 |
 |
For sure; one thing we can all agree on is that PD has put us in the same boat, and we're all fighting, in varying degrees, the same enemy. I was diagnosed in 2005.. I knew some time before, that something was going on. I could tell I was'nt as sharp (flying and racing). I probably could have been experiencing the onset a year or more before I went in for a check-up. I can't imagine the level of your suffering. I have no frame of reference. I went progressively down hill the first 5 years (I won't repeat what I've said before) but have been doing much better the last couple years. Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rayilyn Brown" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2012 6:48 PM Subject: Re: NO FAITH VERSUS SCIENCE DILEMMA > Dave > > I'm glad you've found our exchanges stimulating and therapeutic as I > have. Thanks for putting yourself out there. I think I said before I > can't do much so it keeps the brain cells firing. > > How long have you had PD? My first five years were easy, but by 7 was > ready for DBS. This is my 16th. > > The last thing I would want to do is make anyone's life more difficult. > I think we all want to help each other! > > Ray > > -----Original Message----- > From: DAVID MCMURRAY > Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 8:54 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: NO FAITH VERSUS SCIENCE DILEMMA > > Ray, I appreciate your response, but no apology necessary. Our > discussions have been theraputic and stimulating to me. And I respect and > actually have been quite amazed at the work you have to be putting in to > feed the info you do to all the members. > > My battle with PD is obviously insignificant to what you have to deal > with. > I am one of the more fortunate ones; the progression has been almost > non-existant over the last couple years, for which I am most grateful. > > You're doing an exceptional job, and I'm sure the rest of the members feel > the same way. > > Regards, > > Dave > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rayilyn Brown" <[log in to unmask]> > To: <[log in to unmask]> > Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 11:41 PM > Subject: Re: NO FAITH VERSUS SCIENCE DILEMMA > > >> Dave >> >> I'm hard to offend. I know I sometimes give my opinion so I apologize. >> However, my aim has been to provide information rather than think I could >> change anybody else's opinion. I don't think I said "faith has no place >> in science", but are different ways of " knowing" our world. >> >> I don't think we were debating anything, but talking past each other. >> >> No harm done. >> >> Ray >> >> ----Original Message----- >> From: DAVID MCMURRAY >> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 1:02 PM >> To: [log in to unmask] >> Subject: Re: NO FAITH VERSUS SCIENCE DILEMMA >> >> Rick and Ray; >> I agreed to that a long time ago, but my posts have been a direct >> response >> to issues brought up by both of you. If you don't want me to respond to >> "faith has no place in science", don't post it. I was invited to debate >> the >> "when does life begin" subject.... >> >> If I have offended anyone, I apologize, I thought we were having an >> honest, >> objective debate on issues important to all of us. >> >> I do, unless I get kicked off, intend to respond if these and similar >> statements are posted to the membership. >> >> Regards; >> >> Dave >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Rick McGirr" <[log in to unmask]> >> To: <[log in to unmask]> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 11:39 AM >> Subject: Re: NO FAITH VERSUS SCIENCE DILEMMA >> >> >>> Ray, I think you meant to address this to Dave. I agree with you. >>> >>> Dave, I think the conversation threatens to veer wide from the purpose >>> of >>> this listserv. If we cannot help the cause, which is fighting PD, then >>> we >>> should go somewhere else to 'talk' about other issues such as personally >>> held beliefs or misconceptions, or the benefits and limits of science or >>> religion. >>> >>> I stand ready to discuss a range of subjects, anything you like, >>> anywhere >>> you like, public or private. But we've heard from a great many here who >>> would love to avoid the arguments that often erupt. Unfortunately, >>> science >>> and religion do seem to intersect over PD and medical research, and that >>> causes sparks. Many people around the world use this list as a forum for >>> giving and getting support and advice on the ups and downs of living >>> with >>> PD. I respect that, and I think it's a very important use for this >>> listserv. I think I'm pretty much done with commenting on religion >>> and/or >>> science here. I'm inviting any others who might want to continue the >>> conversation to suggest a forum for us to meet, thereby saving this >>> place >>> for those who need it. >>> >>> Let me suggest Gather.com, where I have been occasionally posting >>> different things since 2006. It's designed more for writers, rather than >>> the quick and easy format of facebook. There are many viewpoints >>> represented there, and thousands of members. It's not the fastest site, >>> but its content is rich and varied. >>> >>> Rick McGirr >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Parkinson's Information Exchange Network >>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Rayilyn Brown >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 1:30 AM >>> To: [log in to unmask] >>> Subject: NO FAITH VERSUS SCIENCE DILEMMA >>> >>> Rick >>> >>> Poverty, starvation, and horrible diseases like Parkinson's threaten >>> human >>> dignity, not science. There is nothing noble about Alzheimer's, ALS or >>> Huntington's. I do not wish to return to the lives of our ancestors >>> living in cold caves, eating raw meat and dying at 18. >>> >>> And another thing, it is not faith versus science. They are two >>> different >>> ways of "knowing" about our existence; one requires evidence and is >>> self-correcting, the other allows you to believe anything you want. It >>> is >>> not a matter of picking one over the other, but of knowing the >>> difference >>> between the two. >>> >>> Ray >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: DAVID MCMURRAY >>> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 4:58 PM >>> To: [log in to unmask] >>> Subject: Re: MJFOX ON SANTORUM/FAITH VERSUS SCIENCE >>> >>> Ray, there are many voices in the scientic community on both sides of >>> the >>> issue, but, unfortuneatly, the loudest seem to come from athiests that >>> are >>> on a mision to prove there is no God.. An example of this is one you >>> may >>> know, James Randi, who was kicked out of a Sunday School class and has >>> dedicated his life, as an atheist, "tried and true". He agrees with >>> guys >>> like biologist Richard Dawkins, (this info is gleaned from Big Think >>> Editors) who has stated that scientists never need faith. But then goes >>> on >>> to say that his "faith is based on the scientific method. (a religion)? >>> >>> David Gelernter, a professor of computer science at Yale University has >>> expressed concern that technology will eventually threaten human dignity >>> and >>> integrity, making the "wisdom" and "moral seriousness" found in religion >>> even more important to future generations". He says without the moral >>> absolutes found in religion, technology's increasinrg intrusion into >>> human >>> life via cloning and genetic engineering may present a "tremendously >>> dangerous, moral conflict of interest" to mankind. >>> >>> For me, it takes more faith to believe that the universe just >>> haphazardly >>> came together in perfect orderly fashion, (the result of a Big Bang), >>> than >>> to believe in a Creator. >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Rayilyn Brown" <[log in to unmask]> >>> To: <[log in to unmask]> >>> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 8:36 PM >>> Subject: Re: MJFOX ON SANTORUM >>> >>> >>>> 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 >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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