Sherack Nhar Posted January 7, 2003 Author Share Posted January 7, 2003 Originally posted by Cjais "Pro-life" cannot exist. There is only Anti-choice. You can't kill a foetus anymore than you can kill bacteria by showering. It only shows you put human life on a piedestal above everything else. The foetus is not an individual in any way. It is not human. But life? Yeah, sure, if that makes you feel "pro-life"... [...] Therapeutic cloning: Yes. Save lives. I'm for it. Reproductive cloning: No point really, unless to save endangered species. Then again, there'd be no need to save those species unless they contributed to the environment in a vital way. The technology certainly has no place amongst humans - we're already too many. Adopt a child instead. To those whose morals stand in the way of scientific development: Get the hell out of the way. I'm fine with you stopping it's use after it's been developed. But trying to stop science itself will only take us back to the dark ages. This man speaks my thoughts. It scares me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Originally posted by darthfergie I think cloning can be a good thing in certain cases (like the endagered species scen) I still think that. Reproductive cloning: No point really, unless to save endangered species. Then again, there'd be no need to save those species unless they contributed to the environment in a vital way. Yeah, well, every species has a right to survive. We have taken a lot of animal's rights this way. Every living thing depends on the other in the enviroment. It's called an ecosystem. Think of it this way: Plant -> rabbit -> owl. Rabbits die out in area. Plant -> ___ -> owl. Owl dies out (or eats the line, depending on ur interpritation:D ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Originally posted by Crazy_dog no.3 Yeah, well, every species has a right to survive. We have taken a lot of animal's rights this way. Every living thing depends on the other in the enviroment. It's called an ecosystem. Don't speak of "rights" when you're adressing nature itself. Did nature try to protect all the species which are now extinct? Did it care one icky bit? Things must die to give space to new ones. Yes, we're all connected, but not all dependant. And dependancy can change and adapt. Consider the example below: Plant -> rabbit -> owl. Rabbits die out in area. Plant -> ___ -> owl. Owl dies out (or eats the line, depending on ur interpritation:D ) If rabbits became extinct, the owls would have to find a new food source, EG mice, or adapt themselves to become scavengers. If they don't do one of these things, they'll have to move away or become extinct themselves. It is pointless to save every race right now. There's a thing called overpopulation, even amongst animals. It will never work, and we can only blame nature for not giving us enough space on this planet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Originally posted by Artoo Genetic manipulation [...] and crops can increase food output, Gene-seeding would be a big, fat stupid mistake: If you go to malaria countries, for example, you will find that an abnormally large percentage of the population suffers from a certain genetic disorder, that makes their red blood cells fold over, which means that they cannot transport oxygen as effectively. This, of course, is not smart. But, curiously, this configuration of blood cells offers partial protection against malaria. This example demonstrates the importance of biodiversity: Different genes may be able to combat different threats. So selecting genes would not be smart. quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Clefo I will, personally, never take a "Pro-Life" person seriously unless they are, well, Pro-Life (Don't understand what I'm saying? good) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Pro-life" is an impossible stance to take, since humans derive their energy from dead organic material. "Pro-life" is simply a nice way of saying "anti-choice". quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Darth_Rommel About the cloning thing... as the (modern) world gets older and older... well, we're eventually going to stop replacing ourselves... it's already a huge problem in Europe, since a whole generation was wiped out by WW2. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You have not seen the demographic statistics of the developing countries. I repeat: You have not seen the demographic statistics of the developing countries. @Tie Guy: There is no such thing as "evil". It is a concept invented by humans to justify their actions. @darthfergie: You have to notice that there are two main kinds of cloning: Reproductive (new humans), and therapeutic (new organs). You only comment on the reproductive side of things. Is this intentional? quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Havoc Stryphe As far as it being a publicity stunt... Had you or I heard of the Raelian Sect (Religion or Belief) before the announcement of the "Cloned" baby Eve's birth? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I actually had, yes. They were the nut-cases who wanted to clone Hitler some while back. To put him on trial, no less! Obviously, they don't know anything about cloning. quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Sherack Nhar This man speaks my thoughts. It scares me. