Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
Intent On 7/22/06, RollinOn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But it'sok to kill innocent civilians in the name of Freedom? How come nobody will answer that question? It's being done by the same man, right? Why is it ok tosacrifice Iraqipeople? I guesscalling them collateral damage makes it ok? I'm just curious on what makeskilling thesepeople sodifferent so please answer. Mark ---Original Message--- From: tahouston Date: 07/22/06 15:26:04 To: Tim Thompson; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: quad Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture I could not have said it better! T Houston - Original Message - From: Tim Thompson To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: quad Sent: Friday, July 21, 2006 3:09 PM Subject: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture The Stem Cell DilemaIn my opinion, the deeper issue requires an insight into how an Inch keeps turning into the horror mile.Org Roe vs Wade was nothing more than lifting the restriction on abortion during the 1st tri-mester That inch was twisted into a Constitutional Right to the point of argueing for sucking the brains out of the skull just before birth. Approx 47,000,000 abortions have been committed, and a good portion of those were AFTER that 1st tri-mester. Org Child Abuse laws were about real abuse, now they've been taken so far as to punish parents who ground their brats, after every other form of attitude adjustment has been declared child Abuse. Since mom can't wash out the mouth of her brat, society now is forced to endurelistening to teenagers AND CHILDREN who could make a sailor blush. There is no Seperation of Church and State clause in the 1st Amendment, however the part of prohibiting free exercise thereof is totaly ignored. Now its been twisted into prevention of exercise thereof, declaring a public place can't allow it. Our modern Indoctrination Centers aka Public Schools have robbed an entire generation of the truth in favor of Political Correctness. So a whole generation can't see how wrong those decisions are. For this reason, too many people don't have the knowledge required to see through sound bite news and political issues.Remember, the USA wouldn't exist w/o Christianity, as FREEDOM in itself is derived from Freedom of Choice, and our Bill of Rights got their seeds from such Christian philosophies including Love thy Neighbor. Check for yourself at http://wwweadshome.com/QuotesoftheFounders.htm Now Organized Religion is a man made Idea, and that is a whole can of worms which divides and seperates instead of just following the basic principles.For that reason I consider myself a Christian, but I don't believe in organized religion. But I do see the possibility for abuse if the Inch is given regarding embryoninic research.This is based on the previous abuses, not my religious views.Today disgaurded fetuses tomorrow it could be embryo's created just for harvesting. Believe me, THAT is a real moral dilema. One where human life has no value.Stunt
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
So they were asacrifice in order to accomplish a goal. I say this because it wasa known fact that innocent people would die, right? So please once again tell me howthis is different. Mark ---Original Message--- From: Jim Lubin Date: 07/22/06 22:36:35 To: RollinOn; Tim Thompson; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; tahouston Cc: quad-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the "Big Picture" Since you said please...Innocent people are not purposely being targeted to be killed. At least not by U.S. military. The U.S. military uses every option available to avoid killing innocent people. In the case where those soldiers are accused of raping that girl and killing the family, if they are found guilty after an investigation and court marshal, then they should get the death penalty. Removing the stem cells from a human embryo means it is purposely being killed. President Truman weight the options and decided to use 2 atomic bombs to try to end WWII. It was his decision alone to make. Some say he was right, some say he was right to kill a few thousand people to end the war where many were being killed. Over 60 years later some people think he made the wrong decision, but the rest of the world had to live with his decision.Like President Truman's decision to use the atomic bombs, it was a tough decision to make. Unlike President Truman's decision, Congress had the chance to override President Bush's decision but failed to do so. At 03:11 PM 7/22/2006, RollinOn wrote: But it's ok to kill innocent civilians in the name of Freedom? How come nobody will answer that question?It's being done by the same man, right?Why is it ok to sacrifice Iraqi people?I guess calling them collateral damage makes it ok?I'm just curious on what makes killing these people so different so please answer. Jim Lubin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://makoa.org/jim disAbility Resources: http://www.makoa.orgPlease Help: Inkjet Toner Cartridge Recycling
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
