“Embryos are Humans” Says U.S. Government Report on Stem Cell Research

  • Thread starter Thread starter buffalo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ribozyme said:
According to Singer, the issue is not the question of membership in the species Homo sapiens, but rather the embryos are considered “persons”. To Singer, those are rather different concepts. He thinks that you can be a person and not a human, and you can be a human and not a person.
Click to expand...
And far be it from me to deny his own estimate of his own moral worth.😉
 
ribozyme said:
That is something that even Peter Singer acknowledges. To him, the question is the inherent moral worth of the embryos.
Click to expand...
I am suprised anyone would care what Peter Signer’s opinion on what is moral is.
 
ribozyme said:
Well, he would argue that no moral wrong would occur because he was not harmed in any way as no pain was inflicted if Peter Singer was aborted in this way.
Click to expand...
Who cares what Peter Singer thinks? He is so far out of the mainstream that his opinon adds nothing to any discussion other than sidetrack the discussion into a discussion of how morally reprehensible he is.
 
estesbob said:
Ribozyme should be greatful his parents were not an innured with peter Singer as he is!
Click to expand...
Let it be noted that I detected your trap to get me to say something uncharitable and avoided it with a graceful lateral Arabesque.😃
 
MikeWM said:
How about we send it to every politician who doesn’t have a polcy to ban IVF - ie. basically all of them, Republican as well as Democrat? IVF is the real problem, there’s be no embryos to perform stem cell research on if not for IVF.

Mike
Click to expand...
Unfortunately its a double whammy. Not only does IVF end up killing the unborn it also cuts down on the number of couples looking to adopt. No party is going to oppose it, however, as no one wants to be seen insensitive to a copuple who wants a child. Adophus Huxely told us this would happen long ago-I wonder when the “feelies” will hit the movies?
 
estesbob said:
Unfortunately its a double whammy. Not only does IVF end up killing the unborn it also cuts down on the number of couples looking to adopt. No party is going to oppose it, however, as no one wants to be seen insensitive to a copuple who wants a child.
Click to expand...
Yes, you’re entirely right.

Mike
 
estesbob said:
Who cares what Peter Singer thinks? He is so far out of the mainstream that his opinon adds nothing to any discussion other than sidetrack the discussion into a discussion of how morally reprehensible he is.
Click to expand...
Well, his views are acknowledged by academia, and he is not considered a fringe ethicist. I think he is an eminent secular moral philosopher, but I do agree that some of his views are not mainstream.

I thought it would be interesting (and relevant to the thread) to mention Singer’s views. He does NOT deny the obvious; he believes that embryos are humans. This is in contrast to the views of most feminists and some left-wing politicians.
 
ribozyme said:
Well, he would argue that no moral wrong would occur because he was not harmed in any way as no pain was inflicted if Peter Singer was aborted in this way.
Click to expand...
First off, he would not even be around to argue his case. Second, moraility is not confined to victims.
 
[sign] The ultimate question is perhaps not only the loss of protection of the unborn child, but the loss of humanity itself. C S. Lewis calls the technicians of the new age “men without chests,” and states in his book, The Abolition of Man (1947), that “the man-molders of the new age will be armed with the powers of an omni-competent state and an irresistible scientific technique… but man’s final conquest has proven to be the abolition of man.”[/sign]

From the article, “Medical Techniques in Connection with Induced Abortion to Assess Fetal Development and Remove Tissue and Organs” by Thomas W. Strahan.
lifeissues.net/writers/air/air_vol11no3_19971.html

What greater handicap is there than to lack a human heart?
 
pablo_rafael said:
I have somewhat puzzled by the heated debate on stem-cell research. President Bush and the Christian-right fundamentalists have made a huge deal out of prohibiting it. But at the same time they are silent on all the embyos from fertility clinics that are thrown out. Why is it so wrong to use embryos for research but OK to toss them away as garbage?
Click to expand...
Pablo,

I agree with you that IVF is a problem, but I am not puzzled by Bush’s stance on this issue.

Bush isn’t trying to ban research on embryos, he is trying to maintain the ban on *federal funding *for research on embryos. It is a subtle but important difference. The Bush Administration is just as silent on the issue of embryos being thrown out at IVF clinics as it is about legislation making it totally illegal to experiment on embryos.

This is where I wish Bush would take a stronger stance.

Rebecca Taylor
www.MaryMeetsDolly.com
A Catholics Guide to Biotechnology
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top