[QUAD-L] Stem cell research under attack and Michigan, vote no on Senate bills 647-652
BODY {
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 12px; COLOR: #00; LINE-HEIGHT:
16px; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; BACKGROUND-COLOR:
#ff
}
#message {
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 12px; COLOR: #00; LINE-HEIGHT:
16px; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif
}
P {
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 12px; COLOR: #00; LINE-HEIGHT:
16px; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif
}
#message P {
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 12px; COLOR: #00; LINE-HEIGHT:
16px; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif
}
TD {
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 12px; COLOR: #00; LINE-HEIGHT:
16px; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif
}
#message TD {
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 12px; COLOR: #00; LINE-HEIGHT:
16px; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif
}
H1 {
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 18px; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 4px; COLOR:
#2d6985; LINE-HEIGHT: 22px; FONT-FAMILY: Palatino Linotype, Book Antiqua,
Palatino, serif
}
#message H1 {
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 18px; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 4px; COLOR:
#2d6985; LINE-HEIGHT: 22px; FONT-FAMILY: Palatino Linotype, Book Antiqua,
Palatino, serif
}
H2 {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 12px; COLOR: #00;
LINE-HEIGHT: 14px
}
#message H2 {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 12px; COLOR: #00;
LINE-HEIGHT: 14px
}
H3 {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 11px; COLOR: #00;
LINE-HEIGHT: 13px
}
#message H3 {
MARGIN-TOP: 0px; FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 11px; COLOR: #00;
LINE-HEIGHT: 13px
}
A {
COLOR: #922112; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
A:link {
COLOR: #922112; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
A:visited {
COLOR: #922112; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
#message A {
COLOR: #922112; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
#message A:link {
COLOR: #922112; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
#message A:visited {
COLOR: #922112; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
A:hover {
COLOR: #c82112
}
A:active {
COLOR: #c82112
}
#message A:hover {
COLOR: #c82112
}
#message A:active {
COLOR: #c82112
}
.smaller {
FONT-SIZE: 9px; LINE-HEIGHT: 12px
}
.smaller TD {
FONT-SIZE: 9px; LINE-HEIGHT: 12px
}
.smaller P {
FONT-SIZE: 9px; LINE-HEIGHT: 12px
}
#message .smaller {
FONT-SIZE: 9px; LINE-HEIGHT: 12px
}
#message .smaller TD {
FONT-SIZE: 9px; LINE-HEIGHT: 12px
}
#message .smaller P {
FONT-SIZE: 9px; LINE-HEIGHT: 12px
}
.larger {
FONT-SIZE: 13px; LINE-HEIGHT: 16px
}
.larger TD {
FONT-SIZE: 13px; LINE-HEIGHT: 16px
}
.larger P {
FONT-SIZE: 13px; LINE-HEIGHT: 16px
}
#message .larger {
FONT-SIZE: 13px; LINE-HEIGHT: 16px
}
#message .larger TD {
FONT-SIZE: 13px; LINE-HEIGHT: 16px
}
#message .larger P {
FONT-SIZE: 13px; LINE-HEIGHT: 16px
}
.rightSide {
FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 8px 12px
}
#message .rightSide {
FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 8px 12px
}
.leftSide {
FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 12px 8px 0px
}
#message .leftSide {
FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 12px 8px 0px
}
#content {
PADDING-RIGHT: 15px; PADDING-LEFT: 15px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 15px;
PADDING-TOP: 15px
}
Urge the Michigan State Senate to vote No on Senate Bills 647-652
Dear Stem Cell Research Supporter:
Hope for Michigan patients is under attack and we need your help TODAY!
This Wednesday, 12/20, tomorrow at noon, the Senate Health Policy Committee is
expected to vote on politically motivated and unnecessary legislation
restricting important stem cell research that can save lives. We need your help
in opposing these bills, Senate Bills 647-652.
MESSAGES FROM OUT OF STATE SUPPORTERS VERY WELCOME!
PLEASE call today and Wednesday, and e-mail ALL senators on the Health Policy
Committee as well as YOUR senator (if you are a Michigan resident) and urge
them to vote No on Senate Bills 647-652.
Health Policy Committee senators are listed below. To find your district please
go to: http://www.senate.michigan.gov/2003/senatedistricts.pdf. Then look at
the attached senate list to see which senator corresponds to your district.
Specifically, tell the senators:
This Senate legislation would hamper life-saving research into cures and
treatments for many injuries and diseases, such as cancer, juvenile diabetes
and Alzheimer’s.
Michigan voters have already voiced their support for modernizing stem cell
laws and don’t want the Senate to further restrict, delay or obstruct research;
Strong federal research guidelines are already in place and Michigan already
has the toughest restrictions of any state in the nation.
If you call and get a voice mail, please make sure you leave a message calling
on the senator to oppose the bills and stand up for patients.
Please also tell your friends, family, and your associates about this important
RE: [QUAD-L] Stem Cell research
Definitely have some kinks to work out but this should advance research at an enormous speed! Mark Jackson RollinOn _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2007 6:33 PM To: quad-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] Stem Cell research Mark, I heard the same and heard that now they may need to worry about the new cells being cancerous due to them coming from the skin. But either way...it's a break through in science and someday it just may help the newly disabled. Keith/34/C4-5/NJ _ Check out AOL Money Finance's list of the HYPERLINK http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop000301; \nhottest products and HYPERLINK http://money.aol.com/top5/general/ways-you-are-wasting-money?NCID=aoltop000 302 \ntop money wasters of 2007. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.7/1151 - Release Date: 11/25/2007 4:24 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.7/1152 - Release Date: 11/26/2007 10:50 AM
Re: [QUAD-L] Stem Cell research
I guess I must be jaded. I can't help but to think that our fearless leader is going to step up to the microphone someplace and congratulate all the researchers for their progress in skin cancer research. john - Original Message From: RollinOn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; quad-list@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 11:40:38 AM Subject: RE: [QUAD-L] Stem Cell research Definitely have some kinks to work out but this should advance research at an enormous speed! Mark Jackson RollinOn From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2007 6:33 PM To: quad-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] Stem Cell research Mark, I heard the same and heard that now they may need to worry about the new cells being cancerous due to them coming from the skin. But either way...it's a break through in science and someday it just may help the newly disabled. Keith/34/C4-5/NJ Check out AOL Money Finance's list of the hottest products and top money wasters of 2007. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.7/1151 - Release Date: 11/25/2007 4:24 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.7/1152 - Release Date: 11/26/2007 10:50 AM Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
[QUAD-L] Stem cell research
I heard today on the news that they have figured out how to get stem cells from skin instead of using embryos. Has anyone else heard this? Mark Jackson 501-840-2291 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.7/1151 - Release Date: 11/25/2007 4:24 PM
[QUAD-L] Stem Cell research
