This applies after the child is born also - a child not trained to be a thinking human grows into an animal -
which explains a lot ......
 

> Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 23:39:15 -0700
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: "left alone" = 0
> To: [log in to unmask]
> 
> In IVF it takes adult intervention for these cells to become a child. If 
> left alone and not implanted in a human uterus they must either be frozen, 
> discarded, or used for medical research. They wouldn't become anything. 
> No human being is formed if "left alone".
> 
> this is why it is poor policy to let people who don't understand the 
> science to decide what kind of science will be pursued.
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: David McMurray
> Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 8:16 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: MJFOX ON SANTORUM
> 
> Here's a unique thought, a simple consideration; why try to be God and
> arbitrarily declare when those cells become a child? Why not agree that,
> left alone without adult intervention, a human is being formed with his or
> her special, unchangeable identity.....then, change our expensive, slothful
> government adoption bureaucracy. This would allow a streamlined, efficient
> way for those who would adopt a US baby except for the red tape. Faith
> based programs would be a great expediter if the bureaucracy would help or
> get out of the way. If this could happen, everybody should be happy. The
> mother doesn't have to raise the child, the adoption family gets the child
> they couldn't otherwise have, and the baby, at least has a shot at a loving
> family relationship.
> 
> One of the problems with that scenario is that there are those that are
> using abortion as a birth control procedure and they are unwilling to carry
> the child to full term. This is sad, but true.
> 
> Dave
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: jcu
> Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 5:11 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: MJFOX ON SANTORUM
> 
> All of this is so intriguing. 'Personhood, and when it begins' sounds like
> such a noble debate. But once a child is born, exactly when does their
> 'personhood' actually get respected? Exactly when are children ever
> truly treated like 'citizens' in any real sense of that word?
> 
> The hypocrisy of these thinkers is astounding!
> 
> A baffled canadian,
> joan
> 
> 
> 
> On 2012-03-16, at 11:36 PM, Rayilyn Brown wrote:
> 
> > Rick
> >
> > I like your observation that life is a continuum. We were all star dust 
> > once.
> >
> > IVF sure changed the abortion argument didn't it? I mean who knew about 
> > zygotes among the non-scientific population?
> >
> > People who oppose science and base their opinions on faith should not be 
> > making research decisions in a secular society IMO.
> >
> > What I am most concerned about is this hostility to science. Faith 
> > didn't give us knowledge of DNA or IVF.
> >
> > -----Original Message----- From: Rick McGirr
> > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 12:45 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: MJFOX ON SANTORUM
> >
> > After listening to MJ Fox's diplomatic approach, I clicked on the short 
> > with Ron Paul and heard his pandering. I have also heard Santorum's 
> > absolute statements, and Gingrich's hypocritical traditionalism, Romney's 
> > posturing, and President Obama's strong support for a woman's right to 
> > choose. I can characterize much of what I hear as political "peacock-ing", 
> > if you'll allow me.
> >
> > The discussion about when a person's life begins is an interesting one. I 
> > expect that the more convinced one is about when personhood begins, the 
> > more resolute one will be about the issue of when abortion is allowable. 
> > The view that the fetus' life need not be considered at all seems to have 
> > taken a back seat to the idea that, at some stage along the way, a viable 
> > human person emerges during the nine month process, and "person" means 
> > "citizen" and "citizen" means "rights".
> >
> > For me, the terms need further clarification. "Life" to me is a continuum. 
> > If I fully represent my views here, it will be something different than 
> > what others would state. The questions crop up like new plant growth after 
> > a forest fire. Trying to be a bit dainty here, there is a lot of "life" 
> > that ends up in places other than where God intended for our propagation. 
> > If a couple copulate unsuccessfully, are eggs and sperm cells "life", even 
> > when they don't combine? Is this an example of when "life" ends? How is 
> > this life/death to be classified? Is there evidence of a moment at which 
> > the breath of life is blown into a group of cells? Does this "breath" 
> > cause a group of cells to be an individual? When is it appropriate to 
> > bestow full citizen's rights to this group of cells? Is there a moment 
> > which passes, after which we can draw the distinction between persons and 
> > biological material? Further, do frozen, non-implanted embryos meet any 
> > such definitions? These 'groups of cells' are not in a survivable 
> > condition, once they are thawed. They still have to successfully be 
> > implanted by the doctor, and attach to the uterine wall of the candidate 
> > mother and develop the umbilical cord, etc, through the months during 
> > gestation. Is there a mother/child relationship between the un-implanted 
> > embryo while it survives in the womb? Is the woman actually a "mother", 
> > before, during, and/or after such attempts are made, either in the bedroom 
> > or the laboratory? In the case of unsuccessful attempts, should the 
> > doctor, or the copulating couple, be charged with negligence or worse? 
> > This is not a ridiculous question, within the framework of current 
> > discussions, that is, if "life begins at conception".
> >
> > Are these and a host of other questions not legally, socially, 
> > religiously, personally, politically pertinent? Is this not as thorny a 
> > range of subjects as you could encounter in any creekside raspberry patch?
> >
> > My view is that even though males participate in the process of 
> > procreation, women ought to be the majority of any body deciding on a 
> > woman's right to ask for and receive abortion. If I were a woman, I 
> > wouldn't want any gaggle of rich, white men to sit in judgment of my 
> > sexuality and the sanctity of my actions. I also view the discussion of a 
> > woman's right to abortion services as a distracting parallel discussion on 
> > the rights of the cells of embryos. My view is that there is no evidence 
> > of personhood at the stage of combined sperm and egg, before implantation 
> > in the uterus, including those embryos in the freezers of IVF clinics. The 
> > use of such embryos for medical research should be allowed and fully 
> > supported.
> >
> > So many questions, and so many answers...
> >
> > Rick McGirr
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Parkinson's Information Exchange Network 
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Rayilyn Brown
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 11:51 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: MJFOX ON SANTORUM
> >
> > Fox has interesting take on Santorum’s ESCR beliefs:
> >
> > http://piersmorgan.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/14/michael-j-fox-on-rick-santorums-anti-stem-cell-research-beliefs-i-dont-want-to-suppress-ideas-i-dont-agree-with/?hpt=pm_mid
> >
> > Ray
> > Rayilyn Brown
> > Past Director AZNPF
> > Arizona Chapter National Parkinson Foundation
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: 
> > mailto:[log in to unmask]
> > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: 
> > mailto:[log in to unmask]
> > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: 
> > mailto:[log in to unmask]
> > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn
 		 	   		  
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn