[commanderkai]

Brenda Brenda:

Scientifically, yes. Religiously, no.

Yeah, that's your own religious interpretation. I see a very large distinction between eating a chicken egg, and killing human fetuses.

[Gunnair]

"BartSimpson"]

$1:

In the issue of the gay/lesbian lifestyle I also appreciate that the inherent political correctness of many of you effectively prevents an objective discussion of the fact that many aspects of gay-lesbian lifestyles are not socially acceptable when practised by heterosexuals."

Actually, what some might consider PC, other's might concieve as Jesus' teachings of not to cast the first stone.

I find it curious, Bart, that someone who has admitted killing for his country, also not really in line with Biblical teachings, has no issue taking someone to task for their sins.

[Brenda]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Brenda Brenda:

Scientifically, yes. Religiously, no.

Yeah, that's your own religious interpretation. I see a very large distinction between eating a chicken egg, and killing human fetuses.

Explain the difference?
Why are we humans worth more than a chicken? I thought we are all Gods creatures?

Anywho, I am not religious, and I certainly have no problem with creating animal life for the sole purpose of consumption, and I also do not see a bunch of cells as human life, so I have no problem in creating a fertile egg for the sole purpose of curing disease.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Well, here's the way I see it, Brenda. The Bible says that God put animals here to serve us. Whether as beast of burden or food or companionship.

As for stem cells, I have no issues there either, particularily when the stem cells are "raised" in a petri dish. At that point, whatever is in that dish ain't human yet.

[BigKeithO]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

If a human fetus can be created and then destroyed in the name of research then why not create a full-term baby? Or why not use a six-year old for research? Once these lines are crossed and rationalized then what ethical barrier will fall next?

Cause it won't work? Full-term babies and six-year old's have cells just like you and me, not stem cells. You see they've already developed into specialized cells at that point, hence a living person.

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

In the matter of stem cells the simple fact is that they are harvested from fetuses that are either aborted or created in a lab and then destroyed for the purpose of stem cell harvesting.

Currently this is true. Scientists are already close to using your own every day cells as stem cells, skin cells in this case.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21886974/

[commanderkai]

Brenda Brenda:

Explain the difference?
Why are we humans worth more than a chicken? I thought we are all Gods creatures?

Anywho, I am not religious, and I certainly have no problem with creating animal life for the sole purpose of consumption, and I also do not see a bunch of cells as human life, so I have no problem in creating a fertile egg for the sole purpose of curing disease.

Sentience? Sentience is a pretty good factor. Animals do not have the mental capacity, let alone the moral or ethical obligations that God created for humanity.

And no. I'm not arguing this even further because you're just making a strawman argument because you don't even believe that humans and animals are at the same level. If you did see that, you would have an issue with putting a horse down with a broken leg, while we do our best to help humans with similar injuries and disabilities. All of us being "God's creatures" does not make us all equal under God.

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/ ... ecnum=4226

Read this if you're seriously wanting an answer to distinctions between human and animal life.

[djakeydd]

Yes indeed hawkins, that's why a more and more higher number of ppl are loosing faith in science, which has become a religion. Take global warming for example, a poll in Germany says that now up to 48% say global warming is a contrivance. Science is caving in on itself, the near earth orbit is cluttered with junk that threatens every endeavor going. Evolution is a theoretical disaster. We have not conquered anything and can't figure out how to stop a gushing oil disaster that could potentially threaten every ocean on earth. Hawkins is pathetic and so are those who hang on the overextended promises and false hypothesis' of the blanket so called science community.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/06/07/9 ... z0qEamBzbD

[Brenda]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Brenda Brenda:

Explain the difference?
Why are we humans worth more than a chicken? I thought we are all Gods creatures?

Anywho, I am not religious, and I certainly have no problem with creating animal life for the sole purpose of consumption, and I also do not see a bunch of cells as human life, so I have no problem in creating a fertile egg for the sole purpose of curing disease.

Sentience? Sentience is a pretty good factor. Animals do not have the mental capacity, let alone the moral or ethical obligations that God created for humanity.

And no. I'm not arguing this even further because you're just making a strawman argument because you don't even believe that humans and animals are at the same level. If you did see that, you would have an issue with putting a horse down with a broken leg, while we do our best to help humans with similar injuries and disabilities. All of us being "God's creatures" does not make us all equal under God.

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/ ... ecnum=4226

Read this if you're seriously wanting an answer to distinctions between human and animal life.

So you see a bunch of cells in a petri dish as more worthy than a horse with a broken leg?

Btw, I didn't realize my personal beliefs had anything to do with the difference between science and religion. Devil's Advocate sound familiar?

Other than that, I don't think God created anything. Not human life, not animal life.

[sandorski]

All Religion is Fail. That's all that needs be said. Whether Hawkins is right or not is for History to decide.

[djakeydd]

Yeah, thats why ppl like hawkins and suzuki are fails, their religion of paganism and humanism is a proven abject failure

[commanderkai]

Brenda Brenda:

So you see a bunch of cells in a petri dish as more worthy than a horse with a broken leg?

Actually I never said that at all. I asked THIS question to you.

commanderkai commanderkai:

You don't see a distinction between a human life and a chicken, or a pig?

And you answered:

Brenda Brenda:

Scientifically, yes. Religiously, no.

I asked about a human life and a chicken or a pig. I didn't say a few cells in a petri dish and a chicken. You made an assumption that I see a few cells as human.

[Brenda]

djakeydd djakeydd:

Yeah, thats why ppl like hawkins and suzuki are fails, their religion of paganism and humanism is a proven abject failure

That's not considered a religion. Although, if you throw Al Gore into this, and pretend they are self-proclaimed Gods, then you have a point...

[Brenda]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Brenda Brenda:

So you see a bunch of cells in a petri dish as more worthy than a horse with a broken leg?

Actually I never said that at all. I asked THIS question to you.

commanderkai commanderkai:

You don't see a distinction between a human life and a chicken, or a pig?

And you answered:

Brenda Brenda:

Scientifically, yes. Religiously, no.

I asked about a human life and a chicken or a pig. I didn't say a few cells in a petri dish and a chicken. You made an assumption that I see a few cells as human.

Fair enough. So where do you think human life starts?
According to Bart, it starts at fertilization. I don't agree, scientifically. Since Barts reasoning was religiously, and you asked me about human life and a chicken while we were talking about fetuses who are aborted and harvested, I assumed you agreed with him, meaning that human life starts (in this case) in a petri dish.
We are talking "a few days old fetuses", which cannot be detected in the human body yet, thus not aborted either.

[Zipperfish]

Neither our country's abortion nor stem cell policy has anyting to do with science. Medical science has progressed to the point where aboertions can be conducted relatviely safely (for the mother) and we can harvest stem cells.

Science has merely progressed to the point where we can do this; it is silent on the issue of whether or not we should be doing it.

[djakeydd]

Brenda Brenda:

djakeydd djakeydd:

Yeah, thats why ppl like hawkins and suzuki are fails, their religion of paganism and humanism is a proven abject failure

That's not considered a religion. Although, if you throw Al Gore into this, and pretend they are self-proclaimed Gods, then you have a point...

Thank you, I was including the Rev. Gore. HOnorable mention also goes to Gorby and moe strong..