Scientists find a non-controversial way to produce stem cells They're already calling it the biological Holy Grail, the equivalent of the Wright Brothers' first aeroplane flight and a bit like learning how to turn lead into gold. But even if one dismisses the hype, the latest discovery in stem cell research is truly a stunning breakthrough by any standards. Two teams of researchers at Japan's Kyoto University and the University of Wisconsin in the United States have succeeded in developing a simple method of producing stem cells from human skin which can be carried out at most fully equipped research labs. Using deactivated viruses, the scientists managed to transport four key genes into the nucleus of the skin cells which reprogrammed them into cells virtually identical to embryonic stem cells. And stem cells, as we all know, are the master cells which have the capacity to transform into any of the body's entire repertoire of heart, liver, brain, bone and muscle cells. Thus they are seen as a potential source of replacement tissues for people who are injured or ill - including those suffering from cardiovascular disease, diabetes, Alzheimer's or Parkinson's. Also, stem cell treatments drawn from a person's own skin would eliminate the danger of immune system rejection. Of far greater import, though, is the fact that till today the only way stem cells could be obtained was from embryos which had to be destroyed while they were harvested. The new discovery neatly sidesteps this hassle area and deftly diffuses the huge political firestorm generated over the morality of stem cell research. The method avoids the use of human reproductive materials altogether - no egg, no embryo and no cloning technique at all. Of course, there are still problems to be worked out with the reprogramming procedure which could take many years before the technique is made safe for use on humans. A basic question to solve is how similar these cells are in behaviour and potential to regular embryonic cells that scientists have been studying for nearly a decade now. Another is how to avoid the potential for cancer since the gene-carrying viruses disrupt the DNA of the cells. But at least as far as ethical bans and restrictive government fundings are concerned, they've been blown away. This is the best news yet for an area of research that can change the face of medicine forever. Mark Jackson 501-840-2291 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.7/1151 - Release Date: 11/25/2007 4:24 PM
Re: [QUAD-L] Stem Cell research
Mark, I heard the same and heard that now they may need to worry about the new cells being cancerous due to them coming from the skin. But either way...it's a break through in science and someday it just may help the newly disabled. Keith/34/C4-5/NJ **Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest products. (http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop000301)
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
I agree with you 100% Silas. All I want to be able to do again is walk. They can stick their ethics where the sun don't shine and get going on the research. Jim
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
And this is what they're funding! This is why they don't even try to research it's pointless and it's a "Ban" or would people want their federal funds wasted on research that we can't use? So I agree they can talk about allowing federal funds then throw them useless material to work with so you're right it's lip service and everyone knows it. Mark A study published in the online journal Nature Medicine says the stem-cell lines are contaminated with a non-human molecule that may make them risky for use in medical therapies. Three years ago, Bush said federal funds could be used for research only on a limited number of stem-cell lines already in existence. That allowed research to continue and enabled the president to assure social conservatives that no new embryos would be destroyed in the process. If few or none of the stem cells in the federally approved batch remain uncontaminated, Bush is wasting precious time. To people suffering from Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, diabetes and other ailments, the president's policy is a failure because it impedes progress. The cells were contaminated because of the manner in which they are processed. Researchers grow the cells in petri dishes lined with cells from mice and bathed in serum derived from calves and other animals. ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 06/01/05 20:50:35 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Quad-list@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research Now you got it! The feds are funding it, but under such restrictive rules they haven't the resources to perform and duplicate experiments independently. The existing stem cells have been proven to be contaminated. The rules still say that's all they can use. It is lip service. The Bush administration has wrapped itself in stupidity and they are damn proud of it. Remember, morons have rights too! In a message dated 6/1/2005 8:28:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yea,But along with Federal funding comes a lot of extra rules and regulations.Private funded researchers tend to not waste money like their Fedraly funded counterparts, and can make the most rapid advances.Once private research has found a proven technology, then the Federal dollars will flow.Most medical advances actualy start this way.IMHO the media is over playing this issue to further the "Progressive Ideologies" which includes abortion and euthenasia. While Embryonic stem cells "MIGHT" be the answer, there is no proof that it is more promising than stem cells harvested from the person needing treatment.Until that proof unfolds, I'd rather see our gov err on the side of caution in regards to ethics.Stunt Hi Stuntman, I understand the difference between PRIVATE and FEDERAL funding for research. It's kind of like owning a PRIVATE Corvette and not putting FEDERAL gasoline in it. It will look great in my driveway but won't get me on the road. I hope you had a good Memorial Day! With Love, CtrlAltDel aka Dave C4/5 Complete - 29 Years Post Texas, USA Stuntman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Howdy Dave, PRIVATE research can still make use of those, it's just not allowed under FEDERAL funding. I wish the same would be applied to abortions. BTW all that money collected by the Reeve's foundation is PRIVATE so it can make use of those types of stem cell sources. Stunt-- Freedom: United States Constitution© 1791 All Rights PreservedMy first Domainhttp://nw-in.com/index.htmlhttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-enter.htmlPicshttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-list/quad-list1.htmHome page. http://tnthompson0.tripod.com/homeincyberspace/Computer Graphics portfolio. http://tnthompson1.tripod.com/index.htm
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
Hi Stuntman, I think waiting for proof before doing the researchcould be a long wait. I too would like to see our government err on the side of caution in regards to ethics,and not just in funding of research, but government ethicssounds like an oxymoron these days. With Love, CtrlAltDel aka DaveC4/5 Complete - 29 Years PostTexas, USAStuntman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yea,But along with Federal funding comes a lot of extra rules and regulations.Private funded researchers tend to not waste money like their Fedraly funded counterparts, and can make the most rapid advances.Once private research has found a proven technology, then the Federal dollars will flow.Most medical advances actualy start this way.IMHO the media is over playing this issue to further the "Progressive Ideologies" which includes abortion and euthenasia. While Embryonic stem cells "MIGHT" be the answer, there is no proof that it is more promising than stem cells harvested from the person needing treatment.Until that proof unfolds, I'd rather see our gov err on the side of caution in regards to ethics.Stunt Hi Stuntman, I understand the difference between PRIVATE and FEDERAL fun! ding for research. It's kind of like owning a PRIVATE Corvette and not putting FEDERAL gasoline in it. It will look great in my driveway but won't get me on the road. I hope you had a good Memorial Day! With Love, CtrlAltDel aka Dave C4/5 Complete - 29 Years Post Texas, USA Stuntman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: Howdy Dave, PRIVATE research can still make use of those, it's just not allowed under FEDERAL funding. I wish the same would be applied to abortions. BTW all that money collected by the Reeve's foundation is PRIVATE so it can make use of those types of stem cell sources. Stunt-- Freedom: United States Constitution© 1791 All Rights PreservedMy first Domainhttp://nw-in.com/index.htmlhttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-enter.htmlPicshttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-list/quad-list1.htmHome page. http://tnthompson0.tripod.com/homeincyberspace/Computer Graphics portfolio. http://tnthompson1.tripod.com/index.htm
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
