A thread not for the easily offended

[lancelot]

You call me an idiot just once more and I will ban your backside, Capice??????

[JollyJamma]

OK Ill keep that in mind Mr. Lancelot captain sir.

[KALSTER]

This is obviously a sensitive issue and tensions can run high. I don't think we are disagreeing about the hard scientific facts here (if I am wrong, please correct me). As I have it, we all agree that a zygote and an embryo is human and alive, but not yet a person; as in, other than the genetic components, it is still an empty vessel. We also agree that, naturally, most zygotes die anyway and that during artificial insemination, most of them die as well.

When it comes to the moral and religious significance of it, we all diverge from each other.

I think then how I see it is fairly obvious as well and Stuart captured it well: It is the presence of a mind that makes you a person and without one, one is just left with a bunch of human cells, with or without the potential to develop into a person. My stance is: because most zygotes die during various stages of development, both during the natural run of things and during artificial insemination as a matter of course and because these deaths are of clumps of matter with zero person-hood, I see no problem whatsoever with either abortion before a certain stage of development or with the cultivation of embryos for the development of a whole slew of revolutionary treatments for debilitating and deadly diseases. According to me, at no point does a god play any part in it and no soul is given/transferred to the zygote during any stage of it's development. The only thing to consider is whether person-hood has started.

Additionally, without the embryo being created in a test tube, it would never even have existed to be able to possess potential in the first place. No people are hurt during this research. So, it seems to me, the issue really is whether we should be creating these "clumps of potential" in the first place and this is where the phrase "playing God" looks to me to be the main point of opposition. Am I wrong about this?

I'd like to ask a few questions:

1) Are any of you who are anti-abortion/anti-stem cell research against artificial insemination? If not, how do you reconcile this with your stance?
2) If the issue is really at it's heart a religious one, should you really expect everyone to be subjected to it by having the government mix religion into its policies?
3) Do any of you believe that a soul is transferred to the zygote during a stage in it's development (if so, when; do only those destined to develop into person-hood get souls?) and are scientists then essentially messing with god's plan?

[SykomantiS]

According to me, at no point does a god play any part in it and no soul is given/transferred to the zygote during any stage of it's development. The only thing to consider is whether person-hood has started.

3) Do any of you believe that a soul is transferred to the zygote during a stage in it's development (if so, when; do only those destined to develop into person-hood get souls?) and are scientists then essentially messing with god's plan?

So bassically, no brain == no soul? So then anything that has a physical brain automagically has a soul- so animals now have souls?

[KALSTER]

According to me, at no point does a god play any part in it and no soul is given/transferred to the zygote during any stage of it's development. The only thing to consider is whether person-hood has started.

3) Do any of you believe that a soul is transferred to the zygote during a stage in it's development (if so, when; do only those destined to develop into person-hood get souls?) and are scientists then essentially messing with god's plan?

So bassically, no brain == no soul? So then anything that has a physical brain automagically has a soul- so animals now have souls?

Are you asking me? I don't believe in souls. I am asking what those opposing stem cell research from a religious standpoint believe.

[rustypup]

so animals now have souls?

hang about... animals don't have souls?

i thought soul magic was required to keep the zygote on an even keel... you know.. take the place of a brain... and common sense... you lot are confusing me now... is there, or is there not, soul juice involved here!?


also, what does it taste like? i'm imagining something like blended ozone and raspberry chocolate... some people are just unlucky to be exposed to a rotten batch of raspberries...

[SykomantiS]

Oh. Sorry rusty, :sarcasm sign:

[-Prometheus-]

........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................

[hamin_aus]

People who ignore blatant facts are idiots.

You call me an idiot just once more and I will ban your backside, Capice??????

You guys are legends.

Thanks for the quotes Lance, as knowledgeable about these things as always!

It seems the problem that came later was one of education not science or religion.

The... but... who...