So they knew they were going to kill them butit wasn't there intent and that's your answer? So let's try not to kill the embryos in the process and we have a compromise. Mark ---Original Message--- From: Tim Thompson Date: 07/23/06 14:02:26 To: RollinOn Cc: quad-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the "Big Picture" "Intent" On 7/22/06, RollinOn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But it'sok to kill innocent civilians in the name of Freedom? How come nobody will answer that question? It's being done by the same man, right? Why is it ok tosacrifice Iraqipeople? I guesscalling them collateral damage makes it ok? I'm just curious on what makeskilling thesepeople sodifferent so please answer. Mark ---Original Message--- From: tahouston Date: 07/22/06 15:26:04 To: Tim Thompson; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: quad Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the "Big Picture" I could not have said it better! T Houston - Original Message - From: Tim Thompson To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: quad Sent: Friday, July 21, 2006 3:09 PM Subject: [QUAD-L] Viewing the "Big Picture" The Stem Cell "Dilema"In my opinion, the deeper issue requires an insight into how an "Inch" keeps turning into the horror mile.Org "Roe vs Wade" was nothing more than lifting the restriction on abortion during the 1st tri-mester That inch was twisted into a "Constitutional Right" to the point of argueing for sucking the brains out of the skull just before birth. Approx 47,000,000 abortions have been committed, and a good portion of those were AFTER that 1st tri-mester. Org "Child Abuse" laws were about "real" abuse, now they've been taken so far as to punish parents who "ground" their brats, after every other form of "attitude adjustment" has been declared "child Abuse". Since mom can't wash out the mouth of her brat, society now is forced to endurelistening to teenagers AND CHILDREN who could make a sailor blush. There is no "Seperation of Church and State" clause in the 1st Amendment, however the part of "prohibiting free exercise thereof" is totaly ignored. Now its been twisted into prevention of "exercise thereof", declaring a public place can't allow it. Our modern "Indoctrination Centers" aka "Public Schools" have robbed an entire generation of the truth in favor of "Political Correctness". So a whole generation can't see how wrong those decisions are. For this reason, too many people don't have the knowledge required to see through sound bite news and political issues.Remember, the USA wouldn't exist w/o "Christianity", as "FREEDOM" in itself is derived from "Freedom of Choice", and our "Bill of Rights" got their seeds from such Christian philosophies including "Love thy Neighbor". Check for yourself at http://wwweadshome.com/QuotesoftheFounders.htm Now "Organized Religion" is a man made Idea, and that is a whole can of worms which divides and seperates instead of just following the basic principles.For that reason I consider myself a Christian, but I don't believe in organized religion. But I do see the possibility for abuse if the "Inch" is given regarding embryoninic research.This is based on the previous abuses, not my religious views.Today "disgaurded fetuses" tomorrow it could be embryo's created just for harvesting. Believe me, THAT is a real moral dilema. One where human life has no value.Stunt
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
In a message dated 7/23/2006 2:33:12 PM Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: "Intent" I wish, hope and pray that nothing bad happens to our standing president, his family or loved ones. But I wonder if the President would have acted any differently if a close family member was in need of precious cells. Would it have been a moral dilemma. Intent is just that. W
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
It is not ok to kill people. We are talking about exploiting the availability of human tissue. Just stem cells. These are not and never will be humans. These are unassigned cells. They have no thoughts, no ambitions, no sense of self, and most importantly, no womb. If I gave you all the pieces of a an automobile, you would not own a car. Even a good mechanic would only own junk because of the lack of tools. It isn't the big picture, its the small minds. john In a message dated 7/22/2006 11:36:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Since you said please...Innocent people are not purposely being targeted to be killed. At least not by U.S. military. The U.S. military uses every option available to avoid killing innocent people. In the case where those soldiers are accused of raping that girl and killing the family, if they are found guilty after an investigation and court marshal, then they should get the death penalty. Removing the stem cells from a human embryo means it is purposely being killed. President Truman weight the options and decided to use 2 atomic bombs to try to end WWII. It was his decision alone to make. Some say he was right, some say he was right to kill a few thousand people to end the war where many were being killed. Over 60 years later some people think he made the wrong decision, but the rest of the world had to live with his decision.Like President Truman's decision to use the atomic bombs, it was a tough decision to make. Unlike President Truman's decision, Congress had the chance to override President Bush's decision but failed to do so. At 03:11 PM 7/22/2006, RollinOn wrote: But it's ok to kill innocent civilians in the name of Freedom? How come nobody will answer that question?It's being done by the same man, right?Why is it ok to sacrifice Iraqi people?I guess calling them collateral damage makes it ok?I'm just curious on what makes killing these people so different so please answer. Jim Lubin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://makoa.org/jim disAbility Resources: http://www.makoa.orgPlease Help: Inkjet Toner Cartridge Recycling