Ethics smethics, Three forths of the american population doesn't have one dam ethical bone in their bodies. Its allright to rape steal commit adultry and lie, but mention stem cell research and oh hell look out. All the ethics start flying out, must be their guilt from all the unethical things they have done. What about abortion? Where is Bush and why does he look the other way?Where is over half of the american adults, noticeI didn't say american population.I bet you'll never find a child for abortion, but ask a young child with a broken neck if there is hope for a cure through stem cell research what their thoughts would be. Man ill hush its just the subject of stem cell and ethics burns my ass! Silas P.S. Guess I just opened big big can of night crawlers. - Original Message - From: David K. Kelmer To: Stuntman Cc: Quad-list@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 1:31 PM Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research Hi Stuntman, I think waiting for proof before doing the researchcould be a long wait. I too would like to see our government err on the side of caution in regards to ethics,and not just in funding of research, but government ethicssounds like an oxymoron these days. With Love, CtrlAltDel aka DaveC4/5 Complete - 29 Years PostTexas, USAStuntman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yea,But along with Federal funding comes a lot of extra rules and regulations.Private funded researchers tend to not waste money like their Fedraly funded counterparts, and can make the most rapid advances.Once private research has found a proven technology, then the Federal dollars will flow.Most medical advances actualy start this way.IMHO the media is over playing this issue to further the "Progressive Ideologies" which includes abortion and euthenasia. While Embryonic stem cells "MIGHT" be the answer, there is no proof that it is more promising than stem cells harvested from the person needing treatment.Until that proof unfolds, I'd rather see our gov err on the side of caution in regards to ethics.Stunt Hi Stuntman, I understand the difference between PRIVATE and FEDERAL funding for research. It's kind of like owning a PRIVATE Corvette and not putting FEDERAL gasoline in it. It will look great in my driveway but won't get me on the road. I hope you had a good Memorial Day! With Love, CtrlAltDel aka Dave C4/5 Complete - 29 Years Post Texas, USA Stuntman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: Howdy Dave, PRIVATE research can still make use of those, it's just not allowed under FEDERAL funding. I wish the same would be applied to abortions. BTW all that money collected by the Reeve's foundation is PRIVATE so it can make use of those types of stem cell sources. Stunt-- Freedom: United States Constitution© 1791 All Rights PreservedMy first Domainhttp://nw-in.com/index.htmmlhttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-enter.htmlPicshttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-list/quad-list1.htmHome page. http://tnthompson0.tripod.com/homeincyberspace/Computer Graphics portfolio. http://tnthompson1.tripod.com/index.htm
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
speaking of ethics, my company (honeywell) makes us all sign an ethics agreement or be fired. now i am training my India-n replacement because he works for 1/5 of what i do. my next step for honeywell is to be tossed out in the interest of their bottom line. now THERE'S some ethics for you.[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 6/1/2005 7:22:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ethics smethics, Three forths of the american population doesn't have one dam ethical bone in their bodies. Its allright to rape steal commit adultry and lie, but mention stem cell research and oh hell look out. All the ethics start flying out, must be their guilt from all the unethical things they have done. What about abortion? Where is Bush and why does he look the other way?Where is over half of the american adults, noticeI didn't say american population.I bet you'll never find a child for abortion, but ask a young child with a broken neck if there is hope for a cure through stem cell research what their thoughts would be. Man ill hush its just the subject of stem cell and ethics burns my ass! Silas P.S. Guess I just opened big big can of night crawlers. Well said!Dave(what's a quad?) Discover Yahoo! Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM & more. Check it out!
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
Silas, There isn't any BAN on stem cell research, regardless of source. This issue is being blown out of perspective. There IS a slippery slope at risk here. The SC was the ones who ruled in favor of abortion, activist judges have really slid that one down the slope, the President CAN'T over rule them. He IS LIMITED to the powers granted to him, even though he has publicaly stated he is Pro-Life. While I see nothing moraly wrong with using Embryos slated for destruction, would it slip down to late term abortion fetuses? That IS the $1,000,000 question. Stunt Ethics smethics, Three forths of the american population doesn't have one dam ethical bone in their bodies. Its allright to rape steal commit adultry and lie, but mention stem cell research and oh hell look out. All the ethics start flying out, must be their guilt from all the unethical things they have done. What about abortion? Where is Bush and why does he look the other way? Where is over half of the american adults , notice I didn't say american population. I bet you'll never find a child for abortion, but ask a young child with a broken neck if there is hope for a cure through stem cell research what their thoughts would be. Man ill hush its just the subject of stem cell and ethics burns my ass! Silas P.S. Guess I just opened big big can of night crawlers. -- Freedom: United States Constitution© 1791 All Rights Preserved My first Domain http://nw-in.com/index.html http://quads.nw-in.com/quad-enter.html Pics http://quads.nw-in.com/quad-list/quad-list1.htm Home page. http://tnthompson0.tripod.com/homeincyberspace/ Computer Graphics portfolio. http://tnthompson1.tripod.com/index.htm
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
Now you got it! The feds are funding it, but under such restrictive rules they haven't the resources to perform and duplicate experiments independently. The existing stem cells have been proven to be contaminated. The rules still say that's all they can use. It is lip service. The Bush administration has wrapped itself in stupidity and they are damn proud of it. Remember, morons have rights too! In a message dated 6/1/2005 8:28:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Yea,But along with Federal funding comes a lot of extra rules and regulations.Private funded researchers tend to not waste money like their Fedraly funded counterparts, and can make the most rapid advances.Once private research has found a proven technology, then the Federal dollars will flow.Most medical advances actualy start this way.IMHO the media is over playing this issue to further the "Progressive Ideologies" which includes abortion and euthenasia. While Embryonic stem cells "MIGHT" be the answer, there is no proof that it is more promising than stem cells harvested from the person needing treatment.Until that proof unfolds, I'd rather see our gov err on the side of caution in regards to ethics.Stunt Hi Stuntman, I understand the difference between PRIVATE and FEDERAL funding for research. It's kind of like owning a PRIVATE Corvette and not putting FEDERAL gasoline in it. It will look great in my driveway but won't get me on the road. I hope you had a good Memorial Day! With Love, CtrlAltDel aka Dave C4/5 Complete - 29 Years Post Texas, USA Stuntman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Howdy Dave, PRIVATE research can still make use of those, it's just not allowed under FEDERAL funding. I wish the same would be applied to abortions. BTW all that money collected by the Reeve's foundation is PRIVATE so it can make use of those types of stem cell sources. Stunt-- Freedom: United States Constitution© 1791 All Rights PreservedMy first Domainhttp://nw-in.com/index.htmlhttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-enter.htmlPicshttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-list/quad-list1.htmHome page. http://tnthompson0.tripod.com/homeincyberspace/Computer Graphics portfolio. http://tnthompson1.tripod.com/index.htm
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
