 |
 |
Greg, Bob, others, debating by arguing with understandings one has reached in regard to topics is discussion that clarifies our thinking. dogmatic statements of what people are told is god's truth - which they then parrot without thinking about - are out of place. these theological postulations are not determinable - unless this god is into debating - which i find has not happened. ethical codes are supposed to guide doctors and lawyers. scientists seek truth. theologians seek to rationalize dogma. atheists argue against all dogma by simply not believing any. life began once perhaps - has evolved into many instances - most of which depend upon some other species. our human species lacks ethics in many of it's most prominent. ron >Bob, >I really don't think we are that far apart on the issue of stem cell >research. I don't want to see "Soylent Green" baby factories >either. I would only support research involving human embryos if >proper safeguards against abuse were in place. I think the NIH has >addressed that issue. I would strongly object to any person >profiting by initiating pregnancies solely for harvesting the >embryos. That is morally wrong. > >Those who question these List discussions can learn from this >exchange of ideas. The more you hash things out the better you >understand your opponents position, and your own. > >Greg >47/35/35