Subject: Stem Cell research


Write our president immediately and advise him that you, your church,
your friends, your students and anyone else you know who think as we do
that these small babies should not be killed for research.
Our president understand our hearts and our love for life.  We must
preserve all forms of early life even if it is seconds old.  He has
made provision that research can be done on those cells that were
available prior to his becomming president but NONE can be done during
his reign using new cells.
We don't need to continue this murder of the preborn so we must stand
up and agree 100% with Senator Santorum and The president.
Here are two great men who have called for an all out war on the
murderers of the pre-born and the unborn.
Please remember Sen. Santorum when it comes time to vote for a new
president who is wholly Christian and totally moral.  We are so
fortunate to have President George W. Bush during these dangerous
times.  Support him.  Write to the newspapers, call radio stations and
anyother media you can think of.
Write, call do whatever you can to impress others to send this message
to President Bush to VETO this bill that would allow more babies to be
killed.
Thanks and God bless you.

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

baron wrote:
> Subject: Stem Cell research
>
>
> Write our president immediately and advise him that you, your church,
> your friends, your students and anyone else you know who think as we
> do that these small babies should not be killed for research.

"Every sperm.. is sacred... Every sperm... is good..."

These are not babies: we're talking a few cells that were never viable
fetuses, never had a brain stem, never even had a nervous system. You may as
well declare blood samples at the Red Cross human beings with rights.

Our president is more concerned about anything that smacks of interfering in
human fertility, including medical research that can actually save lives,
than he is about contributing to the death of over 300,00 innocent people in
Iraq, including US and especially Iraqi civilian casualties. Let's see him
show more concern about those deaths before we worry about the death of
tissue samples.

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

"Nico Kadel-Garcia" <nkadel@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:9badnZXvj5CmdiPZnZ2dnUVZ_uidnZ2d@comcast.com..
> baron wrote: 
>
> "Every sperm.. is sacred... Every sperm... is good..."
>
> These are not babies: we're talking a few cells that were never viable
> fetuses, never had a brain stem, never even had a nervous system. You may
> as well declare blood samples at the Red Cross human beings with rights.
>
> Our president is more concerned about anything that smacks of interfering
> in human fertility, including medical research that can actually save
> lives, than he is about contributing to the death of over 300,00 innocent
> people in Iraq, including US and especially Iraqi civilian casualties.
> Let's see him show more concern about those deaths before we worry about
> the death of tissue samples.
>Not just Iraq what about Lebanon, the evil Bush is holding off doing any
>thing to enable more damage and death to be done to largely innocent
>people. Worry about this rather than cells that may or may not become
>babies

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

baron wrote:
> done during his reign..

Inadvertent but ironically apropos choice of words.

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

I hope by the time that you read this that you are shaking
uncontrollably, unable to feed yourself or even unable to pee
by yourself.  Perhaps it will be you, or maybe your parents,
or possibly your children that are afflicted.  You have asked
for a hell of a lot of bad karma from a hell of a lot of good
people who could benefit from this research.  If it happens to
you, or yours.. remember your post to this BB.  We'll be
thinking about you, REALLY hard.

Cheers, Wizzzer

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> These are not babies: we're talking a few cells that were never viable
> fetuses, never had a brain stem, never even had a nervous system.

We normally call the union of sperm and egg conception.. the
beginning.  A fertalized egg, if simply placed in the proper nurturing
enviroment will grow to an adult human.  That is very different from an
individual sperm or blood cell.

Another noteworth item I've read about regards the number of
permutations between the DNA of sperm and egg upon their union; it
exceeds the number of atoms estimated to exist in our universe.  This
unions is about as special an event as you can imagine.

Our generation is not the first one to find "non human" sources of
tissue to cure diseases.  But, we look back at that prior generation of
healers with horror.

Joe Dunfee
Type I Diabetic

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

<cadcoke3@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1153958511.931567.64720@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com..
>
> Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: 
>
>  We normally call the union of sperm and egg conception.. the
> beginning.  A fertalized egg, if simply placed in the proper nurturing
> enviroment will grow to an adult human.  That is very different from an
> individual sperm or blood cell.

No, most of them will *die*. Only a few survive long enough to start
interesting things like brainstems.

And a gleam in my eye looking upon my wife, placed in the appropriate
nurturing environment, will lead to a family of hundreds of descendants.
Shall the gleam in my eye have the same rights and protections as the
hundreds of living descendants? I think not!

>  Another noteworth item I've read about regards the number of
> permutations between the DNA of sperm and egg upon their union; it
> exceeds the number of atoms estimated to exist in our universe.  This
> unions is about as special an event as you can imagine.

So are the first several hundred digits of pi, or the exact genetic
structure of an amoeba. Uniqueness is hardly unique.

>  Our generation is not the first one to find "non human" sources of
> tissue to cure diseases.  But, we look back at that prior generation of
> healers with horror.

OK, now you're just being silly. Willow tree bark for headache, bandages for
bleeding, curare for tetanus, oranges for scurvy, etc. all have "non-human"
sources of material for curing diseases. Or do you mean specifially for
transplants? The whole concept of transplants was viewed with horror when
first developed, but it's turned into a lively business (with a recent
reporter by a former secretary of state of Canada, reporting Chinese  Falun
Gong members being harvested for a trade in transplantable organs, eek!)

The stem cells are harvested and cultured. A sufficient supply for culturing
(according to the report I read 10 years ago) a're easily havested from
natural abortions, dead and failed babies who otherwise are burned as
medical waste, or in a few cases buried. I can't think of a better use for
that tissue.

