yeah, i dont relly know what is needed for stem cell research. i knew it was stuff that is considered pre fetus, but i didnt know how much... and i consider myself as informed as the rest of the public, at least... and yet the public supposedly outcries the stem cell research. it's like usual, uninformed people making decisions before they should.
aided and abetted by the politicians, of course.
and yeah, the age at which life might begin will be decreasing, and i'm not sure how to control that. maybe there is a different standard we can find. like when brain function begins, or when someother indicator of life starts? i don't know, this area is so difficult, becuase i dont know if we know that much a bout it all yet. more research!
i'm glad to hear we havent outlawed all stem cell research, but we need to allow more research, as long as it is properly controlled.
and no joke any opinion on stem cell research would make kerry lose any chance of the white house... if he's got any good advisors, they'll make sure he keeps his mouth shut on this issue until he theoretically wins.
Thats what I was saying, you I consider even more informed than the average Joe (your young, stay current and are in a learning enviornment) in many ways and you yourself have trouble explaining stem cell's, how they work and where we get them. Perhaps if we informed the public more they would oppose the research and the production of stem cells less. Half of america pictures fetuses in beakers being killed and harvested for cells. Pro life blew it way out of proportion when scientists asked if they could have the umbilical cords of aborted fetuses. We are scientists, we don't want to see something very useful go to waste. We could save lives with those cells!
The determination of being 'human' is difficult under the premis of brain function because we all have different definitions of what that is. The brain begins to form very early on and begins to funtion fairly soon in the capacities to see light (fetuses will turn away from a brigh light) and eventually feel pain (this is difficult to proove also, but we think they can). Are primative brain funtions counted as a human brain? Do we need to wait until the baby has some sort of actualy thought processes, and if so how do we test this.
See choosing factors like that are difficult because they are a warren of questions. If it is when the heart forms, this begins to happen early on to, but it wont fully form until much later. The fetus takes a little while to start 'looking' human but this again depends on your definition of what looks like a human form. Everything depends on your point of view. It is a sticky subject and always will be.
I actually think going with 'the baby being able to survive outside the woumb' would not be so bad. Even as our technology get better, allowing the baby to survive outside the womb at a much earlier age, woman will be able to induce labor or have the baby removed and then right then and there give it to the state. Then the woman has the right to choose to keep the baby inside of her or not, and pro life gets their living fetus.
The only question is, if we have 1 million abortions a year (I have no idea how many) thats 1 million very high cost babies (It takes hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep a premature baby alive) being turned over to the state. Who will pay for these now 1 million new super expensive orphans? I know that I don't want to have to bear this cost as a tax payer but it is unethical to say if your pro life, you pay.
I think that the availibility of birth control is the key to solving this debate. With more effective and availible contraception I think the number of abortions will go down. If the number of abortions go down then perhaps bearing the cost of the new 'saved' children in our scenario wouldn't be so bad. But this would involve tackling several nation wide problems at once, and we all know Uncle Sam is no good at that.
aided and abetted by the politicians, of course.
and yeah, the age at which life might begin will be decreasing, and i'm not sure how to control that. maybe there is a different standard we can find. like when brain function begins, or when someother indicator of life starts? i don't know, this area is so difficult, becuase i dont know if we know that much a bout it all yet. more research!
i'm glad to hear we havent outlawed all stem cell research, but we need to allow more research, as long as it is properly controlled.
and no joke any opinion on stem cell research would make kerry lose any chance of the white house... if he's got any good advisors, they'll make sure he keeps his mouth shut on this issue until he theoretically wins.
Reply
Thats what I was saying, you I consider even more informed than the average Joe (your young, stay current and are in a learning enviornment) in many ways and you yourself have trouble explaining stem cell's, how they work and where we get them. Perhaps if we informed the public more they would oppose the research and the production of stem cells less. Half of america pictures fetuses in beakers being killed and harvested for cells. Pro life blew it way out of proportion when scientists asked if they could have the umbilical cords of aborted fetuses. We are scientists, we don't want to see something very useful go to waste. We could save lives with those cells!
The determination of being 'human' is difficult under the premis of brain function because we all have different definitions of what that is. The brain begins to form very early on and begins to funtion fairly soon in the capacities to see light (fetuses will turn away from a brigh light) and eventually feel pain (this is difficult to proove also, but we think they can). Are primative brain funtions counted as a human brain? Do we need to wait until the baby has some sort of actualy thought processes, and if so how do we test this.
See choosing factors like that are difficult because they are a warren of questions. If it is when the heart forms, this begins to happen early on to, but it wont fully form until much later. The fetus takes a little while to start 'looking' human but this again depends on your definition of what looks like a human form. Everything depends on your point of view. It is a sticky subject and always will be.
I actually think going with 'the baby being able to survive outside the woumb' would not be so bad. Even as our technology get better, allowing the baby to survive outside the womb at a much earlier age, woman will be able to induce labor or have the baby removed and then right then and there give it to the state. Then the woman has the right to choose to keep the baby inside of her or not, and pro life gets their living fetus.
The only question is, if we have 1 million abortions a year (I have no idea how many) thats 1 million very high cost babies (It takes hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep a premature baby alive) being turned over to the state. Who will pay for these now 1 million new super expensive orphans? I know that I don't want to have to bear this cost as a tax payer but it is unethical to say if your pro life, you pay.
I think that the availibility of birth control is the key to solving this debate. With more effective and availible contraception I think the number of abortions will go down. If the number of abortions go down then perhaps bearing the cost of the new 'saved' children in our scenario wouldn't be so bad. But this would involve tackling several nation wide problems at once, and we all know Uncle Sam is no good at that.
Reply
Leave a comment