One more point made on BigThink Editors that should encourage believers that 
are questioning the issue; Rutgers anthropologist Lionel Tiger and his 
colleague Michael McGuire wrote a book called "God's Brain".  Their treatise 
is that in every human brain there is a neurochemical secretion that proves 
religion is a matter of science.  I read somewhere that there is a vacuum 
formed in everyone that can only be filled by God. Seems as though maybe our 
Creator has trumped man's wisdom by design......interesting

I haven't read the book, yet, but I think it may be a must read for anyone 
seriously considering these issues.

Dave








> Ray, there are many voices in the scientic community on both sides of the 
> issue, but, unfortuneatly, the loudest seem to come from athiests that are 
> on a mision to prove there is no God..  An example of  this is one you may 
> know, James Randi, who was kicked out of a Sunday School class and has 
> dedicated his life, as an atheist, "tried and true".  He agrees with guys 
> like biologist Richard Dawkins, (this info is gleaned from Big Think 
> Editors) who has stated that scientists never need faith.  But then goes 
> on to say that his "faith is based on the scientific method.  (a 
> religion)?
>
> David Gelernter, a professor of computer science at Yale University has 
> expressed concern that technology will eventually threaten human dignity 
> and integrity, making the "wisdom" and "moral seriousness" found in 
> religion even more important to future generations".  He says without the 
> moral absolutes found in religion, technology's increasinrg intrusion into 
> human life via cloning and genetic engineering may present a "tremendously 
> dangerous, moral conflict of interest" to mankind.
>
> For me, it takes more faith to believe that the universe just haphazardly 
> came together in perfect orderly fashion, (the result of a Big Bang), than 
> to believe in a Creator.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Rayilyn Brown" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 8:36 PM
> Subject: Re: MJFOX ON SANTORUM
>
>
>> 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