Perhaps you missed a certain part of Western history known as the Dark Ages where religious institutions tortured and killed anyone with an education who made a scientific discovery which contradicted religious teachings?
In fact, they imprisoned and tortured a very famous scientist named Galileo - perhaps you have heard of him - for claiming that Copernicus' theory was true and that the Earth orbits the sun, not the other way around.

Yes, many ancient people believed the earth was round, but they also believed it to be the centre of the universe... thanks to religious arrogance.
Tell me again how it's not religions fault...

The Catholic church only admitted it was wrong about the whole Galileo debacle in 1992.

Also, did you just link the flu vaccine to HIV
Getting an HIV test immediately after a flu shot can increase your chances of a false positive, but then, eating poppy seeds before a drug test can give you a false positive for cocaine.

[KALSTER]

This seems somewhat illogical to me. So by your own admission there is a large failure rate but when it fails it is somehow the mother's fault? What if the next time it doesn't fail because according to you there is also a great chance it won't, is it then still because she would be a bad mother? Sorry but such a nitpicking argument doesn't make any sense to me.

Your interpretation of what he is saying doesn't make sense to me. He did not say it is the mothers fault, nor God's.

I also heard something about a Darwin award. Apparently idiots killing themselves doing well, idiotic things. I guess they need a role model to look up to.

Huh? It is called the Darwin awards, because it plays on that classic evolution drawing of the development of man, the Darwin recipient being one of the non-homo sapiens sapiens.

Yet ancient people believed that the earth was actually round. Even the old mesapotamic (sp.?) pagans knew this. It seems the problem that came later was one of education not science or religion.

What "ancient people"? Sure some of them did, but we are talking about what the Bible says, which is supposed to be the word of God.

The fact of the matter is that I have just as much reason to call your theory a fairy tale as you think you have to call mine one. Anybody who is honest with themself will admit that.

Then, I am afraid, you have no idea how the scientific method works. All ideas are equal? Really?

The problem here is one of definition. At what point does a zygote become a human? I don't see any scientific evidence but only a bunch of arbitrariness.

As stated, it is human from the get go (just like severed limb or a nail clipping), but the question is at what point does it become a person, which requires the ongoing processing of information by a functioning brain.

It was believed not long ago that at up to 3 months a baby cannot think or feel. Advances in 3D ultrasound has shown signs of a fundamentally different but nonetheless fully functioning nervous system with a thinking feeling brain. Yet abortions are still routinely carried out at that time. There was a program on national geographic I think of babies exhibiting fighting behaviour with dominant or submissive attitudes towards each other. These are characteristics previously only attributed to children that can walk or crawl.

I would love to see a citation for this. We need researched figures and precise language for claims such as these. For example, at what age does it have a "fully functioning nervous system with a thinking feeling brain"? Is it a fully functioning and thinking brain that they talked about, or only a working nervous system (you don't need a brain to react to pain). At what age has sibling rivalry been observed and what is your citation for it?

[rustypup]

This seems somewhat illogical to me.

reading comprehension is an important skill and one i would heartily recommend you endeavour to improve on...

take my post out of context of the scripture quoted by lancelot and it makes no sense... in context of his quote, god acknowledges that he's personally responsible for every zygote... if that's the case he must also be responsible for every miscarriage not forgetting the moral wrangling that must come about around siamese twins... (what the heck was he thinking?! having one foetus partway consume the other... that's just ... well.. a little more japanese pop culture than xtian...)

also, and i need to be real clear here, at no point did i assert the mother is at fault... that would be the work of moral fundamentalists who'd love to pigeon-hole anyone not agreeing with their rigid and completely flawed view of the issue as a mass murderer and all round ravenous destroyer of society...

Everybody should see the Outer Limits series

that reading comprehension thing mentioned above... television is not your friend... :/

[lancelot]

People who ignore blatant facts are idiots.

You call me an idiot just once more and I will ban your backside, Capice??????

You guys are legends.