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
For the record John I'm with youI don't believewe aretalking about killing humans with Embryonic stem cell research. I was just trying to understand how these 2 killings are differentinBush's head. Markl ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 07/23/06 15:28:46 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: quad-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the "Big Picture" It is not ok to kill people. We are talking about exploiting the availability of human tissue. Just stem cells. These are not and never will be humans. These are unassigned cells. They have no thoughts, no ambitions, no sense of self, and most importantly, no womb. If I gave you all the pieces of a an automobile, you would not own a car. Even a good mechanic would only own junk because of the lack of tools. It isn't the big picture, its the small minds. john In a message dated 7/22/2006 11:36:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Since you said please...Innocent people are not purposely being targeted to be killed. At least not by U.S. military. The U.S. military uses every option available to avoid killing innocent people. In the case where those soldiers are accused of raping that girl and killing the family, if they are found guilty after an investigation and court marshal, then they should get the death penalty. Removing the stem cells from a human embryo means it is purposely being killed. President Truman weight the options and decided to use 2 atomic bombs to try to end WWII. It was his decision alone to make. Some say he was right, some say he was right to kill a few thousand people to end the war where many were being killed. Over 60 years later some people think he made the wrong decision, but the rest of the world had to live with his decision.Like President Truman's decision to use the atomic bombs, it was a tough decision to make. Unlike President Truman's decision, Congress had the chance to override President Bush's decision but failed to do so. At 03:11 PM 7/22/2006, RollinOn wrote: But it's ok to kill innocent civilians in the name of Freedom? How come nobody will answer that question?It's being done by the same man, right?Why is it ok to sacrifice Iraqi people?I guess calling them collateral damage makes it ok?I'm just curious on what makes killing these people so different so please answer. Jim Lubin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://makoa.org/jim disAbility Resources: http://www.makoa.orgPlease Help: Inkjet Toner Cartridge Recycling
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
At 12:52 PM 7/23/2006, RollinOn wrote: So they knew they were going to kill them but it wasn't there intent and that's your answer? So let's try not to kill the embryos in the process and we have a compromise. Yes, that is my answer. I am all for stem cell research that does not involve taking (what I consider) another life to improve my life. I will not do whatever it takes to make my life better. It's just like organ donation, I would not want someone killed for me to receive a transplant. Removing stem cells from an embryo kills the embryo. You are not removing stem cells from something that has already died. Since there are other sources of stem cells that do not involve the purposeful taking of a life, that research SHOULD be pursued. I'm sure you are aware that there were 2 bills that were going through Congress. The Alternative Pluripotent Stem Cell Therapies Enhancement Act pass unanimously by the Senate but was killed by the Democrats in the House for purely political reasons (I looked up the votes). They did not want President Bush to be able to sign this one so they could claim he is against all stem cell research when he vetoed the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. If it was such a simple right or wrong then Congress should have been easily able to gather enough votes to override the veto. Jim Lubin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://makoa.org/jim disAbility Resources: http://www.makoa.org Please Help: Inkjet Toner Cartridge Recycling
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
At 01:27 PM 7/23/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is not ok to kill people. We are talking about exploiting the availability of human tissue. Just stem cells. These are not and never will be humans. These are unassigned cells. They have no thoughts, no ambitions, no sense of self, and most importantly, no womb. If I gave you all the pieces of a an automobile, you would not own a car. Even a good mechanic would only own junk because of the lack of tools. It isn't the big picture, its the small minds. john Just another thought about what should be considered a human life. At this point in time, I do believe that a human egg and human sperm make a human being from the time they are joined, from that point the zygote contains all the 46 chromosomes need to be human and it continues to develop. When NASA scientist talk about life on Mars they are talking about microscopic bacteria. ALH84001 - The Life on Mars meteorite On August 7, 1996, an historic press conference was held at NASA Headquarters in Washington DC. News that scientists had found evidence of life in a Mars meterorite had