WHEN YOU RESTRICT STUDIES TO A NARROW DEFINITION, it is a ban. If you restrict a study of religion to Christianity, you have effectively banned other religions. The only reason Bush funded stem cell studies was so he could impose ridiculous rules on scientists. This is the kind of thinking that tried to get penicillin banned because it eliminated diseases that god had used to punish people. 25 million dollars is all the government spent to control research in the US. 25 million would buy 1/36 th of a B-2 bomber. In a message dated 6/1/2005 9:36:18 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Silas,There isn't any "BAN" on stem cell research, regardless of source.This issue is being blown out of perspective.There IS a slippery slope at risk here.The SC was the ones who ruled in favor of abortion, activist judges have really slid that one down the slope, the President CAN'T over rule them. He IS LIMITED to the powers granted to him, even though he has publicaly stated he is Pro-Life. While "I" see nothing moraly wrong with using Embryos slated for destruction, would it slip down to late term abortion fetuses?That IS the $1,000,000 question.Stunt Ethics smethics, Three forths of the american population doesn't have one dam ethical bone in their bodies. Its allright to rape steal commit adultry and lie, but mention stem cell research and oh hell look out. All the ethics start flying out, must be their guilt from all the unethical things they have done. What about abortion? Where is Bush and why does he look the other way? Where is over half of the american adults , notice I didn't say american population. I bet you'll never find a child for abortion, but ask a young child with a broken neck if there is hope for a cure through stem cell research what their thoughts would be. Man ill hush its just the subject of stem cell and ethics burns my ass! Silas P.S. Guess I just opened big big can of night crawlers. -- Freedom: United States Constitution© 1791 All Rights PreservedMy first Domainhttp://nw-in.com/index.htmlhttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-enter.htmlPicshttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-list/quad-list1.htmHome page. http://tnthompson0.tripod.com/homeincyberspace/Computer Graphics portfolio. http://tnthompson1.tripod.com/index.htm
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
I found this site informative: http://www.ncsl.org/programs/health/genetics/embfet.htm State statutes on embryonic and fetal research have evolved with the development of new technologies. Currently, a great deal of attention has centered around stem cell research. There are four primary sources for embryonic stem cells: existing stem cell lines, aborted or miscarried embryos, unused in vitro fertilized embryos, and cloned embryos. Current federal policy limits federally funded research to research conducted on embryonic stem cell lines created before August 2001. Federal funding of research involving cloning for the purpose of reproduction or research is prohibited. However, there is no federal law banning human cloning altogether. The Food and Drug Administration has claimed authority over the regulation of human cloning technology as an investigational new drug (IND) and stated that at this time, they would not approve any projects involving human cloning for safety reasons, but Congress has not passed legislation confirming the FDA's authority to prohibit cloning. At 06:35 PM 6/1/2005, Stuntman wrote: Silas, There isn't any BAN on stem cell research, regardless of source. This issue is being blown out of perspective. There IS a slippery slope at risk here. The SC was the ones who ruled in favor of abortion, activist judges have really slid that one down the slope, the President CAN'T over rule them. He IS LIMITED to the powers granted to him, even though he has publicaly stated he is Pro-Life. While I see nothing moraly wrong with using Embryos slated for destruction, would it slip down to late term abortion fetuses? That IS the $1,000,000 question. Stunt
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
We're getting way behind on stem cell research and you'll see people going overseas tryingnew surgeries where no laws protect them and some will have success and others come back worse off. Researchers have theirhands tied regardless of how they sugarcoat it andwithout Federal funds we'll fall furtherbehind and we're saving nothing and losing everything. Mark ---Original Message--- From: David K. Kelmer Date: 05/30/05 22:13:37 To: Stuntman; quad-List@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research Hi Stuntman, I understand the difference between PRIVATE and FEDERAL funding for research. It's kind of like owning aPRIVATE Corvette and not putting FEDERAL gasoline in it. It will look great inmy driveway but won't get meon the road. I hope you had agood Memorial Day! With Love, CtrlAltDel aka DaveC4/5 Complete - 29 Years PostTexas, USA Stuntman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Howdy Dave,PRIVATE research can still make use of those, it's just not allowed under FEDERAL funding.I wish the same would be applied to abortions.BTW all that money collected by the Reeve's foundation is PRIVATE so it can make use of those types of stem cell sources.Stunt Hi Jim, I respect your views on not using embryos from IVF for embryonic stem cell research IF in vitro fertilization treatments, which creates excess human embryos in the first place, is also banned. The reality is that IVF HAS created thousands of cells that will be discarded, and in my mind, simply discarding these cells without using them for medical research is not ethical reasoning. With Love, CtrlAltDel aka Dave C4/5 Complete - 29 Years Post Texas, USA ! Jim Lubin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: At 01:50 PM 5/26/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The morality of stem cell research doesn't seem much different than the morality of harvesting body parts from the dead. It would be nice if they wouldn't die, but those embryos that are being destroyed at fertility clinics will be used to help people, or at least try to help mankind. It isn't a proposal to dissect a baby as some people would have you believe. I consider embryonic stem cell research using embryos from IVF more like harvesting parts from a person in a comma or progressive vegetative state, who previously did not consent to be an organ donor, rather than from the dead because the embryo is living before the stem cells are harvested. That is why I personally am against using embryos "leftover" from IVF. So if Bush vetos the bill which just pasted I'm fine with that. I think in vitro fertilization treatments, which creates excess human embryos in the first place, should be ban also. If a couple can not have baby then it's not meant to be and they can adopt. You probably consider me someone with "extreme" views. I am against abortions but don't think it should outlawed either. It should be a rarely considered procedure. I sure don't want it federally funded. I personally do not have a problem with somatic cell nuclear transfer. I think an embryo created from somatic cells are just a clump of cells. Jim Lubin http://makoa.org/jlubin Quad-list Web Page: http://makoa.org/quadlist Spinal Cord Injury Resource Page: http://www.makoa.org/sci.htm-- Freedom: United States Constitution© 1791 All Rights PreservedMy first Domainhttp://nw-in.com/index.htmlhttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-enter.htmlPicshttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-list/quad-list1.htmHome page. http://tnthompson0.tripod.com/homeincyberspace/Computer Graphics portfolio. http://tnthompson1.tripod.com/index.htm
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
Hi Stuntman, I understand the difference between PRIVATE and FEDERAL funding for research. It's kind of like owning aPRIVATE Corvette and not putting FEDERAL gasoline in it. It will look great inmy driveway but won't get meon the road. I hope you had agood Memorial Day! With Love, CtrlAltDel aka DaveC4/5 Complete - 29 Years PostTexas, USA Stuntman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Howdy Dave,PRIVATE research can still make use of those, it's just not allowed under FEDERAL funding.I wish the same would be applied to abortions.BTW all that money collected by the Reeve's foundation is PRIVATE so it can make use of those types of stem cell sources.Stunt Hi Jim, I respect your views on not using embryos from IVF for embryonic stem cell research IF in vitro fertilization treatments, which creates excess human embryos in the first place, is also banned. The reality is that IVF HAS created thousands of cells that will be discarded, and in my mind, simply discarding these cells without using them for medical research is not ethical reasoning. With Love, CtrlAltDel aka Dave C4/5 Complete - 29 Years Post Texas, USA ! Jim Lubin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: At 01:50 PM 5/26/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The morality of stem cell research doesn't seem much different than the morality of harvesting body parts from the dead. It would be nice if they wouldn't die, but those embryos that are being destroyed at fertility clinics will be used to help people, or at least try to help mankind. It isn't a proposal to dissect a baby as some people would have you believe. I consider embryonic stem cell research using embryos from IVF more like harvesting parts from a person in a comma or progressive vegetative state, who previously did not consent to be an organ donor, rather than from the dead because the embryo is living before the stem cells are harvested. That is why I personally am against using embryos "leftover" from IVF. So if Bush vetos the bill which just pasted I'm fine with that. I think in vitro fertilization treatments, which creates excess human embryos in the first place, should be ban also. If a couple can not have baby then it's not meant to be and they can adopt. You probably consider me someone with "extreme" views. I am against abortions but don't think it should outlawed either. It should be a rarely considered procedure. I sure don't want it federally funded. I personally do not have a problem with somatic cell nuclear transfer. I think an embryo created from somatic cells are just a clump of cells. Jim Lubin http://makoa.org/jlubin Quad-list Web Page: http://makoa.org/quadlist Spinal Cord Injury Resource Page: http://www.makoa.org/sci.htm-- Freedom: United States Constitution© 1791 All Rights PreservedMy first Domainhttp://nw-in.com/index.htmlhttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-enter.htmlPicshttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-list/quad-list1.htmHome page. http://tnthompson0.tripod.com/homeincyberspace/Computer Graphics portfolio. http://tnthompson1.tripod.com/index.htm