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Come to the Swamp, come to the Swamp. We need you there! On a different note: You may want to know that, while in the US "liberal" means "left-wing" (as opposed to the conservative right-wing), in Europe it means "right-wing" (as opposed to the socialist left-wing). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Originally posted by Cjais Don't speak of "rights" when you're adressing nature itself. Did nature try to protect all the species which are now extinct? Did it care one icky bit? Things must die to give space to new ones. I don't adress nature, because there is no physical entity known as "nature" . Also the problem is more things are dying out than evolving. Those dying out include the Giant Panda. Those "new" ones are like those mutated frogs in New Mexico. I am not one of those people who would like a, say, planet-wide city. I mean, the Earth is meant to be one of those rare planets which has a wide variety of life. Lets keep it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tie Guy Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Originally posted by Cjais "Pro-life" cannot exist. There is only Anti-choice. You can't kill a foetus anymore than you can kill bacteria by showering. It only shows you put human life on a piedestal above everything else. The foetus is not an individual in any way. It is not human. But life? Yeah, sure, if that makes you feel "pro-life"... What?! How can you say that? Killing a fetus is killing an individual, a human. If you don't think the fetus is a human yet then fine (i personally do feel it is a human), but you cannot die that it will be a human very soon without intervention. You are killing the human that the fetus would have been, and that is exactly the same as killing a human while living. As for it not being an individual, it most certainly is. It already has a unigue genetic code that dictates who and what it is, a very particular human. A fetus is an individual from conception, and there's simply no way around it. You are destroying life, which anti-abortionists seek to save. Pro-lifers wish to save the lives of fetus's and therefore people, so how can you pro-life oesn't or can't that it doesn't exist? Anti-choice might be another way of saying it, but we aren't about preventing the rights of women, we're about perserving the rights of humans. ShadowTemplar, you do know it is possible to post all those things in one post, don't you? "Evil" does exist, and he has a name, Satan. As for pro-life meaning anti-choice, you can see above, but i have one more thing to say. Why should it be the mother's right to kill her child? Everyone agrees that if she did it after birth then it would be haneous, but its destroying life, be it present or future, either way. "Pro-choice" is just a nicer way of saying "pro-murder." On a different note: You may want to know that, while in the US "liberal" means "left-wing" (as opposed to the conservative right-wing), in Europe it means "right-wing" (as opposed to the socialist left-wing). Actually I didn't want to know that. I could care less about European politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherack Nhar Posted January 7, 2003 Author Share Posted January 7, 2003 Thanks for the kind words, Leon... but I was hoping this thread wouldn't turn out the way it did. If a mod would please close my thread, I'd appreciate it. And BTW, I'm not risking my life by going to the Swamp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havoc Stryphe Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 I agree with Tie guy with everything he just said (well, except the european politics thing ) and even though I agree with him, I just want to say... A whole new can of worms has just been opened up between cjais and Tie! Cloning and abortion in one thread! *Prepares for intense heat and flammage!* PS Go Tie, let them have it! (Well, he seems to have it under control right now. I'll jump in if he needs me too. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Originally posted by Havoc Stryphe Go Tie, let them have it! (Well, he seems to have it under control right now. I'll jump in if he needs me too. ) Brace for impact, coz you're gonna have to Deep Strike into this theatre to carry the day... Originally posted by Tie Guy What?! How can you say that? Killing a fetus is killing an individual, a human. If you don't think the fetus is a human yet then fine (i personally do feel it is a human), but you cannot die that it will be a human very soon without intervention. You are killing the human that the fetus would have been, and that is exactly the same as killing a human while living. As for it not being an individual, it most certainly is. It already has a unigue genetic code that dictates who and what it is, a very particular human. A fetus is an individual from conception, and there's simply no way around it. False. It is individual, yes. But it is not an individual. When you go from the adjective "individual" to the noun "individual" you presume that it has a conciousness. It does not have that. The conciousness is in the central nervous system, and as such is not yet developed. It is therefore no more an individual than your average bacterium. Originally posted by Tie Guy You are destroying life, which anti-abortionists seek to save. Pro-lifers