leaked out, and NASA had to make an announcement. A few minutes before, President Clinton made these remarks at the White House before heading out on a trip to California: This is the product of years of exploration and months of intensive study by some of the world's most distinguished scientists. Like all discoveries, this one will and should continue to be reviewed, examined and scrutinized. It must be confirmed by other scientists... I am determined that the American space program will put its full intellectual power and technological prowess behind the search for further evidence of life on Mars. At the press conference, several scientists from NASA and Stanford University announced their findings -- they confirmed that they had found evidence of ancient, fossilized, microscopic life from a Martian meteorite, known as ALH84001. Implications of Mars Life While the life they talked about was only microscopic, it has several implications for us macroscopic creatures. If life on Mars is ever proven to exist (or have existed at some point in time), it would mean that the creation of life is not something that happens because of freak chance or divine influence, but is in fact a probable occurrence given the right conditions. Even further, if all that life requires is an aqueous solution like liquid water to grow and thrive (which is the current theory), then the universe is literally teeming with life. The suspected liquid water oceans on some of Jupiter's moons (Europa and Callisto) could be filled with life, and life could still be present underneath the Martian surface, where liquid water and thermal energy are still present. (source: http://www.marsnews.com/focus/life/ ) No one called those scientist nuts or lunatics. President Clinton called them some of the world's most distinguished scientists. If that's what scientist consider life then why not, on the basis of a complete biological analysis, the living human embryo - from the moment of the union of the gametes - should be considered a human being with a well defined identity? (paraphrased from the document Scientific and Therapeutic Use of Human Embryonic Stem Cells http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/documents/rc_pa_acdlife_doc_2824_cellule-staminali_en.html ). Given the right conditions, the human embryo will continue to develop and grow. Jim Lubin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://makoa.org/jim disAbility Resources: http://www.makoa.org Please Help: Inkjet Toner Cartridge Recycling
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
Speech to the U.N. By George W. Bush Americans understand the costs of conflict because we have paid them in the past. War has no certainty except the certainty of sacrifice. So I think we all knew. Mark ---Original Message--- From: Jim Lubin Date: 07/23/06 16:14:47 To: RollinOn; Tim Thompson Cc: quad-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the "Big Picture" At 12:52 PM 7/23/2006, RollinOn wrote: So they knew they were going to kill them but it wasn't there intent and that's your answer?So let's try not to kill the embryos in the process and we have a compromise.Yes, that is my answer.I am all for stem cell research that does not involve taking (what I consider) another life to improve my life. I will not do whatever it takes to make my life better. It's just like organ donation, I would not want someone killed for me to receive a transplant. Removing stem cells from an embryo kills the embryo. You are not removing stem cells from something that has already died. Since there are other sources of stem cells that do not involve the purposeful taking of a life, that research SHOULD be pursued. I'm sure you are aware that there were 2 bills that were going through Congress. The Alternative Pluripotent Stem Cell Therapies Enhancement Act pass unanimously by the Senate but was killed by the Democrats in the House for purely political reasons (I looked up the votes). They did not want President Bush to be able to sign this one so they could claim he is against all stem cell research when he vetoed the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. If it was such a simple right or wrong then Congress should have been easily able to gather enough votes to override the veto. Jim Lubin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://makoa.org/jim disAbility Resources: http://www.makoa.orgPlease Help: Inkjet Toner Cartridge Recycling
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
At 08:34 PM 7/22/2006 -0700, Jim Lubin said something that elicited my response: Innocent people are not purposely being targeted to be killed. At least not by U.S. military. The U.S. military uses every option available to avoid killing innocent people. You're kidding, right? How many times on the news have we heard that 'The US bombed a 'suspected' terrorist (house, car, etc.) killing everyone inside' innocent or not. The sad fact is we invaded Iraq for no reason. Over 2,500 US solders dead and 100,000 Iraqis dead. 'Bring em on'. If we were invaded by a foreign country how would you feel? And don't tell me Saddam was an evil dictator. There are many countries ruled by far worse than he. Dan V
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