There is a potential slippery slope: actual living, moving, talking people
have previously been classified as "non-human" for trivial reasons and
denied rights for trivial reasons, but in this case, we're not talking about
people. We're talking about medical waste.

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel@comcast.net> wrote:
|| <cadcoke3@yahoo.com> wrote in message
|| news:1153958511.931567.64720@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com..
|||
||| Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
|||| These are not babies: we're talking a few cells that were
|||| never viable fetuses, never had a brain stem, never even
|||| had a nervous system.
|||
|||  We normally call the union of sperm and egg conception..
||| the
||| beginning.  A fertalized egg, if simply placed in the proper
||| nurturing enviroment will grow to an adult human.  That is
||| very different from an individual sperm or blood cell.
||
|| No, most of them will *die*. Only a few survive long enough
|| to start interesting things like brainstems.
||
|| And a gleam in my eye looking upon my wife, placed in the
|| appropriate nurturing environment, will lead to a family of
|| hundreds of descendants. Shall the gleam in my eye have the
|| same rights and protections as the hundreds of living
|| descendants? I think not!
||
|||  Another noteworth item I've read about regards the number
of
||| permutations between the DNA of sperm and egg upon their
||| union; it
||| exceeds the number of atoms estimated to exist in our
||| universe.  This unions is about as special an event as you
||| can imagine.
||
|| So are the first several hundred digits of pi, or the exact
|| genetic structure of an amoeba. Uniqueness is hardly unique.
||
|||  Our generation is not the first one to find "non human"
||| sources of
||| tissue to cure diseases.  But, we look back at that prior
||| generation of healers with horror.
||
|| OK, now you're just being silly. Willow tree bark for
|| headache, bandages for bleeding, curare for tetanus, oranges
|| for scurvy, etc. all have "non-human" sources of material for
|| curing diseases. Or do you mean specifially for transplants?
|| The whole concept of transplants was viewed with horror when
|| first developed, but it's turned into a lively business (with
|| a recent reporter by a former secretary of state of Canada,
|| reporting Chinese  Falun Gong members being harvested for a
|| trade in transplantable organs, eek!)
||
|| The stem cells are harvested and cultured. A sufficient
|| supply for culturing (according to the report I read 10 years
|| ago) a're easily havested from natural abortions, dead and
|| failed babies who otherwise are burned as medical waste, or
|| in a few cases buried. I can't think of a better use for that
|| tissue.
||
|| There is a potential slippery slope: actual living, moving,
|| talking people have previously been classified as "non-human"
|| for trivial reasons and denied rights for trivial reasons,
|| but in this case, we're not talking about people. We're
|| talking about medical waste.


There are also the 1.3 million plus abortions per year performed
in the U.S.  These fetuses are disposed of, in most cases these
are not viable humans. Why can't these fetuses also be used for
research?

--
It's a place to listen and read for a while, called lurking. Get
an idea of the tone of the community. Learn who the trolls and
troublemakers are and ignore them.

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

Cuz wrote:

> There are also the 1.3 million plus abortions per year performed
> in the U.S.  These fetuses are disposed of, in most cases these
> are not viable humans. Why can't these fetuses also be used for
> research?

A: They're really not needed. Harvesting the natural abortions and
miscarriages can provide plenty of cultrable tissue.

B: That's where the slippery slope starts getting nasty: the potential for
harvesting fetal tissues for organ transplantation is so linked to voluntary
abortion in some folks minds, especially conservative "pro-life" activists,
that to even start thinking that is anathema to them and death to political
campaigns. It's also slippery in that pregnant woman might take a chunk of
cash, or a free abortion, in return for surrendering their fetuses. Anything
that makes abortion easier or less destructive is anathema to these
activists: and in theory, if you don't know much about stem cell culturing,
you could get mothers selling off their fetuses right up until labor begins.
If such tissues turned out to be wildly more useful than they currently are,
you could even get poor women selling fetuses the way winos try to sell
their own blood.

That's where you need to make sensible laws about such havesting, to prevent
serious craziness from occurring.

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]

Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel@comcast.net> wrote:
|| Cuz wrote:
||
||| There are also the 1.3 million plus abortions per year
||| performed
||| in the U.S.  These fetuses are disposed of, in most cases
||| these
||| are not viable humans. Why can't these fetuses also be used
||| for
||| research?
||
|| A: They're really not needed. Harvesting the natural
|| abortions and miscarriages can provide plenty of cultrable
|| tissue.
||
|| B: That's where the slippery slope starts getting nasty: the
|| potential for harvesting fetal tissues for organ
|| transplantation is so linked to voluntary abortion in some
|| folks minds, especially conservative "pro-life" activists,
|| that to even start thinking that is anathema to them and
|| death to political campaigns. It's also slippery in that
|| pregnant woman might take a chunk of cash, or a free
|| abortion, in return for surrendering their fetuses. Anything
|| that makes abortion easier or less destructive is anathema to
|| these activists: and in theory, if you don't know much about
|| stem cell culturing, you could get mothers selling off their
|| fetuses right up until labor begins. If such tissues turned
|| out to be wildly more useful than they currently are, you
|| could even get poor women selling fetuses the way winos try
|| to sell their own blood.
||
|| That's where you need to make sensible laws about such
|| havesting, to prevent serious craziness from occurring.

Sure a waste of material that could be useful. Besides what
is the problem with a woman getting paid for her fetus.
Her body, her choice.

--
It's a place to listen and read for a while, called lurking. Get
an idea of the tone of the community. Learn who the trolls and
troublemakers are and ignore them.

Report this post to a moderator

[  Post Follow-up to this message ]