*DAMN R6 Forum

Anybody watch ER last night? It had a line in it about Stem Cell Research and how if it werent for the politics we could save millions more lives but the main way you can get these stem cells to work with is from mothers who have abortions. Any Opinions on this? Personally I feel that People have the right to decide weather they can have and raise a baby. Thus stem cell research should progress beause within 5 years its projected it could find a cure for  things like Altzhiemers and Parkensins.

Seeing how i'm pro choice, i have no problem with stem cell research. If a couple of fetuses die so that i can live longer i say do it. Dispite the politics of taking a "life" the researchers will just go somewhere else if you damn bible thumpers try to outlaw it. As a athiest i'm not pleased that the pope helped Bush's decision, but at least its allowed to a point.

key words: ABORTED fetuses.
thats not a life yet, and it wont be a life until it is born. if it gets aborted, since thats the woman's choice, then i say by all means use it for stem cells.

You shouldn't rely on a TV show for your scientific knowledge Zaitsev.

It is not projected that cures can be found.  They don't do that in the medical journals.  Sure, stem cells could lead to cures for many problems, especially in regards to organ failure and genetics.  But timelines are unrealistic.  I know that you are too young to remember this (not a slam, but you just weren't around for it), but some stupid moron made that comment about AIDS when it first hit big on the scene.  "Oh, if it wasn't a gay mans illness, the government would acknowledge it, and there would be research.  A cure can be found in 5 years."  Well, it's been like 15 years of study now, and it's not even close to being cured.  According to my college microbiology professor, it most likely will never be (just like the common cold).  I don't remember all the reasons she gave, but it involved how the HIV (being a virus like a cold) could continue to mutate and mutate, so that no cure can work.  The hope (she said) is in finding something that fights off the symptons well enough and long enough to kill off the virus within the body.  Eventually, AIDS may be something that could be treated like a really bad cold or mono, but that's as close to a cure as they'll ever get.  And back to the point, 15 years later and they aren't there yet.

As for stem cell research, I'm anti-abortion (the way it's set up today, don't get me started on the abortion issue, where the FATHERS rights have gone completely unheard and lawmakers are pussies).  But, for any legal abortions (now and in the future) and for using the placenta and cord for stem cells, I'm all for the research.  I want to see some laws or regulations put into effect on what will be done (like the no cloning of human beings now).  There are too many ethical questions on the proper use of the knowledge yet, but there's nothing wrong with learning it.

I only brought up the subject from television that is not where my opinions come from. It IS infact projected by many health organizations that such an occurance of cures would happen however they cannot come out and say it without fear of scrutiny. Meanwhile also the greater good is babies who are not yet born, perhaps from say Rape can be used for this research. I am pro abortion, its a womens right to choose which is the least we can do seeing as they get payed 75?  to the mans $1

Whether abortion is murder or not, I don't feel it really should be an issue.  In most poor countries, one of the leading reasons they cannot break out of the cycle of poverty is because the birth rate is so high, they have too many babies and the population is larger than can be supported with a proper life.  I feel it is better to have the fetus "die" before it has any cognition of its life then to live a life in poverty or to be abandoned by its parents.  As such abortion should be legal.

Stemming from that, stem cell research should most certainly be acceptable, and given all the supply of stem cells as there are to be obtained.  The continued placement of religious morality over legal precedent in decisions is outrageous for a country that is supposed to have seperation of church and state.

Just take the issue of homosexual marrige...it currently isn't legal in a number of states.  That is unconstitutional discrimination.  Homosexuals should have every oppertunity that heterosexuals have...marrige, partner benefits, and the ability to adopt a child.  To not give that is illegal but it is being overlooked because in the eyes of many religious leaders, it is immoral.

Ahhh. Boo abortions... Yay Bucc...

Ben

Ben what about Rape or forced Prositution?

Theres no such thing as forced prostitutions. It's all rape...  And I thorougly believe that the baby is alive in the mom's womb. After 6 week I think he's living. He's "aborted" after like 10. So you are killing an innocent human being because bad memories. I believe rape should be punished with life in prison or capital punishment... Still, I believe killing an Innocent Unborn (but alive child) not much better. Also, why not just take the childs that die in the moms womb and do this? Why must we resort to killing an innocent child?!

