Finally, abortion

[LeafByNiggle]

No, it does not bother to me at all.
Sorry, I am not God. It is not me who created man, who created the Universe.
… You know, each day 40 thousand children die of hunger in the world…

Seriously? You are going to defend apathy toward the death of hungry children?

And would it bother you if those embryos that were naturally expelled were to be somehow captured and used as a source of embryonic stem cells for research?

 

[Nate13]

Does it bother you that over 4 million of these persons are flushed down the toilet every year in the US due to the natural failure to implant? The best estimates I could find for implantation rates are about 50%. So it there are 4 million live births then there are about 4 million others that didn’t attach.

There is no way to measure that accurately so yes that is an “estimate” and probably not one worth noting.

Also, those would be natural deaths. It makes no more sense for me to get upset about those than it does to get upset about a 100 year old man dying of natural causes. 2.4 million people die in the U.S every year already, most of them due to natural causes. Also the replacement rate is about equal the death rate currently so you would have something close to 2.4 million births per year and assuming your 50% stat, the same number of deaths due to failure to implant that we have naturally every year anyways. What would this tell me? Life is dangerous early on, but outside the womb isn’t all that much better.

 

[jilly4ski]

There is no way to measure that accurately so yes that is an “estimate” and probably not one worth noting.

Also, those would be natural deaths. It makes no more sense for me to get upset about those than it does to get upset about a 100 year old man dying of natural causes. 2.4 million people die in the U.S every year already, most of them due to natural causes. Also the replacement rate is about equal the death rate currently so you would have something close to 2.4 million births per year and assuming your 50% stat, the same number of deaths due to failure to implant that we have naturally every year anyways. What would this tell me? Life is dangerous early on, but outside the womb isn’t all that much better.

The drowning analogy is still wrong, because it is not a natural cause. It is like being outraged over miscarriage or still birth. Nobody is outraged, but many are devastated when it happens to them, just as those who know they experience an early miscarriage (no implantation) are devastated. If a woman starts to miscarry, there is nothing she or doctors can do, they can tell her to rest, etc. We cannot prevent miscarriage and still birth anymore than we can prevent early miscarriage when the child fails to implant.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

It makes no more sense for me to get upset about those than it does to get upset about a 100 year old man dying of natural causes. 2.4 million people die in the U.S every year already, most of them due to natural causes. .

OK, then what do you think of using those naturally expelled embryos for embryonic stem cell research?

 

[Nate13]

OK, then what do you think of using those naturally expelled embryos for embryonic stem cell research?

Unconscionable if they are still alive. If they are able to keep them alive then they should be trying to save their lives, not use them for research. If they are not alive and have already passed away, then I would see it as on the same level as organ donation. It would be up to the mother and father to make a decision on whether to allow it. Something tells me embryonic stem cell research requires live embryo’s though.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Unconscionable if they are still alive. If they are able to keep them alive then they should be trying to save their lives, not use them for research. If they are not alive and have already passed away, then I would see it as on the same level as organ donation. It would be up to the mother and father to make a decision on whether to allow it. Something tells me embryonic stem cell research requires live embryo’s though.

They may be alive to the extent that the cells can be cultured in a lab, even if the expelled embryo has no chance of survival as an embryo. How can you on one hand be absolutely apathetic toward the prospect of millions of naturally expelled embryos being flushed down the toilet, but then be suddenly so concerned about what someone may do with those cells just before they are flushed?

 

[Nate13]

They may be alive to the extent that the cells can be cultured in a lab, even if the expelled embryo has no chance of survival as an embryo. How can you on one hand be absolutely apathetic toward the prospect of millions of naturally expelled embryos being flushed down the toilet, but then be suddenly so concerned about what someone may do with those cells just before they are flushed?

Uh we do so on a daily basis. A man falls over dead. We immediately begin work figuring out if any of his organs can be saved for donation and if his license shows he is an organ donor. It’s pretty simple. At one point your alive, then the next your dead. This is a very cold calculated, but truthful way of looking at it.

Think of what happens in a hospital. Someone’s heart has just stopped and you have doctor’s scrambling to get the defibrillator set up and start trying to restart the person’s heart. They urgently rush to do everything they can to save the person’s life but eventually enough time passes that they have to pronounce them dead and move on to another patient. A couple seconds makes all the difference. Emotional and spiritual attachments remain, but physically they are gone. Physical remains deserve respect obviously for who they once were, but in many cases with miscarriage as well as normal deaths that is not possible to achieve in the manner we would like.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Uh we do so on a daily basis. A man falls over dead. We immediately begin work figuring out if any of his organs can be saved for donation…

So can we treat the cells of a naturally expelled embryo just like a donated organ? It is too bad the person died, but at least we can make use of his organs. It is too bad the embryo got expelled, but at least we can make use of its stem cells.

 

[Nate13]

So can we treat the cells of a naturally expelled embryo just like a donated organ? It is too bad the person died, but at least we can make use of his organs. It is too bad the embryo got expelled, but at least we can make use of its stem cells.

Are you against organ donation after someone has died? Morally it would be fine. Emotionally I’m sure many people would choose not to do so.

You were trying to make the point that we treat embryo’s differently than we do adults. I think I’ve shown very clearly that we don’t. You seem to be clinging to this idea that there is a difference in emotional response. Any woman who has had a miscarriage would tell you differently.

In the case where implantation fails to occur and you have a couple days old miscarriage which may not be recognized as such, the lack of emotional response is only due to the fact that no one knew there was a loss.

Its would be like blaming someone for not being sad about a child of theirs dying that they had no way of knowing the welfare of. Do you also blame moms that give up their children for adoption and lose contact for life and then aren’t saddened when that child dies years and year later and they have no way of knowing?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Are you against organ donation after someone has died? Morally it would be fine. Emotionally I’m sure many people would choose not to do so.

