 |
 |
Ray wrote: "One of his was it would destroy the family because it involves asexual reproduction. Guess he's never heard of IVF." Just as an FYI, the President's Council of Bioethics, which seems to have thrown off even the pretense of being remotely balanced on this issue (see the most recent issue of The New Atlantis, five essays on The Embryo Question, easily accessed online at http://www.thenewatlantis.com/), has deemed IVF *sexual* reproduction because, they say, the essence of sexual reproduction is *really* the union of egg and sperm; this definition conveniently takes out the IVF counter to the asexual reproduction argument. great letter, rayilyn - thank you. Mackenzie Rayilyn Brown <[log in to unmask]> wrote: Whether you are pro or con re therapeutic cloning I strongly encourage you to deluge the Arizona Republic with letters. They won't publish them all, but the level of debate on this issue is very embryonic here in AZ. In fact its about where the Congress was about 3 years ago when they stopped both reproductive and therapeutic cloning in the Senate. We need to at least raise the level of public awareness. On Sunday there was a a full page with photo of Republican Rep. Bob Stump talking about his HB 2221 banning state funding of both therapeutic and reproductive cloning. It passed today, but not without my objection in an article "Ban on use of Arizona Funds for human cloning advances". I did manage to knock of the "it's immoral, I won't pay for it" argument, but I live in Surprise, not Peoria, AZ The reporter knows very little about this subject. My advocacy of therapeutic cloning is not supported by all of you, but what I really can't stand is ignorance. Stump didn't even know all the arguments against TC. One of his was it would destroy the family because it involves asexual reproduction. Guess he's never heard of IVF. I sometimes had to argue with myself when I taught Advanced Placement Hiistory, but don't think I want to in this situation. Anyway, you all know this is a complicated subject not limited to 200 words. Both sides of the issue will be distorted because of the nature and constraints of the news media. This does affect you. So please, if you can, help educate Arizona, maybe by focusing on one aspect of the debate in 200 words or less. Here is their email: [log in to unmask] thanks, Ray ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'