Jim, How do you feel about us killing cows and chickens to eat? What about euthanizing dogs and cats at the pound to control the population? Do rats and monkeys fall into the protected group? How about killing flys and mosquitoes - they feed the larger animals you know. In a related point - our Catholic priest said today birth control like condoms, creams and IUDs are a violation of God's natural law but family size can be regulated by practicing abstinence during times of fertility. He didn't cover vasectomies or tubal ligations but I think those would be considered violations of natural law as well. As long as 'God's natural law' is the topic, where do you think artificial resuscitation figures in? If you blow somebody's lungs up a few times and he comes out of it is that different than breathing for him the rest of his life? The lines get pretty fuzzy. Dave P.S. I believe in the natural law that the strongest survive and the rest are at their mercy. In a message dated 7/23/2006 2:15:12 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At 01:27 PM 7/23/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is not ok to kill people. We are talking about exploiting the availability of human tissue. Just stem cells. These are not and never will be humans. These are unassigned cells. They have no thoughts, no ambitions, no sense of self, and most importantly, no womb.If I gave you all the pieces of a an automobile, you would not own a car. Even a good mechanic would only own junk because of the lack of tools. It isn't the big picture, its the small minds.johnJust another thought about what should be considered "a human life". At this point in time, I do believe that a human egg and human sperm make a human being from the time they are joined, from that point the zygote contains all the 46 chromosomes need to be human and it continues to develop. When NASA scientist talk about "life on Mars" they are talking about microscopic bacteria. ALH84001 - The Life on Mars meteorite On August 7, 1996, an historic press conference was held at NASA Headquarters in Washington DC. News that scientists had found evidence of life in a Mars meterorite had leaked out, and NASA had to make an announcement. A few minutes before, President Clinton made these remarks at the White House before heading out on a trip to California: "This is the product of years of exploration and months of intensive study by some of the world's most distinguished scientists. Like all discoveries, this one will and should continue to be reviewed, examined and scrutinized. It must be confirmed by other scientists... I am determined that the American space program will put its full intellectual power and technological prowess behind the search for further evidence of life on Mars." At the press conference, several scientists from NASA and Stanford University announced their findings -- they confirmed that they had found evidence of ancient, fossilized, microscopic life from a Martian meteorite, known as ALH84001. Implications of Mars Life While the life they talked about was only microscopic, it has several implications for us macroscopic creatures. If life on Mars is ever proven to exist (or have existed at some point in time), it would mean that the creation of life is not something that happens because of freak chance or divine influence, but is in fact a probable occurrence given the right conditions. Even further, if all that life requires is an aqueous solution like liquid water to grow and thrive (which is the current theory), then the universe is literally teeming with life. The suspected liquid water oceans on some of Jupiter's moons (Europa and Callisto) could be filled with life, and life could still be present underneath the Martian surface, where liquid water and thermal energy are still present. (source: http://www.marsnews.com/focus/life/ )No one called those scientist "nuts" or "lunatics". President Clinton called them "some of the world's most distinguished scientists."If that's what scientist consider "life" then why not, on the basis of a complete biological analysis, the living human embryo - from the moment of the union of the gametes - should be considered a human being with a well defined identity? (paraphrased from the document "Scientific and Therapeutic Use of Human Embryonic Stem Cells" http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/documents/rc_pa_acdlife_doc_2824_cellule-staminali_en.html ).Given the right conditions, the human embryo will continue to develop and grow. Jim Lubin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://makoa.org/jim disAbility Resources: http://www.makoa.orgPlease Help: Inkjet Toner Cartridge Recycling Dave
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
Your right on Dave! Nature has to take its coarse, if every embryo became a human the world would be so over populated no one could servive. Were already on the road to self destruction, hell if nature took it's coarse none of us quads would alive to worry about stem cells. Don't get me wrong I won't to walk again, and im glad for modern medicine that save so many lives. Think about it! Not so long ago when someone was critical there was no cure so nature took it's coarse. I think Bush doesn't won't to see a cure , same way as he's put so many in harms way all over the world. Nature means less population! Silas - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: quad-list@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2006 2:59 PM Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the "Big Picture" Jim, How do you feel about us killing cows and chickens to eat? What about euthanizing dogs and cats at the pound to control the population? Do rats and monkeys fall into the protected group? How about killing flys and mosquitoes - they feed the larger animals you know. In a related point - our Catholic priest said today birth control like condoms, creams and IUDs are a violation of God's natural law but family size can be regulated by practicing abstinence during times of fertility. He didn't cover vasectomies or tubal ligations but I think those would be considered violations of natural law as well. As long as 'God's natural law' is the topic, where do you think artificial resuscitation figures in? If you blow somebody's lungs up a few times and he comes out of it is that different than breathing for him the rest of his life? The lines get pretty fuzzy. Dave P.S. I believe in the natural law that the strongest survive and the rest are at their mercy. In a message dated 7/23/2006 2:15:12 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At 01:27 PM 7/23/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is not ok to kill people. We are talking about exploiting the availability of human tissue. Just stem cells. These are not and never will be humans. These are unassigned cells. They have no thoughts, no ambitions, no sense of self, and most importantly, no womb.If I gave you all the pieces of a an automobile, you would not own a car. Even a good mechanic would only own junk because of the lack of tools. It isn't the big picture, its the small minds.johnJust another thought about what should be considered "a human life". At this point in time, I do believe that a human egg and human sperm make a human being from the time they are joined, from that point the zygote contains all the 46 chromosomes need to be human and it continues to develop. When NASA scientist talk about "life on Mars" they are talking about microscopic bacteria. ALH84001 - The Life on Mars meteorite On August 7, 1996, an historic press conference was held at NASA Headquarters in Washington DC. News that scientists had found evidence of life in a Mars meterorite had leaked out, and NASA had to make an announcement. A few minutes before, President Clinton made these remarks at the White House before heading out on a trip to California: "This is the product of years of exploration and months of intensive study by some of the world's most distinguished scientists. Like all discoveries, this one will and should continue to be reviewed, examined and scrutinized. It must be confirmed by other scientists... I am determined that the American space program will put its full intellectual power and technological prowess behind the search for further evidence of life on Mars." At the press conference, several scientists from NASA and Stanford University announced their findings -- they confirmed that they had found evidence of ancient, fossilized, microscopic life from a Martian meteorite, known as ALH84001. Implications of Mars Life While the life they talked about was only microscopic, it has several implications for us macroscopic creatures. If life on Mars is ever proven to exist (or have existed at some point in time), it would mean that the creation of life is not something that happens because of freak chance or divine influence, but is in fact a probable occurrence given the right conditions. Even further, if all that life requires is an aqueous solution like liquid water to grow and thrive (which is the current theory), then the universe is literally teeming with life. The suspected liquid water oceans on some of Jupiter's moons (Europa and Callisto) could be filled with life, and life could still be present underneath the Martian surface, where liquid water and thermal
Re: [QUAD-L] So, what do ya think of stem cell chat?
I don't think I've changed anyone"s mind about stem cells. I think everyone here has there opinions. I'm sure the moral arguement against use of embryonic stem cells wouldn't exist if they caused hair to grow on bald people , or guarenteed weight loss while imcreasing the size of your penis/boobs. The agonizingly stupid part is that someday it probably will effect a cure for those conditions as well. john
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
Bush jumped at Sadam to finish what his daddy started - Very few yelled at GHWB in '91. Sadam was the biggest bully in the area blowing all sorts of rhetoric at us - he needed spanking. It seemed it would be 'free'. O'C In a message dated 7/23/2006 4:03:59 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Your right on Dave! Nature has to take its coarse, if every embryo became a human the world would be so over populated no one could servive. Were already on the road to self destruction, hell if nature took it's coarse none of us quads would alive to worry about stem cells. Don't get me wrong I won't to walk again, and im glad for modern medicine that save so many lives. Think about it! Not so long ago when someone was critical there was no cure so nature took it's coarse. I think Bush doesn't won't to see a cure , same way as he's put so many in harms way all over the world. Nature means less population! Silas - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: quad-list@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2006 2:59 PM Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the "Big Picture" Jim, How do you feel about us killing cows and chickens to eat? What about euthanizing dogs and cats at the pound to control the population? Do rats and monkeys fall into the protected group? How about killing flys and mosquitoes - they feed