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
Hi QP, Well put. I couldn't agree more with your statement. With Love, CtrlAltDel aka DaveC4/5 Complete - 29 Years PostTexas, USA QuadPirate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thatjust puts youin avery caring and compassionate class of people that are tired of seeing all the suffering. Mark ---Original Message--- From: ~LittleQuad~ Date: 05/27/05 08:41:51 To: Jim Lubin; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; quad-List@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research wow, so where does that put me? i would gladly go donate eggs to be used for stem cell research!!! i'm not going to be using them, so why not get something beneficial out of them??? littlequadJim Lubin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 01:50 PM 5/26/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The morality of stem cell research doesn't seem much different than the morality of harvesting body parts from the dead. It would be nice if they wouldn't die, but those embryos that are being destroyed at fertility clinics will be used to help people, or at least try to help mankind. It isn't a proposal to dissect a baby as some people would have you believe. I consider embryonic stem cell research using embryos from IVF more like harvesting parts from a person in a comma or progressive vegetative state, who previously did not consent to be an organ donor, rather than from the dead because the embryo is living before the stem cells are harvested. That is why I personally am against using embryos "leftover" from IVF. So if Bush vetos the bill which just pasted I'm fine with that.I think in vitro fertilization treatments, which creates excess human embryos in the first place, should be ban also. If a couple c! an not have ! baby then it's not meant to be and they can adopt. You probably consider me someone with "extreme" views.I am against abortions but don't think it should outlawed either. It should be a rarely considered procedure. I sure don't want it federally funded.I personally do not have a problem with somatic cell nuclear transfer. I think an embryo created from somatic cells are just a clump of cells. Jim Lubinhttp://makoa.org/jlubin Quad-list Web Page: http://makoa.org/quadlistSpinal Cord Injury Resource Page: http://www.makoa.org/sci.htm http://fly.to/littlequadYahoo ID - littlequad
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
Hi Dave, If one believes an embryo is a life then it is entitled to protection (life and liberty) under the law. So using federal funds to pay for it's destruction is wrong. The embryo has not committed any crime. If you do agree that it is the government's job to protect the lives of the individuals, when do you think that a life begins and is entitled to that protection? If not as an embryo then when? Embryonic stem cell research is not banned in the United States, the research is just not funded using federal funds. The research might have the potential in theory to help people. Since there are other potential sources for stem cells, those sources should be explored using federal funds. States and private funds may pay for research using human embryonic stem cell lines that are not eligible for federal funding. This federal funding debate reminds me of some of the people in the 80s who did not want their tax dollars used to pay for nuclear weapons. Jim At 07:10 AM 5/28/2005, David K. Kelmer wrote: I respect your views on not using embryos from IVF for embryonic stem cell research IF in vitro fertilization treatments, which creates excess human embryos in the first place, is also banned. The reality is that IVF HAS created thousands of cells that will be discarded, and in my mind, simply discarding these cells without using them for medical research is not ethical reasoning.
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
Howdy Dave, PRIVATE research can still make use of those, it's just not allowed under FEDERAL funding. I wish the same would be applied to abortions. BTW all that money collected by the Reeve's foundation is PRIVATE so it can make use of those types of stem cell sources. Stunt Hi Jim, I respect your views on not using embryos from IVF for embryonic stem cell research IF in vitro fertilization treatments, which creates excess human embryos in the first place, is also banned. The reality is that IVF HAS created thousands of cells that will be discarded, and in my mind, simply discarding these cells without using them for medical research is not ethical reasoning. With Love, CtrlAltDel aka Dave C4/5 Complete - 29 Years Post Texas, USA Jim Lubin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 01:50 PM 5/26/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The morality of stem cell research doesn't seem much different than the morality of harvesting body parts from the dead. It would be nice if they wouldn't die, but those embryos that are being destroyed at fertility clinics will be used to help people, or at least try to help mankind. It isn't a proposal to dissect a baby as some people would have you believe. I consider embryonic stem cell research using embryos from IVF more like harvesting parts from a person in a comma or progressive vegetative state, who previously did not consent to be an organ donor, rather than from the dead because the embryo is living before the stem cells are harvested. That is why I personally am against using embryos leftover from IVF. So if Bush vetos the bill which just pasted I'm fine with that. I think in vitro fertilization treatments, which creates excess human embryos in the first place, should be ban also. If a couple can not have baby then it's not meant to be and they can adopt. You probably consider me someone with extreme views. I am against abortions but don't think it should outlawed either. It should be a rarely considered procedure. I sure don't want it federally funded. I personally do not have a problem with somatic cell nuclear transfer. I think an embryo created from somatic cells are just a clump of cells. Jim Lubin http://makoa.org/jlubin Quad-list Web Page: http://makoa.org/quadlist Spinal Cord Injury Resource Page: http://www.makoa.org/sci.htm -- Freedom: United States Constitution© 1791 All Rights Preserved My first Domain http://nw-in.com/index.html http://quads.nw-in.com/quad-enter.html Pics http://quads.nw-in.com/quad-list/quad-list1.htm Home page. http://tnthompson0.tripod.com/homeincyberspace/ Computer Graphics portfolio. http://tnthompson1.tripod.com/index.htm
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
