted September 30, 2012 Report Share Posted September 30, 2012 The human brain begins forming very early in prenatal life (just three weeks after conception)Ref: http://main.zerotothree.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ter_key_brainFAQ Embryonic stem cells (ES cells) are pluripotent stem cells derived from the inner cell mass of the blastocyst, an early-stage embryo.[1] Human embryos reach the blastocyst stage 4–5 days post fertilizationRef: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embryonic_stem_cell Now i am not gonna say your religious but it seems as though you are ignoring the science here. I am not sure if i speak for everyone here but my view on this is if it has no brain then it is not murder. Your basically saying that the moment a fully developed human dies if you were to stab there dead corpse you committed murder... Now that sounds ridiculous lol the only part i agree with is your eugenics statement if stem cell research is abused. I honestly do not see how no one ever again getting cancer, diabetes, muscular degeneration, and so fourth is living in a hilter world... I am very certain that the application form for such a procedure in the future is not going to ask what color your hair is in order to get approved lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.