|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
posted June 29, 2007 02:39 PM |
|
Edited by Consis at 14:43, 29 Jun 2007.
|
Binabik,
A fascinating piece of legwork you've done there. The popularity of this particular field of science seems to be rooted on the false belief that a person can cheat death in some small way. That concept alone is enough to convince me that the wealthy persons of our day must surely be pursuing it with unrivaled zeal. What the government wants with it exactly.....I am uncertain. That old theory behind Captain America the comic book superhero seems ever more likely especially now.
What if as a society we began systematically extracting and storing cells at incremental stages of growth in our childrens' lives? Let's say, what if cells were extracted and stored at birth, then at age 10, and again at 16. Or what if cellular extraction became a yearly thing as easily and commonly as we do with blood extraction for tests? And then in our older ages, when aging problems arise, we then use our own youthfully extracted cells to combat the problem? This seems the most likely reason for our grandchildren to live to be 150 years old. That's what all the studies I've read are suggesting--that our grandchildren will live to be 150, but they don't give any reasons why. They say it is based on a calculation of growth that human beings began since the earliest records of human life spans. It all seems very interesting.
____________
Roses Are Red And So Am I
|
|
dkolb
Promising
Known Hero
Nay Nay and Aslan Protector
|
posted July 08, 2007 02:17 PM |
|
|
"I notice that everybody who is Pro-Abortion has already been born."
an interesting observation, no?
|
|
Pomo
Famous Hero
The lone peasant
|
|
posted July 08, 2007 04:05 PM |
|
|
Quote:
"I notice that everybody who is Pro-Abortion has already been born."
an interesting observation, no?
Short answer: no, it's not.
|
|
dkolb
Promising
Known Hero
Nay Nay and Aslan Protector
|
|
posted July 08, 2007 04:49 PM |
|
Edited by dkolb at 16:51, 08 Jul 2007.
|
Quote:
you are right... the death penalty is a whole series of topics in and on itself... the reason i brought it up however is that, to me at least, it seems a bit hypocritical to be pro-life when it comes to adoption and pro-death when it comes to the death penalty
...all life is sacred, right?
Ah but see there are two sides to a coin.
On death row there is a man who has been wanting to die for a long time.
His name is Allen Holman and he is a ruthless murderer.
His execution keeps on getting delayed because the state medical board has threatened to punish any doctor who takes part in an execution.
"Why do they have a problem? They perform abortions, murder babies all the time," Holman told The Associated Press in an interview at the state's Central Prison. "They all of a sudden got conscience about their Hippocratic oath.
This guy is hardly a puppet of the pro-life movement
asked if he felt bad about his murder he said:
"I don't feel no remorse or regret about what I did. I haven't cried no tears."
I tell you this to illustrate a point.
If it is hypocrisy to be pro-life but for the death penalty, then it is equally hypocritical to be pro-choice but against the death penalty.
Just stirring up the pot....
Abortion is a very strongly held belief one way or the other, at any rate so I do not wish to linger here.
@Pomo: I'm sorry you were not born with a sense of irony.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 17, 2008 05:04 AM |
|
|
Wow. Having read over this thread again, my thought on abortion have certainly changed. I'm still pro-choice, but I'm strongly against third-trimester abortions unless the mother's health is in danger.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted May 17, 2008 07:09 AM |
|
|
Going to avoid the abortion issue for now. Contraception - I am all for it. Helps prevent unwanted pregnancies. All good in my opinon.
Stem Cell - Getting close the abortion issue, but there is some differences. Now they have started to be able to retrieve stem cells from adult cells. Which is a good thing.
Now I am not going to say if I am for or against abortion (I will say there is sometimes I am and sometimes I am not). I will say that if abortions are going to take place anyhow, then perhaps it is time to set up an arrangement with the mothers and fathers. Instead of aborting the fetus, let the fetus be used in stem cell research. Thus a potential tragedy can at least have a chance to be benificial.
As to the creating of a fetus specifically for stem cell, that I think is wrong.
People no longer want to have any consequences for their actions. Get pregnant, have it aborted. Commit a crime, blame it on somebody/something else. Get to 100 lbs overweight? Have it sucked out.
Now if it is not a choice that opens up another can of worms.
____________
Message received.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 17, 2008 02:15 PM |
|
|
Abortion is hardly consequence-free. It can damage a woman's health. And it often has an emotional impact as well.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
executor
Famous Hero
Otherworldly Ambassador
|
|
posted May 17, 2008 06:15 PM |
|
|
50% of all abortions end up in a woman's death.
____________
Understanding is a three-edged sword.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 17, 2008 06:42 PM |
|
|
That depends on if you consider abortion to be murder.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
executor
Famous Hero
Otherworldly Ambassador
|
|
posted May 18, 2008 12:54 AM |
|
Edited by executor at 00:54, 18 May 2008.
|
And that depends on whether you consider the fetus to be human or not.
From genetics point of view, it is human. No other branch of science proved otherwise  .
____________
Understanding is a three-edged sword.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 18, 2008 02:04 AM |
|
|
From a genetics perspective, a human corpse is human too.
It depends on whether you consider a fetus to be alive, and, if so, when. And when it is alive, how you balance it against the will of the mother.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
executor
Famous Hero
Otherworldly Ambassador
|
|
posted May 18, 2008 12:21 PM |
|
|
Corpses aren't alive. Fetus is.
