|
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
 Posted - 02/28/2003 : 08:09:09
|
Read all about it: http://msnbc.com/news/852027.asp?0cv=CB10
Chances are it won't make it through the Senate, but I have to say, just when I think our legislators can't disappoint me any more... that article highlights some of the worst reasoning, legislative or otherwise, I have ever seen. Apparently, it's politically wise to just shitcan the whole thing now because those dastardly scientists will no doubt take experimentation to unacceptable levels. So, we are reduced to calling 60-cell clumps "human life" in order to prevent our esteemed and terribly busy elected officials from having to make politico-scientific decisions that require actual thought.
Fucking appalling.
|
I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery.
-Agent Smith |
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
 Posted - 02/28/2003 : 08:15:11 [Permalink]
|
Dr. Edell read a quote from a politician who basically said something to the effect of "whether it's a hoax or not, this shows that we must ban it!", of course speaking of the Raelian cloning hoax.
Do the public really feel so strongly about it that politicians see it as such an attractive issue to jump on and claim that "something must be done NOW!"?
quote:
The human race is not open to experimentation at any level, even the molecular level.
I agree, fucking appalling. Let's see which of them that oppose it change their minds when a loved one develops Alzheimer's. |
| Edited by - Tokyodreamer on 02/28/2003 08:17:59 |
 |
|
|
Infamous
Skeptic Friend
85 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2003 : 09:11:31 [Permalink]
|
Is this going to ban cloning of organ cells? Like cloning someone a new kidney or a new liver?
I'm against cloning embryos and killing them for their stem cells because cloning of organ cells makes it unnecessary.
But a ban on the cloning of organ cells would be wrong. Have they considered the kid who's dying because one of his organs is failing and he can't get a donor? |
|
|
|
jmcginn
Skeptic Friend
343 Posts |
Posted - 02/28/2003 : 10:01:38 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The human race is not open to experimentation at any level, even the molecular level.
What a joke in deed. We run experiments every day on humans that's how we make progress with medicine. Should there be controls, definitely, should it be monitored, definitely.
There is a good example of what can happen if such controls are not in place. From sometime in the 1930's until I think 1972 a congress funded experiment ran that allowed black Americans who had syphllis to go untreated so they could observe the natural history of the disease because it was assumed black men were more promiscous than white men and also collect autopsy data.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762136.html
So controls do need to be in place, but to lock away all of the potential because of fears of abuse and small-mindedness is mind boggling. Of course other countries will carry on and be the leaders in this area and we will become the modern day Soviet Union mired in out dated biological and medical sciences. :< |
|
|
|
Snake
SFN Addict
USA
2511 Posts |
Posted - 03/01/2003 : 02:17:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by jmcginn
quote:
The human race is not open to experimentation at any level, even the molecular level.
What a joke in deed. We run experiments every day on humans that's how we make progress with medicine
I can't quote it exactly but one of those idiot congressman said something about it (the cloning) not being natural.
WELL!!!!! What about 'test tube' babies? If they only want people to reproduce naturally they must stop all the people who now use artifical methods of conception. I'd like to see them try to stop that!
It seems it's mostly the Xians who do it too and thank god for the multipal biths they cause.
Sheesh! We can't have cloning but we can endlessly add to the population by other means. ????? |
|
|
|
thorionthei
New Member
2 Posts |
Posted - 03/05/2003 : 02:09:33 [Permalink]
|
I am actually against cloning. I am a rare breed of atheist that is prolife. I am also a logical person that sees this going down an ugly road. People get diseases and that is life. I have loved one with diseases and am sad. But the thought of prolonging their life or easing their suffering at the cost of human cloning just comes across as a perverted ancient myths where the elders eat the children to live forever. Only the strong survives is a ugly/sad but logical rule of nature. We mess with that rule and we all grow weak as a race.
pax
Jorge |
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 03/05/2003 : 05:11:56 [Permalink]
|
I don't understand why you are against cloning. Would you mind presenting further arguments?
Regarding the Survival of the Fittest, all advancements in medicine which allow more people to live longer ultimately contribute to widen the gene pool, which is necessary for beneficial mutations to arise. Humans have dominated because of our brains (and a fortuitous time of arrival), which have allowed us to develop medicines, etc. This means that by using all available technology to keep more people alive longer we are strengthening, rather than weakening our race. |
|
|
|
Orpheus
Skeptic Friend
92 Posts |
Posted - 03/05/2003 : 06:31:46 [Permalink]
|
The "weakening of the species" argument seems to rest on a myth regarding evolution- that it improves a species. The fact that we can keep people alive longer, or that welfare programs help people who would ordinarily have died, does not mean that the basic fundamentals of evolution have changed.
Genes are spread due to reproduction, plain and simple. So, those people who reproduce before dying get to have their genetic information added to the human species's genetic "package". From an evolutionary perspective, the only "improvement" is when specific genes allow a species to survive the specific environment it is in. If a deadly virus were to break out tommorow which attached itself to all people with a certain genetic makeup, let's say, people with rounded red blood cells, then people born with sickle-cell anemia would survive, and most other humans would die out. You can never predict the course of evolution! That's what makes it so interesting. |
Find your own damned answers! |
|
|
|
jmcginn
Skeptic Friend
343 Posts |
Posted - 03/05/2003 : 09:02:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
If a deadly virus were to break out tommorow which attached itself to all people with a certain genetic makeup, let's say, people with rounded red blood cells, then people born with sickle-cell anemia would survive, and most other humans would die out. You can never predict the course of evolution! That's what makes it so interesting.
That's why any idea of genetic engineering or eugenics scares the living hell out of me. Sickle cell trait is a great example. For decades we considered it a defect and only recently have we understood that it is a beneficial mutation for those who live in areas infested with malaria (the same can be said of Tay Sach's trait with those from poor urban European areas and and gives resistance to a disease I can't recall right now, maybe one of the plagues).
By engineering away such traits we are reducing are genetic variation and thus making us as a species/population more susceptible to diseases and changing environments.
However cloning if used to make cells to treat diseases is a different matter. This I support with vigor. It is the best way to produce these cells and numerous serious diseases can be treated. |
|
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