wish to save the lives of fetus's and therefore people, so how can you pro-life oesn't or can't that it doesn't exist? Anti-choice might be another way of saying it, but we aren't about preventing the rights of women, we're about perserving the rights of humans. Anti-choicers seek to remove the woman's control over her own body. Until it can be safely removed from the body, and kept alive in a hospital, it is a part of the mother. Removing it is no different from cutting your hair. Every time you bath you destroy life, that is no different from a fetus at the stage of development we talk about here. Why is that less murderous. And again: In medical terms, it is not a human yet. Originally posted by Tie Guy ShadowTemplar, you do know it is possible to post all those things in one post, don't you? When I start quoting a new post, I make a new post. Simple as that (even MODs do this: I've seen GonkHater do it). Originally posted by Tie Guy "Evil" does exist, and he has a name, Satan. And out of the window with the last remnants of your integrity. "Satan" is just a handy boogeyman, used by Judeaism (and it's subsects Christianity and Islam). "Evil" is merely a term invented and used to justify human actions. So, in a rational sense, it doesn't exist. Originally posted by Tie Guy As for pro-life meaning anti-choice, you can see above, but i have one more thing to say. Why should it be the mother's right to kill her child? Everyone agrees that if she did it after birth then it would be haneous, but its destroying life, be it present or future, either way. "Pro-choice" is just a nicer way of saying "pro-murder." Why should it be your right to wash your skin. In doing so you kill many times the number of living cells than an abortion does. And at the stage we're talking about here, those cells are exactly alike, save for genome. Therefore "Pro-Choice" does not equal "Pro-Murder". Originally posted by Tie Guy Actually I didn't want to know that. I could care less about European politics. Knowledge never harms. Anyway I just thought it a fun thing to know. But if you don't want to know, then I won't pull you out of your bed in the middle of the night to ask you what "liberal" means in European politics. Aah, forgot this (thanks C'Jais): However, you are not killing anything with therapeutic cloning. You're reprogramming the cells to become specialized nerve cells in your spine, for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 Originally posted by Tie Guy What?! How can you say that? Killing a fetus is killing an individual, a human. Is DNA all that makes one human? There is no individual in 2 cells. They're 2 individual cells, yes, but not an individual human. There is no consciusness at this stage, there is nothing that makes it human, except for the genetic code, which would kill the cell if we were to examine it. It is the blueprint of a human. Just as the blueprint of a building can be discarded, so can the blueprint of the human. Once the central nervous system is developed, you can refer to the fetus as an individual (though barely). Brainwaves are used to determine with certainty whether a person is dead or not - if these brainwaves are applied to a fetus, it would be classified as dead tissue. It's obviously alive, but it is not human. Regarding a fetus as individual, human life would be the same as stating that sperm cells are individual, human life too. You are killing the human that the fetus would have been, and that is exactly the same as killing a human while living. No. I am discarding the blueprint of the human, much as you can discard the blueprint of a building, but you'd be hard pressed to merely "discard" the building after it's completely built. However, you are not killing anything with therapeutic cloning. You're reprogramming the cells to become specialized nerve cells in your spine, for example. As for it not being an individual, it most certainly is. It already has a unigue genetic code that dictates who and what it is, a very particular human. I suppose you think clones aren't individual in any way, then. They're certainly not unique - or are they? Claiming that genetic code alone makes something human, makes something individual is like claiming that an artificially constructed DNA chain which resembles a human one is individual life as well. It takes more than DNA for something to be called unique. It takes more than DNA for something to be called alive and conscius. Pro-lifers wish to save the lives of fetus's and therefore people, so how can you pro-life oesn't or can't that it doesn't exist? "Pro-life" sounds so bombastic. It means you value all life, no? Also the bacteria you kill when you wash your hands. The plants you eat for dinner. The animals you kill for space and the trees you fell for space. You cannot be pro life no matter how you at it, unless you place HUMAN LIFE on a piedestal above everything else. I find this immoral to the extreme. You have to kill to survive. Actually I didn't want to know that. I could care less about European politics. I suppose you're the supreme judge of what gets posted here. No one said he adressed you specifically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boba Rhett Posted January 7, 2003 Share Posted January 7, 2003 As Sher requested, I'll close this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.