And if it is, belancing it's life against mother's will is out of question. Agaisnt her life or health, yes, but not will. She did not have to have sex (exception: rape).
Do you balance your own right to live against the will of a guy who wants you dead because your existence is inconvienent to him ?
____________
Understanding is a three-edged sword.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted May 18, 2008 01:42 PM |
|
|
Quote:
50% of all abortions end up in a woman's death.
Hmm....... FOOL!!! If its done with the needed equipment it cannot cause death unless its very close to the birth......
Doing aborting with like......... these:
its a high %chance to die from it, same goes with all bad medical equipment or metods.....
You will die from the injury, soo stop the 50% chance to die.....
I think we should follow the jewish practice: A allready born person is priored before a "potenisal" person.
You get raped, and you get pregnant. Its like a 9 month punishment, and you where the victim. If abortion is not allowed the victim will suffere likely severe mental pain along with more pain after the birth. I know women are stronger mentaly then men, however this is soo extreme that a male mind would likely have gone completely insane or killed himself instantely at the first possible occation.
Soo am i rigth????
If you was told that you would have a high chance of death if you give birth, i think you would have wanted a abortion unless its very close to birth(several days away, some genes or someting kicks in affecting the mind).
If you got a baby, and you want to breatfeed it and get pregnant. The issue here is: take abortion to keep breatfeeding the kid or wait for the "potensial" kid? Its a big issue.
If you where told your kid will be born with no brain, would you still give birth? I think there was a case on this, the woman gave birth soo the kids organs could help others.
Soo its a big and confusing issue.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted May 18, 2008 02:04 PM |
|
|
I just read backwards a few pages and........... i think this manga is a interissting addition to the topic.
http://www.onemanga.com/Bitter_Virgin/1/
It covers rape, abortion, pregnancy, loss, love, the mental problems after stuff like rape, jealusy......
I't unlogical on some places like all other fictional work, but it covers some of this topic pretty good.
|
|
executor
Famous Hero
Otherworldly Ambassador
|
|
posted May 18, 2008 02:34 PM |
|
Edited by executor at 14:40, 18 May 2008.
|
Quote:
Hmm....... FOOL!!! If its done with the needed equipment it cannot cause death unless its very close to the birth......
Sorry but I meant the fetuses - statistically, 50% of them are female.
Mvass was able to get my intention, but since you didn't, perhaps I should be more straightforward with my statements in the future.
And as for your other reservations, I already said that in cases of life or health danger to the mother, as well as rape, the matter is not that easy, and I accept voluntary abortion there(it's still killing, but justified by danger to another person - mother in that case).
But if these requirements are obsolete, I consider abortion to be nothing but murder.
____________
Understanding is a three-edged sword.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 18, 2008 03:42 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Fetus is.
One's arm is also alive, but that doesn't make it illegal to cut it off.
Abortion is okay (well, not okay, but permissible) in the first trimester. Otherwise, it should be only based on the health of the mother.
Quote:
Do you balance your own right to live against the will of a guy who wants you dead because your existence is inconvienent to him?
If I was physically attached to someone against their will, and the only way they could remove me was to kill me, then they would have the right to do so.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
executor
Famous Hero
Otherworldly Ambassador
|
|
posted May 18, 2008 04:10 PM |
|
|
Quote:
If I was physically attached to someone against their will, and the only way they could remove me was to kill me, then they would have the right to do so.
That is pararrel to rape, but in most cases, women have sex willingly, so they should be responsible for their actions. If that man did something and he knew it could end in someone else becoming attached to him, then that is not against his will. He accepted the odds by doing that action, regardless how long they were.
And arm is not a separate being - your arm is part of you. Fetus is not a part of woman's body. Umbilical cord is. But as long as one considers fetus to be a human being, removal of it is murder(unless fetus does it itself, then it would have been suicide, but I would not count on it).
The first trimester is a matter of many controversies - brain is not fully developed yet, so there is a dispute in determining whether fetus is human or not. I consider it to be a human being so intended removal of it is simply killing for me.
____________
Understanding is a three-edged sword.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 18, 2008 05:14 PM |
|
|
Quote:
women have sex willingly, so they should be responsible for their actions
That's not what I meant. What I meant was that the woman doesn't want the fetus attached to her, so it is attached to her against her will.
Quote:
Fetus is not a part of woman's body.
That's debatable.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
executor
Famous Hero
Otherworldly Ambassador
|
|
posted May 18, 2008 05:44 PM |
|
Edited by executor at 17:46, 18 May 2008.
|
Quote:
Quote:
women have sex willingly, so they should be responsible for their actions
That's not what I meant. What I meant was that the woman doesn't want the fetus attached to her, so it is attached to her against her will.
I know, but I emphasis the fact they know the odds that the fetus will start to exist, and that these odds > 0(in most cases), regardless how long they were. So she could have avoided it for sure. But she chose not to, so she should assume responsibility. Father also should, but that's a bit another story.
Quote:
Quote:
Fetus is not a part of woman's body.
That's debatable.
True, but most biologists, especially geneticians would agree that it is a separate organism. So do I.
____________
Understanding is a three-edged sword.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted May 18, 2008 05:54 PM |
|
|
Stop blabbering...........
The fetus is leecheing nurishment from its mother, growing inside its mother, and soo on.
If you don't want to be pregnant and don't want the child you would easly compare it to a parasite.
Soo in my eyes, it's a part of the mom............
|
|
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