Thanks for the quotes Lance, as knowledgeable about these things as always!

It seems the problem that came later was one of education not science or religion.

The... but... who...

Perhaps you missed a certain part of Western history known as the Dark Ages where religious institutions tortured and killed anyone with an education who made a scientific discovery which contradicted religious teachings?
In fact, they imprisoned and tortured a very famous scientist named Galileo - perhaps you have heard of him - for claiming that Copernicus' theory was true and that the Earth orbits the sun, not the other way around.

Yes, many ancient people believed the earth was round, but they also believed it to be the centre of the universe... thanks to religious arrogance.
Tell me again how it's not religions fault...

The Catholic church only admitted it was wrong about the whole Galileo debacle in 1992.

Also, did you just link the flu vaccine to HIV
Getting an HIV test immediately after a flu shot can increase your chances of a false positive, but then, eating poppy seeds before a drug test can give you a false positive for cocaine.

Good on you jamin
As you know I do not particularly like these debates. I also agree with rusty, if you are convinced that you are wrong, admit it. I have my beliefs which I try not to foist onto others, I read scientific articles because I am interested in all views, but evolution, I have always had a bit of a battle with that one.
As to who is right or wrong, only time will tell.

I do enjoy reading this thread, if only to see all the differing opinions, and most posters put their point across well and they make for a good read. As for puppy and other stirrers well go for it!

As always:

"God must love stupid people, he made so many of them"

[KatrynKat]

+1

[-Prometheus-]

........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................

[wizardofid]

I read scientific articles because I am interested in all views, but evolution, I have always had a bit of a battle with that one.
As to who is right or wrong, only time will tell

@lance
I am a part time bookie any one that wants to make bets let me know, I can't guarantee your money back.

[KALSTER]

Your interpretation of what he is saying doesn't make sense to me. He did not say it is the mothers fault, nor God's.

It's not what he said or not, it's the premises of the two sentences contradicting each other, but perhaps you don't see that contradiction.

Yes, I don't see a contradiction.

As stated, it is human from the get go (just like severed limb or a nail clipping), but the question is at what point does it become a person, which requires the ongoing processing of information by a functioning brain.

So now it IS human, but earlier it was said to be a clump of pond scum. Again arbitrary definitions rule.

I didn't call it pond scum and neither did anyone else. He said it is like pond scum, i.e. formless or not a developed human capable of person-hood. OBVIOUSLY something borne of human DNA is human in nature. What is arbitrary or ambiguous about that?

I would love to see a citation for this. We need researched figures and precise language for claims such as these. For example, at what age does it have a "fully functioning nervous system with a thinking feeling brain"? Is it a fully functioning and thinking brain that they talked about, or only a working nervous system (you don't need a brain to react to pain). At what age has sibling rivalry been observed and what is your citation for it?

Oh the information age. Not everything I watch is on the internet. There is another real world out there.

We are talking science here and "I saw this someplace" is simply not good enough. Any proper science you see in any program will have it's legitimate scholarly sources somewhere on the internet. After your needless fuss about it, you do seem to have provided a source with citations. Well done for that at least.

It is well known that at 3 months the brain and nervous system is already developed. The reason elective abortions are not routinely carried out after that. The mainstream medical establishment is not disputing this. During the 4th week the neural tube that will be the brain and spinal cord closes, shortly after which distinct types of neurons start forming. So at which point will you view it as a person? When there is a functioning brain? Which day will that be? Seems nobody is sure.
Here are a couple of facts. Oh my, thumbsucking at 7 weeks. Seems to be learning survival skills at a very early age.

From your source:

"Using ultrasound techniques, it was first shown that REM (rapid eye movements) which are characteristic of active dream states have been demonstrated at 23 weeks. J. Birnhaltz, "The Development of Human Fetal Eye Movement Patterns," Science, 1981, vol. 213, pp. 679-681

REM have since been recorded 17 weeks after conception. S. Levi, Brugman University of Brussels, American Medical Association News, February 1, 1983"

and

"We now know that the unborn child is an aware, reacting human being who from the sixth month on (and perhaps earlier) leads an active emotional life." (Not sure what the citation for this is though).

