 |
 |
I have tried to keep silent on this round of ugly comments on those of us who question the morality of stem-cell research, but sorry -- just can't do it any longer. The comments below are just a sampling of what we have had to put up with. Please refrain from making sweeping generalizations about pro-lifers who believe that the baby in the womb IS a fellow human being -- the consequences to him/her is obviously life or death. We are not talking about mere tissue, but a baby. I know many of you don't agree with that, but don't assume those of who do are pro-death. The truth is that we are very much pro-life. >Michel Margosis wrote: >Bill, your argument is based on logic and reasoning and may be acceptable to >people of reason. The problem lies in the fact that anti-abortionists base >their actions only on emotions and blind faith, regardless of consequence to >their fellow humans. If this could be discussed rationally on theological >grounds by experts in the Good Book, greater headway could be made. >Michel On Wed, 19 Jan 2000 13:28:24 -0500 Joao Paulo Carvalho <[log in to unmask]> writes: > My answer as I read the news is : > > Some "No-cell" Zealots will not hesitate to blow-up clinics and kill > doctors > that believe that a cure may be found using stem cells . Their > behaviour is > much similar to those moslem zealots that believe they will gain the > heaven > if they kill people that they believe insult their religion in some > way as > was the case of the indian writer that wrote the book "Satanic > Verses" .... > > Paul Ayers wrote: > > > >From one PWP I am highly offended, Zealots come in many forms. > What's > > the difference in "No-cell" Zealots and "Got to have Cell" > Zealots? > > -- > Joao Paulo - Salvador,Bahia,Brazil > [log in to unmask]