P.S. Cringe, fetus is to comfort us. Of course abortion clinics call them fetus's. They want your money.

Ben

I seriously dont know but I am simply asking do babies at 10 weeks of age have feelings? If not is it any different then say...when you eat eggs for breakfast?

Ben, by forced prostitution I think he means being forced by a parent or such to be a prostitute, so it wouldn't be rape.

Like I said before, I don't really care if you want to call a fetus alive or a person.  If the mother doesn't want a child, that child isn't going to have a good life and is better off.  I certainly would suggest adoption over abortion if the pregnancy is into the third term, but I have no issues with early term abortion.  It is a great hardship on women to be pregnant and if they are young it is also dangerous.

If you people think that stoping stem cell research in this country will stop it from happening, wake up. Most scientists who care about hellping mankind simply move to a country where they don't have such laws.

all i have to say is this about abortion
1. Its legal
2. If you don't like it don't have one
3. If its against christian morals, then the church should stop members from having abortions
4. if anti abortion activists cared so much in saving lives why not protest abortion that happen in other countries.
5. Having a baby is a lifestyle choice and one drunken mistake shouldn't ruin your life.

The catholic church truely weirds me out, they don't like people having abortions, but yet they won't endorce the morning after pill (a pill that stops the egg from attacting to the uterus or something), the pill isn't a abortion pill. Its also disconcerning that they don't think that sex should be happening if your not trying to have a kid. The church is way overdue of another vatican councill (even though vatican 2 happened in the 60s). Yes i do know that the catholic church isn't the only group intent on stoping abortions but i don't want to make this a 2000 word post.

I am a athiest, i was born and raised catholic, however it pisses me off when other religious groups try to enforce their views on me.

Normally I dont respond to these threads but I just couldn't resist this time. There has been a trend in the past five years to not use embryonic stem cells for stem cell research. It was found with the study done by Wilmut, I. et. al., in 1996, with the famous lamb cloning experiments, that undifferentiated adult mamallian cells were viable for use as stem cells (Wilmut, I.; Schnieke, A. E.; McWhir, J.; Kind, A. J.; Campbell, K. H. S. Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. Nature. Volume 385(6619),27 February 1997?,pp 810-813.) I bring this to your attention because it is common for one to argue that stem cell research should not be done because abortion is immoral. Granted, an embryologic stem (ES) cell is a better vehicle for cloning than is an adult cell in an early differentiated state, they (ES cells, that is) are not necessary to do cloning research. From speaking with geneticists interested in this field I am told that the trend is to de-differentiate a multipotent cell, from, say, the skin of an adult, and use that for enucleation/renucleation studies. It is absolutely not necessary to require an aborted fetus to acquire stem cells. Also, with regards to abortion, many researchers acquire embryonic stem cells from the cord. They do not come from embryologic tissues because the tissue itself, as the definition of the word tissue would imply, is already differentiated. So, remember, if you are uncomfortable with the thought of someone carving up an embryo to get cells for research, that these are hematopoietic (from the blood) cells that have the potential to be pluripotent. To take this a step further, it is feasible to acquire pluripotent stem cells from the cord of a term fetus. Arguing that stem cell research is unethical because abortion is unethical is a moot point.

more to come

Bio

(http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~damnr6/yabbse/YaBBImages/banana.gif)

Looks like this'll be a triple post.

Next, regarding the idea that there are cures for dieases such as alzheimers and parkinsons in the next five years is kind of a silly statement. First, pathologists are able to recognize characteristic changes that occur in an alzheimers brain but the mechanism of disease is not yet known. The most recent study I found regarding Alzheimers and stem cell therapy was done in 2000 (Mattson MP. Emerging neuroprotective strategies for Alzheimer's disease: dietary restriction, telomerase activation, and stem cell therapy. Experimental Gerontology. 35(4):489-502, 2000 Jul.) and suggested that stem cells had the potential to be used to treat alzheimers. With this in mind, it commonly takes 20 or more years for results to transfer from the lab bench to the clinicians office. Parkinsons is a little more difficult with regards to the use of stem cells for treatment but it sounds like the use of stem cells for treatment is much closer than for alzheimers (Arenas E. Stem cells in the treatment of Parkinson's disease. Brain Research Bulletin. 57(6):795-808, 2002 Apr.). In the limited literary review I did this morning I saw not a single article that ever put a timeframe on when a "cure" might be found. It would be remiss for a medical professional to ever make such a statement. It is not unethical for someone on TV to make such a statement. Always ask yourself, what is the evidence to back that statement?