So your source puts the first tell tale signs of a brain processing information at nearly 4 months. Before that the foetus seems to be an automaton, simply reflexively reacting directly to stimulae, but not showing signs of cognition. I would argue that 13 weeks is probably a good cut-off then, partly due to this fact. Some abortions do happen after this time though, but are rare and almost always because of strong medical reasons to do so. You are quite right in saying that it is difficult if not impossible to put a clear date on the switching on of person-hood, but studies do suggest an absence of cognitive ability (in my book, person-hood) at 13 weeks. This Link, which goes into much more detail, agrees. It is an open discussion though and there is no clear scientific reason alone to limit abortion to within the first trimester, except that it becomes increasingly dangerous for the mother. Are you against all forms of abortion and if not, where do you think the cut off should be?

This debate started over the use of embryos in stem cell research though and these are no where near developed enough to be considered people yet IMO.

Like I said, embryonic stem cell research aren't killing embryos that would have developed into viable foetuses, they are growing embryos that was never destined to grow into foetuses in the first place.

Nobody has answered my questions yet and I think they are pretty important ones.:

1) Are any of you who are anti-abortion/anti-stem cell research against artificial insemination? If not, how do you reconcile this with your stance?
2) If the issue is really at it's heart a religious one, should you really expect everyone to be subjected to it by having the government mix religion into its policies?
3) Do any of you believe that a soul is transferred to the zygote during a stage in it's development (if so, when; do only those destined to develop into person-hood get souls?) and are scientists then essentially messing with god's plan?

[hamin_aus]

Perhaps you missed a certain part of Western history known as the Dark Ages

Perhaps read up more about the subject

No U.

Yes, many ancient people believed the earth was round, but they also believed it to be the centre of the universe... thanks to religious arrogance.
Tell me again how it's not religions fault...

Or thanks to lack of knowledge perhaps? I find it remarkable that they could have known this at all. So tell me again why it MUST be religion's fault.

Because almost every religion that has ever existed has placed human beings and this planet as the central point of all their deities focus. With that presupposition, how do you expect even the most scientific ancients not to assume the earth was the centre of the universe?
I'm not debating ancient people knew the earth was round, ancient telescopes found all over the world were powerful enough to see Mars and Jupiter, and even some of Jupiter moons. Nothing remarkable about that knowledge, really, the science of optics has been around for well over a thousand years and if you can see other planets that are round, it doesn't take a genius to deduce ours must be as well.
What's impressive is the maths that went with their ancient Astronomy. The ancient Chinese and the Mayans had it right long before Greeks, Romans or the Middle East.
It's ironic that the Roman calendar we currently use is one of the least accurate of the calendars.

Oh sorry, my bad, turns out it's hepatitus. Memory ain't what it was. The HB virus was grown in monkeys shiped from Africa (probably Uganda). This vaccine was discovered to have been given to the NYC gay men and mentally retarded children and the African colonies that first contracted the disease. A form of the HI virus was discovered in these monkeys that serve as carriers which with some mutations can infect humans.

Please provide some sort of proof of this.
To the best of my knowledge, and I'm not even going to Google this, no-one has ever got hepatitis from a vaccination, but adults can have pretty violent reactions to them.

[wizardofid]

@-Prometheus-
..... bah!, please continue, I think hamin is annoyed now, KALSTER is thinking what the hell?
And rusty just rolls laughing occasionally to the other side.

I have to agree kalster here.

3)Do any of you believe that a soul is transferred to the zygote during a stage in it's development (if so, when; do only those destined to develop into person-hood get souls?) and are scientists then essentially messing with god's plan?

Are you stating that as fact or theory ?

scientists then essentially messing with god's plan?