Hmmm, So you want nobody to be charged for murder if a fetus is killed during the commision of a crime? At what point does the right to life extend to the unborn? Remember, it was originaly intended for abortion to be performed ONLY during the 1st Tri-mester, unless the mother's health was in danger. Society has slowly accepted extending that time period through brainwashing that a woman can do what-ever she wants with her body! BS! She should make up her mind in that 1st tri-mester. After that, there is another life with a right. Stunt Excellent points John! I totally agree! It's so refreshing to hear a man say this, I always find it strangely perverse that men seem to want to control women and what they do. Corie (a woman who does not feel the government has the right to tell me what I can and cannot do with my body!) - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; quad-List@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 5:35 PM Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research Lets be a bit careful here. We all have different beliefs. Roe v Wade didn't create a law, it struck down laws that are unconstitutional. I don't feel that the gov't has the right to tell me and whatever doctor I choose what I can or can not do. I always find it strangely perverse that men seem to want to control women and what they do. Almost every religion grants men authority over women as if it was a birthright. Because every religion sees it as a birthright. Nobody wants to adopt American children(thank you Oprah and Sally Jessy) Most Asylums and Orphanages have been closed in the past 40 years because of the stigma they caused. Now unwanted children are sent to foster homes that have loose oversight and are almost always under funded. Where is that church money? Why isn't it morally important that unwanted children are taken care of. We are a nation of laws as long as the laws are agreeable with us today. Tomorrow, who knows? I find it incredibly hypocritical that people would picket and denounce abortion when they have yet to adopt an American child and picket the fertility clinic. To top that off, they are all extreme conservatives that feel they pay too much in taxes. How do we begin funding an extra 1.5 million unwanted children each year? (By the way, that is 5800 abortions each day and that doesn't include holidays when the clinics aren't open) Some serious problems that won't get better with name calling and really has nothing to do with cloning cells or using human eggs or embryos to cure many of the health problems of people who have been given the gift of life, if not the quality. If you don't believe that we are here as a result of evolution from lower life forms, then how can you have a faith that says that some cells, visible only under a high powered microscope, constitute a human life? john In a message dated 5/27/2005 7:43:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Funny, When a person stands by the morals they believe in, are they the closed minded one? I guess SOME people haven't been paying attention on how easily the activist judges pervert well meaning legistlation. Roe VS Wade: Intent; to make it LEGAL for a woman to get an abortion during the FIRST Trimester. Activist Judges have: 1) turned a LAW into a RIGHT illegaly w/o an Amendment 2) extended that Illegal Right to minors w/o parental consent 3) now fighting for partial birth abortions 4) forced TAXPAYERS to bare the financial burden for approx 1.5 MILLION Abortions each year Child Abuse: has been perverted into parental control by the CPS Can you imagine how far they could pervert cloning? Yes, I agree in stem cell research. No, I'm against human cloning. But the wording of ANY law regarding it must have no loopholes for activist judges. At 09:39 AM 5/27/2005, QuadPirate wrote: And in America Bush's religeous beliefs are supposed to be in no way involved in his decisions as our president, he's supposed to be listening to the people not the voices in his head. I don't know how you figure that. Everyone makes decisions based on their own religious or non-religious beliefs. So Mark, do you think that any person who has religious beliefs is just listening to voices in their head or just people who don't agree with you and your beliefs? Jim -- Freedom: United States Constitution© 1791 All Rights Preserved My first Domain http://nw-in.com/index.html http://quads.nw-in.com/quad-enter.html Pics http://quads.nw-in.com/quad-list/quad-list1.htm Home page. http://tnthompson0.tripod.com/homeincyberspace/ Computer Graphics portfolio. http://tnthompson1
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
Vary will said Stuntman Wheelchair WarriorStuntman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmmm,So you want nobody to be charged for murder if a fetus is killed during the commision of a crime?At what point does the right to life extend to the unborn?Remember, it was originaly intended for abortion to be performed ONLY during the 1st Tri-mester, unless the mother's health was in danger.Society has slowly accepted extending that time period through brainwashing that "a woman can do what-ever she wants with her body"!BS!She should make up her mind in that 1st tri-mester.After that, there is another life with a right.Stunt Excellent points John! I totally agree! It's so refreshing to hear a man say this, "I always find it strangely perverse that men seem to want to control women and what they do." Corie (a woman who does not feel the government has the right to tell me what I! can and cannot do with my body!) - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; quad-List@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 5:35 PM Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research Lets be a bit careful here. We all have different beliefs. Roe v Wade didn't create a law, it struck down laws that are unconstitutional. I don't feel that the gov't has the right to tell me and whatever doctor I choose what I can or can not do. I always find it strangely perverse that men seem to want to control women and what they do. Almost every religion grants men authority over women as if it was a birthright. Because every religion sees it as a birthright. Nobody wants to adopt American children(thank you Oprah and Sally Jessy) Most Asylums and Orphanages have been closed in the past 40 years because of ! the "stigma" they caused. Now unwanted children are sent to foster homes that have loose oversight and are almost always under funded. Where is that church money? Why isn't it morally important that unwanted children are taken care of. We are a nation of laws as long as the laws are agreeable with us today. Tomorrow, who knows? I find it incredibly hypocritical that people would picket and denounce abortion when they have yet to adopt an American child and picket the fertility clinic. To top that off, they are all extreme conservatives that feel they pay too much in taxes. How do we begin funding an extra 1.5 million unwanted children each year? (By the way, that is 5800 abortions each day and that doesn't include holidays when the clinics aren't open) Some serious problems that won't get better with name calling and really has nothing to do with cloning cells or using human eggs or embryos to cu! re many of the health problems of people who have been given the gift of life, if not the quality. If you don't believe that we are here as a result of evolution from lower life forms, then how can you have a faith that says that some cells, visible only under a high powered microscope, constitute a human life? john In a message dated 5/27/2005 7:43:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Funny, When a person stands by the morals they believe in, are they the closed minded one? I guess SOME people haven't been paying attention on how easily the activist judges pervert well meaning legistlation. Roe VS Wade: Intent; to make it "LEGAL" for a woman to get an abortion during the "FIRST" Trimester. Activist Judges have: 1) turned a "LAW" into a "RIGHT" illegaly w/o an Amendment 2) extended that "Illegal Right" to ! minors w/o parental consent 3) now fighting for "partial birth" abortions 4) forced TAXPAYERS to bare the financial burden for approx 1.5 MILLION Abortions each year Child Abuse: has been perverted into parental control by the CPS Can you imagine how far they could pervert cloning? Yes, I agree in stem cell research. No, I'm against human cloning. But the wording of ANY law regarding it must have no loopholes for activist judges. At 09:39 AM 5/27/2005, QuadPirate wrote: And in America Bush's religeous beliefs are supposed to be in no way involved in his decisions as our president, he's supposed to be listening to the people not the voices in his head.I don't know how you figure that. Everyone makes decisions based on their o! wn religious or non-religious beliefs.So Mark, do you think that any person who has religious beliefs is just listening to voices in their head or just people who don't agree with you and your beliefs?Jim-- Freedom: United States Constitution© 1791 All Rights PreservedMy first Domainhttp://nw-in.com/index.htmlhttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-enter.htmlPicshttp://quads.nw-in.com/quad-list/quad-list1.htmHome page. http://tnthompson0.tripod.com/homeincyberspace/Computer Graphics portfolio. http://tnthompson1.tripod.com/index.htm__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
That is where we differ. I do not believe that a fetus deserves the rights
and liberty that an individual human deserves. It is a hope for life. It
deserves a humane respect. It does not represent a human life. I realize it is
an emotional topic. I don't expect everyone to see the step in logic between
their hopes to reality. I sure don't expect everyone to agree with me. It is
only my opinion. We are human and prone to emotional judgements. Human embryos
are only hopes for life and shouldn't be confused with a human life. If these
hopes are used to improve the quality of life, haven't they gained a value that
is greater than even a reverent destruction.
