 |
 |
This applies after the child is born also - a child not trained to be a thinking human grows into an animal - which explains a lot ...... > Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 23:39:15 -0700 > From: [log in to unmask] > Subject: "left alone" = 0 > To: [log in to unmask] > > In IVF it takes adult intervention for these cells to become a child. If > left alone and not implanted in a human uterus they must either be frozen, > discarded, or used for medical research. They wouldn't become anything. > No human being is formed if "left alone". > > this is why it is poor policy to let people who don't understand the > science to decide what kind of science will be pursued. > > -----Original Message----- > From: David McMurray > Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 8:16 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: MJFOX ON SANTORUM > > Here's a unique thought, a simple consideration; why try to be God and > arbitrarily declare when those cells become a child? Why not agree that, > left alone without adult intervention, a human is being formed with his or > her special, unchangeable identity.....then, change our expensive, slothful > government adoption bureaucracy. This would allow a streamlined, efficient > way for those who would adopt a US baby except for the red tape. Faith > based programs would be a great expediter if the bureaucracy would help or > get out of the way. If this could happen, everybody should be happy. The > mother doesn't have to raise the child, the adoption family gets the child > they couldn't otherwise have, and the baby, at least has a shot at a loving > family relationship. > > One of the problems with that scenario is that there are those that are > using abortion as a birth control procedure and they are unwilling to carry > the child to full term. This is sad, but true. > > Dave > > -----Original Message----- > From: jcu > Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 5:11 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: MJFOX ON SANTORUM > > All of this is so intriguing. 'Personhood, and when it begins' sounds like > such a noble debate. But once a child is born, exactly when does their > 'personhood' actually get respected? Exactly when are children ever > truly treated like 'citizens' in any real sense of that word? > > The hypocrisy of these thinkers is astounding! > > A baffled canadian, > joan > > > > On 2012-03-16, at 11:36 PM, Rayilyn Brown wrote: > > > Rick > > > > I like your observation that life is a continuum. We were all star dust > > once. > > > > IVF sure changed the abortion argument didn't it? I mean who knew about > > zygotes among the non-scientific population? > > > > People who oppose science and base their opinions on faith should not be > > making research decisions in a secular society IMO. > > > > What I am most concerned about is this hostility to science. Faith > > didn't give us knowledge of DNA or IVF. > > > > -----Original Message----- From: Rick McGirr > > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 12:45 PM > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: Re: MJFOX ON SANTORUM > > > > After listening to MJ Fox's diplomatic approach, I clicked on the short > > with Ron Paul and heard his pandering. I have also heard Santorum's > > absolute statements, and Gingrich's hypocritical traditionalism, Romney's > > posturing, and President Obama's strong support for a woman's right to > > choose. I can characterize much of what I hear as political "peacock-ing", > > if you'll allow me. > > > > The discussion about when a person's life begins is an interesting one. I > > expect that the more convinced one is about when personhood begins, the > > more resolute one will be about the issue of when abortion is allowable. > > The view that the fetus' life need not be considered at all seems to have > > taken a back seat to the idea that, at some stage along the way, a viable > > human person emerges during the nine month process, and "person" means > > "citizen" and "citizen" means "rights". > > > > For me, the terms need further clarification. "Life" to me is a continuum. > > If I fully represent my views here, it will be something different than > > what others would state. The questions crop up like new plant growth after > > a forest fire. Trying to be a bit dainty here, there is a lot of "life" > > that ends up in places other than where God intended for our propagation. > > If a couple copulate unsuccessfully, are eggs and sperm cells "life", even > > when they don't combine? Is this an example of when "life" ends? How is > > this life/death to be classified? Is there evidence of a moment at which > > the breath of life is blown into a group of cells? Does this "breath" > > cause a group of cells to be an individual? When is it appropriate to > > bestow full citizen's rights to this group of cells? Is there a moment > > which passes, after which we can draw the distinction between persons and > > biological material? Further, do frozen, non-implanted embryos meet any > > such definitions? These 'groups of cells' are not in a survivable > > condition, once they are thawed. They still have to successfully be > > implanted by the doctor, and attach to the uterine wall of the candidate > > mother and develop the umbilical cord, etc, through the months during > > gestation. Is there a mother/child relationship between the un-implanted > > embryo while it survives in the womb? Is the woman actually a "mother", > > before, during, and/or after such attempts are made, either in the bedroom > > or the laboratory? In the case of unsuccessful attempts, should the > > doctor, or the copulating couple, be charged with negligence or worse? > > This is not a ridiculous question, within the framework of current > > discussions, that is, if "life begins at conception". > > > > Are these and a host of other questions not legally, socially, > > religiously, personally, politically pertinent? Is this not as thorny a > > range of subjects as you could encounter in any creekside raspberry patch? > > > > My view is that even though males participate in the process of > > procreation, women ought to be the majority of any body deciding on a > > woman's right to ask for and receive abortion. If I were a woman, I > > wouldn't want any gaggle of rich, white men to sit in judgment of my > > sexuality and the sanctity of my actions. I also view the discussion of a > > woman's right to abortion services as a distracting parallel discussion on > > the rights of the cells of embryos. My view is that there is no evidence > > of personhood at the stage of combined sperm and egg, before implantation > > in the uterus, including those embryos in the freezers of IVF clinics. The > > use of such embryos for medical research should be allowed and fully > > supported. > > > > So many questions, and so many answers... > > > > Rick McGirr > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Parkinson's Information Exchange Network > > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Rayilyn Brown > > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 11:51 PM > > To: [log in to unmask] > > Subject: MJFOX ON SANTORUM > > > > Fox has interesting take on Santorum’s ESCR beliefs: > > > > http://piersmorgan.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/14/michael-j-fox-on-rick-santorums-anti-stem-cell-research-beliefs-i-dont-want-to-suppress-ideas-i-dont-agree-with/?hpt=pm_mid > > > > Ray > > Rayilyn Brown > > Past Director AZNPF > > Arizona Chapter National Parkinson Foundation > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn