Maybe, but I will not hold my breathe. If you hadn't noticed, just like on this board, I do call people "stupid" or "retarded" for their opinions. Her beliefs do not affect me, the economy, nor do I think it will start WW3 even if she were elected. Sorry.AussieReaper wrote:
Ever? Huh. Maybe Palin could share some of those sources with us. I'm sure it would convince you and I Creationism is definitely real.lowing wrote:
just like you, I have not read anything that supports it.AussieReaper wrote:
"But why?" Is my quesiton. Why don't you believe. I'm not asking what you think of other people. Why don't you believe in Creationism as a perfectly reasonable and true source for humanities creation.
It'd probably affect you if she were to cut funding to stem cell research and science in general. And push for creationism to be taught in schools. Your wife is a teacher iirc. Do you think she would enjoy a curriculum set that pushes both fact and fiction?
I have mixed feelings about stem cell research. Basically being a hypocrite. If it would save the lives of MY kids I am all for it and could argue its benefits. That is one issue where your opinion is directly affected by the fact if it will SAVE YOU or YOUR family. If it is not needed by YOU, then it is "immoral".AussieReaper wrote:
It'd probably affect you if she were to cut funding to stem cell research and science in general. And push for creationism to be taught in schools. Your wife is a teacher iirc. Do you think she would enjoy a curriculum set that pushes both fact and fiction?
Yes my wife is a teacher, and what she is forced to teach or exclude already pisses my off. Basically the exclusion of traditions like Halloween and Christmas. Excluding Halloween all together and replacing Christmas with "holidays from around the world".
Last edited by lowing (2011-06-23 05:30:21)
That's a rather selfish outlook imo. I can see that stem cell research can benefit others not related to me and am all the more happy for them to receive treatment from it. Think of it like donating blood. You're happy to receive blood if it will save you or your family, but having someone else receive a blood transfer is "immoral".lowing wrote:
I have mixed feelings about stem cell research. Basically being a hypocrite. If it would save the lives of MY kids I am all for it and could argue its benefits. That is one issue where your opinion is directly affected by the fact if it will SAVE YOU or YOUR family. If it is not needed by YOU, then it is "immoral".
Yes my wife is a teacher, and what she is forced to teach or exclude already pisses my off. Basically the exclusion of traditions like Halloween and Christmas. Excluding Halloween all together and replacing Christmas with "holidays from around the world".
Isn't Halloween more of an American tradition than a purely religious one? Seems odd to not be able to teach it. But there is no reason why families can't share traditions and holidays with their children. I don't think a school should be forced to celebrate with them.
You misunderstand, I have mixed feelings about, but because I would accept any benefit from it, I do not condemn it, anyway, the big hang up was using aborted babies and the cloning thing it could lead to.AussieReaper wrote:
That's a rather selfish outlook imo. I can see that stem cell research can benefit others not related to me and am all the more happy for them to receive treatment from it. Think of it like donating blood. You're happy to receive blood if it will save you or your family, but having someone else receive a blood transfer is "immoral".lowing wrote:
I have mixed feelings about stem cell research. Basically being a hypocrite. If it would save the lives of MY kids I am all for it and could argue its benefits. That is one issue where your opinion is directly affected by the fact if it will SAVE YOU or YOUR family. If it is not needed by YOU, then it is "immoral".
Yes my wife is a teacher, and what she is forced to teach or exclude already pisses my off. Basically the exclusion of traditions like Halloween and Christmas. Excluding Halloween all together and replacing Christmas with "holidays from around the world".
Isn't Halloween more of an American tradition than a purely religious one? Seems odd to not be able to teach it. But there is no reason why families can't share traditions and holidays with their children. I don't think a school should be forced to celebrate with them.
No she doesn't teach Halloween, the kids are not allowed to celebrate it in school with parities and dressing up like we used to do when I was a kid. conservative Christian fruitcakes have a hard on for Halloween, and of course PC caters to them.
With Christmas, they can no longer have a Christmas party and exchange gifts in school like we used to do. Now they have to recognize "holidays around the world", which I do not have a problem with, but not at the expense of dismissing our own traditions, because some liberal assholes wants to be an assholes.
I'm assuming this point of view stems from the HUGE abortion debate we had a while ago, so I guess it means that you view it as immoral because you perceive fetii as having been alive, yeah?lowing wrote:
I have mixed feelings about stem cell research. Basically being a hypocrite. If it would save the lives of MY kids I am all for it and could argue its benefits. That is one issue where your opinion is directly affected by the fact if it will SAVE YOU or YOUR family. If it is not needed by YOU, then it is "immoral".AussieReaper wrote:
It'd probably affect you if she were to cut funding to stem cell research and science in general. And push for creationism to be taught in schools. Your wife is a teacher iirc. Do you think she would enjoy a curriculum set that pushes both fact and fiction?
Then what do you feel about people donating organs after they've died? In Belgium for example, everyone's an organ donor unless people explicitly state otherwise. Great system imo.
inane little opines
As I said, my POV is hypocritical, I have my feelings toward abortion but as I said in that other thread, I do not wish to legislate my opinion or judge another on the issue of abortion. Also the cloning thing leaves a lot to question regarding how far we will allow that technology to go.Shocking wrote:
I'm assuming this point of view stems from the HUGE abortion debate we had a while ago, so I guess it means that you view it as immoral because you perceive fetii as having been alive, yeah?lowing wrote:
I have mixed feelings about stem cell research. Basically being a hypocrite. If it would save the lives of MY kids I am all for it and could argue its benefits. That is one issue where your opinion is directly affected by the fact if it will SAVE YOU or YOUR family. If it is not needed by YOU, then it is "immoral".AussieReaper wrote:
It'd probably affect you if she were to cut funding to stem cell research and science in general. And push for creationism to be taught in schools. Your wife is a teacher iirc. Do you think she would enjoy a curriculum set that pushes both fact and fiction?
Then what do you feel about people donating organs after they've died? In Belgium for example, everyone's an organ donor unless people explicitly state otherwise. Great system imo.
I think organ donation is a great thing, after all they gave their permission.
Last edited by lowing (2011-06-23 16:58:53)
Meh, they will figure out cloning regardless. Knowledge has always been a double-edged sword and with proper legislation you can keep the 'bad' out of the picture (hopefully, or at least temporarily until future generations revisit the subject). Doesn't make it any less worth it to pursue that knowledge as it may have way more positive results than negative ones. In the issue of stem cells that is a definite.
Either way, what happens now is that fetii are collected in garbage bags and burned to a crisp. Believing that the way we dispose of bodies is reflective of the value that life has had the one we attach to a fetus is obviously not much. Might as well use it for the betterment of mankind, because the possibilities of stem cells are endless; from making blind people see again to growing limbs and organs and repairing the brain if damaged. Realising how many people we could help by simply allowing the research surely defeats any argument opposing it.
Either way, what happens now is that fetii are collected in garbage bags and burned to a crisp. Believing that the way we dispose of bodies is reflective of the value that life has had the one we attach to a fetus is obviously not much. Might as well use it for the betterment of mankind, because the possibilities of stem cells are endless; from making blind people see again to growing limbs and organs and repairing the brain if damaged. Realising how many people we could help by simply allowing the research surely defeats any argument opposing it.
inane little opines
Well, the human experiments of Germany and Japan, as well as the US taking that research and using it, was something that should have never happened or be allowed to happen, and yet science was advanced because of it.Shocking wrote:
Meh, they will figure out cloning regardless. Knowledge has always been a double-edged sword and with proper legislation you can keep the 'bad' out of the picture (hopefully, or at least temporarily until future generations revisit the subject). Doesn't make it any less worth it to pursue that knowledge as it may have way more positive results than negative ones. In the issue of stem cells that is a definite.
Either way, what happens now is that fetii are collected in garbage bags and burned to a crisp. Believing that the way we dispose of bodies is reflective of the value that life has had the one we attach to a fetus is obviously not much. Might as well use it for the betterment of mankind, because the possibilities of stem cells are endless; from making blind people see again to growing limbs and organs and repairing the brain if damaged. Realising how many people we could help by simply allowing the research surely defeats any argument opposing it.
I think the thinking is, by using aborted babies for science, leads to a justification and rationalization of aborting babies.
why not give the mother the option to "abort for science"
When people go to the clinic to abort a baby they want to forget about it. Don't think they want to be confronted with that.Trotskygrad wrote:
why not give the mother the option to "abort for science"
I support the view that aborted fetii should be used for science but abortion itself should never be popularized because of it. I don't think it would have much effect anyway, it doesn't take away from the psychological effect it has on people and would instead spark a HUGE ethics debate. If anyone starts promoting abortion that would most probably be very counter productive.lowing wrote:
Well, the human experiments of Germany and Japan, as well as the US taking that research and using it, was something that should have never happened or be allowed to happen, and yet science was advanced because of it.
I think the thinking is, by using aborted babies for science, leads to a justification and rationalization of aborting babies.
inane little opines
You say that as if she already doesn't have the option.Trotskygrad wrote:
why not give the mother the option to "abort for science"
I suppose, some good should come out it I guess, but as I said, the hard liners are going to say using aborted babies for such a thing, justifies aborting the baby and that is not acceptable to them.Shocking wrote:
When people go to the clinic to abort a baby they want to forget about it. Don't think they want to be confronted with that.Trotskygrad wrote:
why not give the mother the option to "abort for science"I support the view that aborted fetii should be used for science but abortion itself should never be popularized because of it. I don't think it would have much effect anyway, it doesn't take away from the psychological effect it has on people and would instead spark a HUGE ethics debate. If anyone starts promoting abortion that would most probably be very counter productive.lowing wrote:
Well, the human experiments of Germany and Japan, as well as the US taking that research and using it, was something that should have never happened or be allowed to happen, and yet science was advanced because of it.
I think the thinking is, by using aborted babies for science, leads to a justification and rationalization of aborting babies.
Apparently they've now turned the 'blowtorch' on you instead of palin.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
I concur, great system.Shocking wrote:
In Belgium for example, everyone's an organ donor unless people explicitly state otherwise. Great system imo.
So is Palin for that plan?
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
Hell no.
Jaekus wrote:
I concur, great system.Shocking wrote:
In Belgium for example, everyone's an organ donor unless people explicitly state otherwise. Great system imo.
Hurricane2k9 wrote:
Jaekus wrote:
I concur, great system.Shocking wrote:
In Belgium for example, everyone's an organ donor unless people explicitly state otherwise. Great system imo.
Tu Stultus Es
copycat
What else is new?13rin wrote:
Apparently they've now turned the 'blowtorch' on you instead of palin.
Really? Palin is against organ donations? link please.Jaekus wrote:
Hell no.
Hurricane2k9 wrote:
copycat
Tu Stultus Es
Never said she was, I said she wasn't for "Everyone's an organ donor unless people explicitly state otherwise."lowing wrote:
Really? Palin is against organ donations? link please.Jaekus wrote:
Hell no.
If she is, link please.
eleven bravo wrote:
Hurricane2k9 wrote:
copycat
Tu Stultus Es