john
In a message dated 5/28/2005 3:00:43 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Vary will said Stuntman
Wheelchair
WarriorStuntman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hmmm,So
you want nobody to be charged for murder if a fetus is killed during the
commision of a crime?At what point does the right to life extend to the
unborn?Remember, it was originaly intended for abortion to be performed
ONLY during the 1st Tri-mester, unless the mother's health was in
danger.Society has slowly accepted extending that time period through
brainwashing that "a woman can do what-ever she wants with her
body"!BS!She should make up her mind in that 1st
tri-mester.After that, there is another life with a
right.Stunt Excellent points John! I totally agree!
It's so refreshing to hear a man say this, "I always find it strangely
perverse that men seem to want to control women and what they
do." Corie (a woman who does not feel the government has
the right to tell me what I can and cannot do with my body!)
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ;
quad-List@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research Lets be a
bit careful here. We all have different beliefs. Roe v Wade didn't
create a law, it struck down laws that are unconstitutional. I don't
feel that the gov't has the right to tell me and whatever doctor I
choose what I can or can not do. I always find it strangely perverse
that men seem to want to control women and what they do. Almost every
religion grants men authority over women as if it was a birthright.
Because every religion sees it as a birthright. Nobody
wants to adopt American children(thank you Oprah and Sally Jessy) Most
Asylums and Orphanages have been closed in the past 40 years because of
the "stigma" they caused. Now unwanted children are sent to foster homes
that have loose oversight and are almost always under funded. Where is
that church money? Why isn't it morally important that unwanted children
are taken care of. We are a nation of laws as long as the
laws are agreeable with us today. Tomorrow, who knows? I find it
incredibly hypocritical that people would picket and denounce abortion
when they have yet to adopt an American child and picket the fertility
clinic. To top that off, they are all extreme conservatives that feel
they pay too much in taxes. How do we begin funding an extra 1.5 million
unwanted children each year? (By the way, that is 5800 abortions each
day and that doesn't include holidays when the clinics aren't
open) Some serious problems that won't get better with name
calling and really has nothing to do with cloning cells or using human
eggs or embryos to cure many of the health problems of people who have
been given the gift of life, if not the quality. If
you don't believe that we are here as a result of evolution from lower
life forms, then how can you have a faith that says that some cells,
visible only under a high powered microscope, constitute a human
life? john In a message dated 5/27/2005 7:43:21
P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Funny, When a person stands by the morals they believe in, are they
the closed minded one? I guess SOME people haven't been
paying attention on how easily the activist judges pervert well
meaning legistlation. Roe VS Wade: Intent; to make it "LEGAL" for a
woman to get an abortion during the "FIRST" Trimester.
Activist Judges have: 1) turned a "LAW" into a "RIGHT" illegaly w/o
an Amendment 2) extended that "Illegal Right" to minors w/o parental
consent 3) now fighting for "partial birth" abortions 4)
forced TAXPAYERS to bare the financial burden for approx 1.5 MILLION
Abortions each year Child Abuse: has been
perverted into parental control by the CPS Can you imagine
how far they could pervert cloning? Yes, I agree in stem cell
resea
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
wow, so where does that put me? i would gladly go donate eggs to be used for stem cell research!!! i'm not going to be using them, so why not get something beneficial out of them??? littlequadJim Lubin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 01:50 PM 5/26/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The morality of stem cell research doesn't seem much different than the morality of harvesting body parts from the dead. It would be nice if they wouldn't die, but those embryos that are being destroyed at fertility clinics will be used to help people, or at least try to help mankind. It isn't a proposal to dissect a baby as some people would have you believe. I consider embryonic stem cell research using embryos from IVF more like harvesting parts from a person in a comma or progressive vegetative state, who previously did not consent to be an organ donor, rather than from the dead because the embryo is living before the stem cells are harvested. That is why I personally am against using embryos "leftover" from IVF. So if Bush vetos the bill which just pasted I'm fine with that.I think in vitro fertilization treatments, which creates excess human embryos in the first place, should be ban also. If a couple c! an not have baby then it's not meant to be and they can adopt. You probably consider me someone with "extreme" views.I am against abortions but don't think it should outlawed either. It should be a rarely considered procedure. I sure don't want it federally funded.I personally do not have a problem with somatic cell nuclear transfer. I think an embryo created from somatic cells are just a clump of cells. Jim Lubinhttp://makoa.org/jlubin Quad-list Web Page: http://makoa.org/quadlistSpinal Cord Injury Resource Page: http://www.makoa.org/sci.htm http://fly.to/littlequadYahoo ID - littlequad
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
I still don't get the whole cell thingIf people want to get high tech.then every time a human has sex and does not reproduce then thousands of unborn sperm cells die---this can be from using a condom-having tubes tied-birth control of any type. Each one of these that die are unborn cells alsoI don't look at that as killing life, I think some things are just blown out of porportion. Dan
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
I only know one legal way to define what is right in this argument, we must consult the almighty, the all knowing, yes, Insurance companies. They decide what an act of God is? They must know him. john
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
Funny, When a person stands by the morals they believe in, are they the closed minded one? I guess SOME people haven't been paying attention on how easily the activist judges pervert well meaning legistlation. Roe VS Wade: Intent; to make it LEGAL for a woman to get an abortion during the FIRST Trimester. Activist Judges have: 1) turned a LAW into a RIGHT illegaly w/o an Amendment 2) extended that Illegal Right to minors w/o parental consent 3) now fighting for partial birth abortions 4) forced TAXPAYERS to bare the financial burden for approx 1.5 MILLION Abortions each year Child Abuse: has been perverted into parental control by the CPS Can you imagine how far they could pervert cloning? Yes, I agree in stem cell research. No, I'm against human cloning. But the wording of ANY law regarding it must have no loopholes for activist judges. At 09:39 AM 5/27/2005, QuadPirate wrote: And in America Bush's religeous beliefs are supposed to be in no way involved in his decisions as our president, he's supposed to be listening to the people not the voices in his head. I don't know how you figure that. Everyone makes decisions based on their own religious or non-religious beliefs. So Mark, do you think that any person who has religious beliefs is just listening to voices in their head or just people who don't agree with you and your beliefs? Jim -- Freedom: United States Constitution© 1791 All Rights Preserved My first Domain http://nw-in.com/index.html http://quads.nw-in.com/quad-enter.html Pics http://quads.nw-in.com/quad-list/quad-list1.htm Home page. http://tnthompson0.tripod.com/homeincyberspace/ Computer Graphics portfolio. http://tnthompson1.tripod.com/index.htm
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
