 |
 |
While I understand most people posting here are very passionate about their beliefs because they are directly or indirectly affected by the ravages of this disease. The function of this list should to be disseminate information, dispel inaccurate information and to lend hope and encouragement to all. Posting of insults to anyone's beliefs serves no real purpose except to inflate the ego of the one that is putting down another's belief. When Rayilyn Brown uses words like "Flat Earth Thinkers...stalling humane progress" it does not meet her stated objective of "Hoping people will look at this with an open Mind" Why insult a person you would hope to share enlightenment with. I would urge everyone to share enlightenment, not fuel another's persons equally impassioned belief that may not match yours. Support an argument through respectful logical support of your belief not through disrespectful name calling of those who do not believe the same. With all due respect rewrite your article prior to publication. It just may have a better chance of enlightenment. Your audience is not those who believe the same, it is those whom you wish to convince. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rayilyn Brown" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 3:43 PM Subject: A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY > Dear supporters of Feinstein Bill 2439: > > This will be my second column in The Californian.probably this weekend. I was > restricted to 600 words. If anyone wants to see the longer one let me know. > Also, feel free to use all or in part, or change a few words, add to it to > spread the word. I'm in Murritea, California. > > A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY > “We must not create life to destroy it”, insisted President Bush in his > ill-advised call for a ban on therapeutic cloning. Last summer the House also > prematurely jettisoned therapeutic along with reproductive cloning in an > unprecedented display of ignorance about the difference between the two. > > For the first time in human history cures for diseases that shorten and > devastate the lives of millions of people and their families may be within > the grasp of medical researchers. This giant step for mankind may not be > taken if the Senate passes the Brownback bill instead of the Feinstein bill, > which prohibits only reproductive cloning. The Brownback bill not only bans > Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer(SCNT) therapeutic cloning, but even worse, > imposes Draconian criminal penalties of $100,000.00 and ten years in prison > for researchers and patients who go abroad for treatment. > > Therapeutic cloning involves using an unfertilized egg and a patient’s own > DNA to cure his disease. So, just whose life is being taken when SCNT is > used, the “eggshell” or the person’s own delayed twin? There would be no > twin as both bills ban reproductive cloning. Wouldn’t this procedure in fact > “create life” by making it worth living or allowing a pain-free normal life > span for people of all ages? > > When “life” with civil rights begins is a question of where to draw the > line. However, opponents of SCNT seem to want to push it back to the “glint > in your father’s eye”, or a romantic candlelight dinner. A baby girl is > born with approximately 150,000 eggs. Does anyone really expect 150,000 live > births from one female? Eggs are lost every month. Is anyone going to > retrieve them? And what about those poor little guys, those billions of > sperm? Sadly, there is not an egg for every sperm. > > Therapeutic cloning does not use fetuses or babies, but germ and somatic > cells. For over 20 years the cloning of cells and genes have been used to > produce medicines, diagnostics and vaccines to treat a whole host of > maladies, track the origin of biological weapons, catch criminals, free > innocent people, and produce new plants and livestock. Furthermore, there is > a long history of voluntarily imposed constraints and ethical moratoria on > biotechnology research by physicians and scientists themselves. > > So why do opponents of SCNT fear rampaging clones? Unfounded concerns have > been expressed in the past about new medical therapies, now routine, which > are not forced on anyone. For example, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not use blood > transfusions. People who oppose organ transplants don’t donate theirs to give > life to others. Those who originally objected to in vitro fertilization as > “playing God” may now applaud the birth of litters without regard for the > extra embryos that are routinely destroyed in the process. Opponents of SCNT > have a right to their beliefs and a moral commitment to non-existent > entities, but not the right to deny life-saving medical therapies to those > who do not share them. > > The challenges of the 21st century are different from those faced by our > ancestors sitting in cold caves eating raw meat thousands of years ago. > Since science has so far outdistanced religion and politics in the last > century, it is difficult for all of us to make a rational and humane decision > in this matter. Nevertheless, we are all morally obligated to try to > understand the science of SCNT before we reject it. It has taken us a long > time to come this far and it would be a terrible shame and great crime > against humanity if the descendants of the flat earth thinkers succeed in > stalling human progress and hope. > > Rayilyn Brown > [log in to unmask] > 40697 Corte Albara > Murrieta, CA 92562-5513 > 909-696-0908 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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