You were trying to make the point that we treat embryo’s differently than we do adults. I think I’ve shown very clearly that we don’t. You seem to be clinging to this idea that there is a difference in emotional response. Any woman who has had a miscarriage would tell you differently.

In the case where implantation fails to occur and you have a couple days old miscarriage which may not be recognized as such, the lack of emotional response is only due to the fact that no one knew there was a loss.

Its would be like blaming someone for not being sad about a child of theirs dying that they had no way of knowing the welfare of. Do you also blame moms that give up their children for adoption and lose contact for life and then aren’t saddened when that child dies years and year later and they have no way of knowing?

So I take it your answer is “yes”?

 

[Nate13]

So I take it your answer is “yes”?

So can we treat the cells of a naturally expelled embryo just like a donated organ?

I’ll answer yes and ignore the spin in your question. The same principle applies to everyone no matter how small or large. I do not know the laws for parental rights and organ donation for children who have been born, but the same would apply to children that die in the womb or do not survive premature birth at whatever stage.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Why do you think a single cell can be a person? Do you think it’s a person? Is this a religious conclusion, something in metaphysics, or do you think this is based on science?

What are your arguments for it?

Isn’t the first thing the egg cell does after fertilization is to split into two? So at no point in the life of the fetus was it ever a single cell.

 

[vsedriver]

Why do you think a single cell can be a person? Do you think it’s a person? Is this a religious conclusion, something in metaphysics, or do you think this is based on science?

What are your arguments for it?

First you have to define what is a person. Would you say that a characteristic of personhood would be that of having human life? At what point can you separate the characteristic of human life from personhood?

If a person can’t exist without human life, how can human life exist without being a person?

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

So are sperm and egg; it is just that the information is further apart. Aren’t many cells programed with information necessary to become a functioning human, say via cloning?

My conceptual hang-up is why original DNA and information necessary to become a human being makes the cell already a human person. Doesn’t it just make the cell a potential human person? Doesn’t the advent of cloning make our skin cells potential human people, too?

Whatever it takes, the human person is a creation of God: the soul, the Spirit. It is not up to us to tell Him when He is going to create Him/Her.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

I agree. Definite straw-man.

I just think that, since this is really a straw-man, it’s best for Catholics to give it up, and only concentrate on the meat of the issue.

I think the single-cell thing distracts. Catholics should stop defending it.

Because it’s not a straw-man if you believe it and proclaim it. Then it’s just a very easy way to tear your position apart.

Try to tear it apart.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

OK, then what do you think of using those naturally expelled embryos for embryonic stem cell research?

In this situation I would not see any problem as taking the heart of one person to another.
But why insist here when there are enough embryonic cells in the umbilical chord.?

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

First you have to define what is a person. Would you say that a characteristic of personhood would be that of having human life? At what point can you separate the characteristic of human life from personhood?

If a person can’t exist without human life, how can human life exist without being a person?

The person is the “I”. I am spirit. You are spirit. When I am speaking with you even thou the net, it is my spirit speaking to your spirit.
Through the body, the net, and so on.

 

[NeedImprovement]

(Highlights mine ; text = vsedriver’s)

First you have to define what is a person. Would you say that a characteristic of personhood would be that of having human life? At what point can you separate the characteristic of human life from personhood?

If a person can’t exist without human life, how can human life exist without being a person?

 

[NeedImprovement]

…

Funny it hasn’t been mentioned yet that experts say there are still grave Practical Problems With Embryonic Stem Cell Research .

Also , from the **INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE IN SOCIETY ; Dr. Mae-Wan Ho **, excerpt:

So, how do ES and adult stem cells score at this point?

These latest results show that the ES cells need to be genetically modified and extensive manipulation in vitro before they can be transplanted safely. Direct transplant of ES cells are known to give rise to teratomas and uncontrollable cell proliferation. There is already evidence that ES cells are genetically unstable in long term culture, and are especially prone to chromosomal abnormalities. The risks involved in using the cytomegalovirus promoter to drive over-expression of the transcription factor are undetermined. To avoid immune rejection, the ES cells have to be tissue-matched from a bank of stem cells created from ‘spare’ human embryos. Otherwise, a special human embryo has to be created for the purpose, by transferring the patient’s genetic material into an empty egg, a procedure prone to failure and morally objectionable to many, including scientists.

By contrast, adult stem cells could be transplanted directly without genetic modification or pre-treatments. They simply differentiate according to cues from the surrounding tissues and do not give uncontrollable growth or tumours. The adult stem cells also show high degrees of genomic stability during culture. There is no problem with immune rejection because the cells can readily be isolated from the patients requiring transplant. And there is no moral objection involved. Better yet, research can be directed towards encouraging adult stem cells to regenerate and repair damaged tissues in situ, without the need for cell isolation and in vitro expansion. By minimising intervention, risks are reduced, as well as cost, making the treatment available to everyone and not just the rich.

… not to mention umbilical cord blood & tissue stem cells.

---

So as implausible as science still maintains that this suggestion quoted below actually is …

OK, then what do you think of using those naturally expelled embryos for embryonic stem cell research?

… Why doesn’t the person who suggested it , be a little more practical , by describing exactly how they would go about watching for and collecting these *expelled embryos *… ?

 

[NeedImprovement]

In this situation I would not see any problem as taking the heart of one person to another.
But why insist here when there are enough embryonic cells in the umbilical chord.?

Sorry Plaffenhoffen - I didn’t ackowledge in my last post that you also had mentioned the umbilical cord several posts before mine .