More to come.

Bio

 (http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~damnr6/yabbse/YaBBImages/banana.gif)

Now for the peanut gallery, with your host pfc_biohzrd!!

Abortion is a touchy issue in the United States and has been even before the historic Roe vs. Wade descision in 1973 ( check http://www.law.cornell.edu/index.html for more information). I dont believe one should view abortion as a method of birth control and I think that is the main problem with how American culture views abortion. It is not viewed as a medical procedure that is necessary to improve or save the mothers life but as a means of emergency birth control. "Oops, Bobby didnt pull out in time better go get an abortion!" I believe that attitude is wrong but that is the reality. I think I also must consider the case of a 14 year old girl who comes into my office pregnant requesting an abortion. Am I going to tell her no because i think abortion is wrong? I doubt it. It took quite a bit of courage for her to come into the office and tell me that not only is she pregnant but wants to end that accidental pregnancy. I am not going to send her on her way risking the possibilty that she will have some back alley abortion with the consequence of serious infection, infertlility, or death. Now, lets say the abortion was done, the fetus, if beyond about 20 weeks, is not wisked away before the mother can see it, in fact they commonly are shown to the mother. Why this is done you can decide for yourself but I see it as a excellent method of birth control in itself, especially for younger patients. In order for the fetus to be used for stem cell research the mother must sign legal documents allowing the intitution to use the products of conception for research. If the institution did not ask permission to use the fetus it would not be much different than grave robbing. So, in conclusion, I dont like theraputic abortion as a method of birth control but if it will improve the life of the mother I will not hesitate to do it.

I dont really feel like writing any more so I am done. Now, If you choose to tear apart my post, please do! But do not make statements in rebuttal unless you have hard bibliographic evidence to back it up. That is all I ask.

pwned.

Bio

I believe that both sides of the argument have thier points however in the long run I do believe it is the babies choice. I know both sides because I do debate class and ive had to argue both sides But i think that if Abortion creates available Stem Cell Research  (sorry for iffy wording there) then I am for it because it will whipe out disease. Plus if you dont get an abortion howd it feel to be deeply impoverished in most cases, and be knowing your an unwanted baby? Becuase I dont get why the US Government is against abortion (for the most part) but the welfare programs are a joke so once the baby is born the obviously dont care about the person there. I think they contridict thier own views in this senerio

Wow, damn fine post bio. Thanks for all the info.

That said, I'm going to have to agree completely with bio here. I think there are some very good medical reasons for abortion and for the most part I'm against abortion for non-medical reasons. BUT (and this is a BIG BUT) I can't say for sure what I would do in the situation because I've never been there and that is one decision that depends heavily on circumstance.

As far as abortion, there are just two things I would like to point out. First, it is murder; it is the act of ending a human life. Second, what is this bullshit about it being solely a woman's choice? Last time I checked, the kid was half belonging to the guy too. He should have just as much say.

As for stem cell research, regardless of other issues, if we end up with excess cells that would be going to the dumpster anyways, we might as well use them. However, we shouldn't do anything unethical to get them in the first place.

Ace,
      Many women who have an abortion dont have a father there so yes mostly it is thier choice. It is a womens right to choose that she doesnt want to have this kid to be brought up in most likely crappy circumstances, because the second the babies are out of that whom the world doesnt give a damn about them.

Ace, all a man does in terms of making a child is have an orgasm.  The woman has 9 months of extreme pain and hardship.  I think that alone gives the woman the rights.

when i was a radical environmentalist, i was against stem cell research. i now support it, but i am still iffy on where this research can lead. i know it has positive capabilities, but i know that there are people out there that want to be the first to clone a human being, and i think that they are, in addition to being very unethical, fucking nuts.