the larger animals you know. In a related point - our Catholic priest said today birth control like condoms, creams and IUDs are a violation of God's natural law but family size can be regulated by practicing abstinence during times of fertility. He didn't cover vasectomies or tubal ligations but I think those would be considered violations of natural law as well. As long as 'God's natural law' is the topic, where do you think artificial resuscitation figures in? If you blow somebody's lungs up a few times and he comes out of it is that different than breathing for him the rest of his life? The lines get pretty fuzzy. Dave P.S. I believe in the natural law that the strongest survive and the rest are at their mercy. In a message dated 7/23/2006 2:15:12 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At 01:27 PM 7/23/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is not ok to kill people. We are talking about exploiting the availability of human tissue. Just stem cells. These are not and never will be humans. These are unassigned cells. They have no thoughts, no ambitions, no sense of self, and most importantly, no womb.If I gave you all the pieces of a an automobile, you would not own a car. Even a good mechanic would only own junk because of the lack of tools. It isn't the big picture, its the small minds.johnJust another thought about what should be considered "a human life". At this point in time, I do believe that a human egg and human sperm make a human being from the time they are joined, from that point the zygote contains all the 46 chromosomes need to be human and it continues to develop. When NASA scientist talk about "life on Mars" they are talking about microscopic bacteria. ALH84001 - The Life on Mars meteorite On August 7, 1996, an historic press conference was held at NASA Headquarters in Washington DC. News that scientists had found evidence of life in a Mars meterorite had leaked out, and NASA had to make an announcement. A few minutes before, President Clinton made these remarks at the White House before heading out on a trip to California: "This is the product of years of exploration and months of intensive study by some of the world's most distinguished scientists. Like all discoveries, this one will and should continue to be reviewed, examined and scrutinized. It must be confirmed by other scientists... I am determined that the American space program will put its full intellectual power and technological prowess behind the search for further evidence of life on Mars." At the press conference, several scientists from NASA and Stanford University announced their findings -- they confirmed that they had found evidence of ancient, fossilized, microscopic life from a Martian meteorite, known as ALH84001. Implications of Mars Life While the life they talked about was only microscopic, it has several implications for us macroscopic creatures. If life on Mars is ever proven to exist (or have existed at some point in time), it would mean that the creation of life is not something that happens because of freak chance or divine
[QUAD-L] Emailing: Our_tax_dollars_at_wo
how about this? alan The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments:Shortcut to: http://www.sptimes.com/2006/07/23/Columns/Our_tax_dollars_at_wo.shtmlNote: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled. Our_tax_dollars_at_wo.url Description: Binary data
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
Not an evil dictator, really? You missed all the reports huh? Kuwaties got in his way, Kurds were gassed in very large numbers. He shot, killed, raped, plundered hundreds of thousands of his own countrymen so he was certainly evil. He might not have been the MOST evil dictator on the planet but it's hard to find a 'good' reason to go after the MOST evil. This war was fueled by oil, revenge, and wmd talk. Edie Amin simply killed his own citizens. No oil, no thumbing his nose at the US, no real threat to anyone outside his own country. He was evil but we didn't care. O'C In a message dated 7/23/2006 2:51:18 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At 08:34 PM 7/22/2006 -0700, Jim Lubin said something that elicited my response: Innocent people are not purposely being targeted to be killed. At least not by U.S. military. The U.S. military uses every option available to avoid killing innocent people. You're kidding, right? How many times on the news have we heard that 'The US bombed a 'suspected' terrorist (house, car, etc.) killing everyone inside' innocent or not. The sad fact is we invaded Iraq for no reason. Over 2,500 US solders dead and 100,000 Iraqis dead. 'Bring em on'. If we were invaded by a foreign country how would you feel? And don't tell me Saddam was an evil dictator. There are many countries ruled by far worse than he.Dan V Dave www.daveoconnell.com c3-inc-1967
Re: [QUAD-L] Emailing: Our_tax_dollars_at_wo
I think Bush would violate any or all morals to justify his morals. God only knows what he believes. White house leakls are good if they are authorized. Lies are good if they advance his position. Killing is good if it advances his position. But taxes on rich are bad! John In a message dated 7/23/2006 8:01:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: how about this? alan The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments:Shortcut to: http://www.sptimes.com/2006/07/23/Columns/Our_tax_dollars_at_wo.shtmlNote: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled.