If an embryo is created from a human sperm and a human egg, in nature or by science in a lab, then it is a human being. So an embryo created from a human egg and a somatic cell is not human. That is where I personally draw the line. At 11:53 AM 5/27/2005, QuadPirate wrote: Not a bad point Jim but an embryo can not form by itself in a petri dish. It still needs to be physically put in a womb or test tube just like the sperm needs an egg. So where do you draw the line. Adam didn't need an embryo or sperm so where does life begin? Mark ---Original Message--- From: Jim Lubin Date: 05/27/05 13:15:31 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; quad-List@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research At 08:12 AM 5/27/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I still don't get the whole cell thingIf people want to get high tech.then every time a human has sex and does not reproduce then thousands of unborn sperm cells die---this can be from using a condom-having tubes tied-birth control of any type. Each one of these that die are unborn cells alsoI don't look at that as killing life, I think some things are just blown out of porportion. Dan A sperm and an egg are human haploid cells or gametes (sex cells). Haploid cells have a single set of chromosomes in each cell. Most higher organisms are diploid that is, they have two sets but their gametes (sex cells) are haploid. In 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 On the basis of a complete biological analysis, the living human embryo is - from the moment of the union of the gametes - a human subject with a well defined identity, which from that point begins its own coordinated, continuous and gradual development, such that at no later stage can it be considered as a simple mass of cells
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
That would be just fine. An egg is not a human life. At 06:40 AM 5/27/2005, ~LittleQuad~ wrote: wow, so where does that put me? i would gladly go donate eggs to be used for stem cell research!!! i'm not going to be using them, so why not get something beneficial out of them??? littlequad Jim Lubin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 01:50 PM 5/26/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The morality of stem cell research doesn't seem much different than the morality of harvesting body parts from the dead. It would be nice if they wouldn't die, but those embryos that are being destroyed at fertility clinics will be used to help people, or at least try to help mankind. It isn't a proposal to dissect a baby as some people would have you believe. I consider embryonic stem cell research using embryos from IVF more like harvesting parts from a person in a comma or progressive vegetative state, who previously did not consent to be an organ donor, rather than from the dead because the embryo is living before the stem cells are harvested. That is why I personally am against using embryos leftover from IVF. So if Bush vetos the bill which just pasted I'm fine with that. I think in vitro fertilization treatments, which creates excess human embryos in the first place, should be ban also. If a couple can not have baby then it's not meant to be and they can adopt. You probably consider me someone with extreme views. I am against abortions but don't think it should outlawed either. It should be a rarely considered procedure. I sure don't want it federally funded. I personally do not have a problem with somatic cell nuclear transfer. I think an embryo created from somatic cells are just a clump of cells. Jim Lubin http://makoa.org/jlubin Quad-list Web Page: http://makoa.org/quadlist Spinal Cord Injury Resource Page: http://www.makoa.org/sci.htm http://fly.to/littlequad Yahoo ID - littlequad
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
At 05:35 PM 5/27/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you don't believe that we are here as a result of evolution from lower life forms, then how can you have a faith that says that some cells, visible only under a high powered microscope, constitute a human life? But I do believe that God used evolution to create humans. It is a human life from the moment of the union of the human gametes. It's basic biology. If not from that moment then what do you believe constitutes a human life? At what stage of human development do you think life begins and entitled to protection under the law? When you can see it without the use of a high powered microscope? Jim
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
Hey Jim, There's some great info on that sight and I found another link which is extremely helpful to completely understand about all the different stem cells and where they come from I urge everybody to read this it makes great points on both sides ofthis issue. http://www.stemcellnetwork.ca/news/leg/downloads/letter.feb2004.pdf Mark ---Original Message--- From: Jim Lubin Date: 05/26/05 12:34:49 To: quad-List@eskimo.com Subject: [QUAD-L] stem cell research I thought this article made some good pointshttp://www.stemcellnetwork.ca/news/articles.php?id=774 Despite the major medical advance, the research once again highlights difficult moral questions. For those who believe life begins at conception, creating human embryos for research and destroying them in the process is tantamount to murder. But there is a growing view not only among scientists, but ethicists as well, that these lab-made embryo clones do not actually have the capacity to grow into a viable human. In fact, David Magnus, director of biomedical ethics at Stanford University, suggested that the South Korean experiments derived its stem cells from clones that might not be considered embryos at all: "There's no reason to think any of these things can ever become a human being," he said. No one knows whether the clones can develop into humans because, so far, none have been allowed to grow beyond a few cells. Dr. Magnus pointed out that stem-cell research on frozen embryos that were created at fertility clinics -- which Canada allows -- might be considered more ethically challenging, because embryos from that source do develop into full human life.
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
The morality of stem cell research doesn't seem much different than the morality of harvesting body parts from the dead. It would be nice if they wouldn't die, but those embryos that are being destroyed at fertility clinics will be used to help people, or at least try to help mankind. It isn't a proposal to dissect a baby as some people would have you believe. We live in a country that considers the death penalty an option while sending an army into a war that established our belief inviolent regime change, and all while talking about the sanctity of life. Pardon me if I find the leadership a bit inadequate in any argument regarding morality or ethics. I've read about everything I can find on the subject of stem cell research. I don't want cloning of humans to be legalized. Should we stumble into that knowledge we can deal with it. At present the technology that seems most promising is the ability to help organs and tissues to regenerate in humansfor the purpose of ending human suffering from existing diseases and conditions. I expect this new research to pose questions and problems but I never expected the government to stand at the doorway to a new science andtremble like a child on Halloween. It is un-American to behave the way our leaders in the executive have. john
Re: [QUAD-L] stem cell research
This critical scientific research is under threat of being banned. Opponents are seeking a treaty in the United Nations that would ban all forms of cloning research by grouping reproductive cloning with therapeutic cloning research - a legitimate form of stem cell research that could quite possibly produce the next generation of lifesaving cures and treatments. Reproductive cloning is dangerous and unethical and is vigorously opposed by GPI along with 95% of the public. Reproductive cloning must be distinguished from important research procedures; such as the therapeutic cloning of specific human cells, genes and other tissues. These procedures are safe, ethical, and do not and cannot lead to the birth of a human being. Policy-makers and the public have often lost the distinction between the reproductive and therapeutic cloning. The stakes are extremely high. UN passage of a proposal to ban therapeutic cloning research sends a strong signal to the entire world. Threats of prohibition of therapeutic cloning research have already cast a pall over the entire realm of stem cell research and are causing a brain drain of promising young scientists who are leaving the field. The result may be a tragic postponement of the development of new treatments and cures.
