On 10/26/06, Russel Madere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > SEEM!!!! No ARE!!!! The jury is out, because they, meaning stem cell > researchers, have yet to produce results in humans. I am of the opinion > that we should fund what is producing results, gene therapy. It has nothing > to do with the morality of either process, it is purely results. I want to > see my buddies from the Army walk and talk again, and not have to ride > around like Stephen Hawkings because of ALS. > > All of the academic research I have seen towards a Parkinsons, MD or ALS > cure is with stem cells. That is fine with me as long as they do not > destroy a human embryo to produce them. Hell, I'll submit to lyposuction so > stem cells can be harvested from my fat ass and belly if it will help.
In the first paragraph, you state "It has nothing to do with the morality of either process". In the second paragraph, you say it's fine as long as "they do not destroy a human embryo". Which is, of course, a MORAL objection. It has EVERYTHING to do with the morality of either process, because the science is clear. That's been my point all along...you can't argue the science, because it's obvious...but I'll grant you a moral argument in a heartbeat. -- "If I had a million dollars, I'd buy you an exotic pet...like a llama, or an emu." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:218478 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