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
Dave, I personally feel HUMAN life needs to be protected when possible. Hmm, let me rephrase that to innocent human lifes. I do believe in the death penalty for violent criminals when their crime can be proven without any doubt. When it comes to non-human life (animals and insects), treat them humanly but I have no problem using animals for food or medical research. I do not agree with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. If you think protecting human embryos is an extreme position for someone to take, be thankful that a person who shares the principles of PETA is not running things, there would be no medical research at all that involved using animals. At 02:59 PM 7/23/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jim, How do you feel about us killing cows and chickens to eat? What about euthanizing dogs and cats at the pound to control the population? Do rats and monkeys fall into the protected group? How about killing flys and mosquitoes - they feed the larger animals you know. In a related point - our Catholic priest said today birth control like condoms, creams and IUDs are a violation of God's natural law but family size can be regulated by practicing abstinence during times of fertility. He didn't cover vasectomies or tubal ligations but I think those would be considered violations of natural law as well. As long as 'God's natural law' is the topic, where do you think artificial resuscitation figures in? If you blow somebody's lungs up a few times and he comes out of it is that different than breathing for him the rest of his life? The lines get pretty fuzzy. Dave P.S. I believe in the natural law that the strongest survive and the rest are at their mercy. Dave www.daveoconnell.com c3-inc-1967
Re: [QUAD-L] Emailing: Our_tax_dollars_at_wo
John, We think so much alike it's scary. Half the time I don't post because all I could say would be ditto. Dan At 08:13 PM 7/23/2006 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said something that elicited my response: I think Bush would violate any or all morals to justify his morals. God only knows what he believes. White house leakls are good if they are authorized. Lies are good if they advance his position. Killing is good if it advances his position. But taxes on rich are bad! John
Re: [QUAD-L] Viewing the Big Picture
He was wahabi and bath and you are right! I didn't care what saddam did as long as he did it to his friends, the kuwaitis, the saudis, the kurds and the iranians. Why should America care if we are buying oil from a sadistic rotten dictator, instead of another sadistic rotten dictator. A little history. We dealt with Saddam while knowing about his gas attacks. We knew the kuwaitis were stealing oil from iraq for eight years during the iraq iran war. He asked our ambassador to iraq rwo days before invading kuwait, "does America have interests in the stability or the direction of the kuwaiti royal family?" she ansered, "no.". Kuwaiti's are sunni and wahabi and for the most part, they are relatives to many of the sunnis in southern iraq as the border is completely unnatural. America is vitally interested in selling oilfield and pipeline equipment to kuwait. Kuwait's sole value to the US is as an oil distribultor. Kuwaitis tend to dislike Americans. Saudis are a joke. Saudis hate Americans and tolerate us because of money. Saudis feel this way about all westerners and even many muslims. Saudis support 99% of all anti western terrorism, even though they may hate the terrorists. ie: palestinians, hesbollah, hamas. Alquaeda was welcome in Saudi society untill after the invasion of afghanistan by US. Obviously, it is merely underground. In the 1970's the US supported the Shaw of Iran. (we did put him in power) We were building him a nuclear power plant, No Shit! He made Saddam look like a piker. He even tortured Americans..and got away with it! iranians are mostly shi'a and for some reason most of them are not anti western, but the theocratic gov't they have is radically anti western, and building a nuclear power plant without American help. Wahabi teachings that go on in most sunni areas teaches that muslims such as shi'a are better than Christians but should be beheaded for the way they interpret the q'uran. Palestinians are sunni, shi'a and christian and largely despised in many arab countries. Jordanians know that the respect they get from other arab states comes from the respect the people show their king (go figure). It does earn them cheap oil. If,in 1991, America's responce to the Iraqi attack on Kuwait had been to do nothing. Or to do nothing on promise of 10 dollar a barrel oil for 25years, we would have lost nothing and harmed no one in the middle east. We would have been viewed as an honest broker. We put infidels in their holy land in 1991. Not for business. We put them their to kill muslims. Let us take great shame in our foriegn policies. We no longer just lie to the arabs and muslims,,now we lie to ourselves. We can't wash the blood from our hands while we kill more of them each day. Bring our troops home Mr Bush. You wouldn't like an arab democracy anyway. P.S. Read about Arab American relations. It is all about money, except the part about religion. john In a message dated 7/23/2006 8:07:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Not an evil dictator, really? You missed all the reports huh? Kuwaties got in his way, Kurds were gassed in very large numbers. He shot, killed, raped, plundered hundreds of thousands of his own countrymen so he was certainly evil. He might not have been the MOST evil dictator on the planet but it's hard to find a 'good' reason to go after the MOST evil. This war was fueled by oil, revenge, and wmd talk. Edie Amin simply killed his own citizens. No oil, no thumbing his nose at the US, no real threat to anyone outside his own country. He was evil but we didn't care. O'C
