 |
 |
Joao, This exhausts me. When it comes right down to it, it is a religious vs. scientific debate. If you believe in God and the Bible and that life comes from God, and He breathed the breath of life into Adam, and He knew us in our mother's womb before we were born, and there is sickness and deformities in the world because we are under the sin nature...and therefore cursed...and therefore brainless babies can happen, then you would understand our side. To us the philosophical side is as important as the scientific one. If you do not believe in the Bible then you just go on science alone and voila you have a difference of beliefs! Let's just agree to disagree. Jen, Dad w/ PD 55/39 -----Original Message----- From: Joao Carvalho [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 10:31 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: stem cells Hi Bob, Like Jack the Stripper used to say : "lets go by parts" ...but lets start with the last paragraph of you re : "Robert A. Fink, M. D." wrote: ***BTW, I don't advocate the throwing of bombs in front of abortion clinics, nor do most of those of us who oppose the unreasoned sacrifice of the unborn****....... Having you as I have in high regard,respect and admiration ,as a person and as a professional (even not agreeing with all yours points of view), I would be the last person to suspect or imagine you to advocate this Nazi behavior ....all I did mention was that some said "pro-life" elements did in past , and who knows may repeat it in the future , such condemned behavior, and that I did not understand how these people could assume to be "pro-life" while killing human beings. My sincere excuses if my bad English may ,by some reason, lead you for another interpretation of those words.. > Secondly you say " a human embryo/fetus is a human being. "......... I > > do not agree . A human being in my way of see it has to have human > > brain , human feelings , human memory , human conscience , to say the > > least . So , I believe the embryo is a group of cells derived of human > > bodies that has the potential to be transformed in the myriad of human > > cells and eventually with all conditions favorable (not the case in > > general) may generate a human being .. The point is : at such stage > > (as embryos) they are only human cells and not human beings . > > The medical profession (and the law in most places) has declared that > a human being is "dead" when they do not have any brain activity > and that this condition is irreversible. This state, called "brain-dead" > is the point where organs can be harvested for transplant, life-support > can be discontinued, etc. The people who have made this distinction > (and have codified it into law) have said that the *brain* is what > makes the "human tissue" truly human. I do agree with such view .... As result of this view I would not accept a new-born that sometimes are born with NO brain ought to be considered as a "human being" ,as long he has not the most fundamental organ to characterize a human being. Along the same line of reasoning an embryo has no brain, and also cannot be considered a human being even if given the proper conditions might have later the potential to become one. > If this is correct, then what about the fact that a human fetus, at about > 8 weeks' gestation, has a recordable EEG (and, as our technology gets > better, maybe even earlier!). If that collection of "human cells" was You now are talking of human fetus , at about 8 weeks'gestation and so far we were talking of embryos . Best regards Cheers, Joao Paulo - Salvador,BA,Brazil [log in to unmask]