Now that is a walking contradiction right there, how can some one mess with a already predetermined plan.Perhaps if you rephrase to why is it being allowed by God's predetermined plan will you get a better understanding. Essentially what God is doing if you believe in him, is removing fate and chance and handing you a big bowl of zygote with a straw, and telling you "deal with it".

2) If the issue is really at it's heart a religious one, should you really expect everyone to be subjected to it by having the government mix religion into its policies?

Why not? if by religion you have governance over a country, it's laws should not violate it's predominate religion.

[rustypup]

rusty just rolls laughing occasionally

pretty damn close - and then i get to wondering how critical thinking should be made part of the curriculum all the way through varsity... because nothing says plumb stupid quite like varsity students going on the rampage and destroying property at the slightest provocation...

if by religion you have governance over a country, it's laws should not violate it's predominate religion.

separation of church and state... religious idiocy is how we end up burning "witches" and stoning rape victims to death...

just for jamin:

The Advertising Standards Authority - in these benighted short-attention-span days, perhaps one of the most important guardians of the English language - has described the fields of "Natural Preservatives in toiletries" and "Essential Oils" as being "traditional scientific disciplines" and ruled that people qualified in these areas may fairly be described as "scientists".

ASA link - because of the source...

[wizardofid]

*edit sigh need more coffee

separation of church and state... religious idiocy is how we end up burning "witches" and stoning rape victims to death...

True enough, burning "witches" yeah well that is absurd, have they never heard of beheading....

Stoning rape victims to death.? What happens to the rapist? , thank God we live in a society where a illegitimate zygote doesn't get you stoned......

...of course look how well Muslim woman are doing......

Perhaps religion should be kept away in a dark damp cellar with reasoning perhaps the two will spawn a illegitimate child called "get real".....

Rusty yeah agreeing with you, it shouldn't be completely excluded, just given less power in government so it doesn't beat common sense and scientific progress to death with a book as thick as the yellow pages....but I get the point.

[KALSTER]

Rusty yeah agreeing with you, it shouldn't be completely excluded

Why not? It is not as if our morals come from God.

[hamin_aus]

The Advertising Standards Authority - in these benighted short-attention-span days, perhaps one of the most important guardians of the English language - has described the fields of "Natural Preservatives in toiletries" and "Essential Oils" as being "traditional scientific disciplines" and ruled that people qualified in these areas may fairly be described as "scientists".

FFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU


I got their "Essential Oils" right here

[wizardofid]

Rusty yeah agreeing with you, it shouldn't be completely excluded

Why not? It is not as if our morals come from God.

All nations must have laws.
All laws try to restrain some "evil", or reinforce some "good" so all law, even administrative law, is enacted morality.
All morality depends on beliefs that cannot be subjected to the scientific method and are, thus, religious beliefs - even if they are non-theistic.

[doo_much]

The Advertising Standards Authority - in these benighted short-attention-span days, perhaps one of the most important guardians of the English language - has described the fields of "Natural Preservatives in toiletries" and "Essential Oils" as being "traditional scientific disciplines" and ruled that people qualified in these areas may fairly be described as "scientists".

FFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU


I got their "Essential Oils" right here

To be fair that's in the UK. Many moons ago I had a neighbour that was 'imported' for his skills as a hydraulic engineer. After about 6 months his son joined them and after about 6 more months I was asked to help the young reperbate find a job, towards which end I was given a CV.

His previous occupation was listed as 'Sanitary Engineer' and he had an original letter of reference from some town or the other to that effect.

Upon enquiry it transpired that he had been a street sweeper. And not the motorised type even. Pure pushing a broom kinda thing. I kid you not.

[lancelot]

Kalster wrote:
Nobody has answered my questions yet and I think they are pretty important ones.:

1) Are any of you who are anti-abortion/anti-stem cell research against artificial insemination? If not, how do you reconcile this with your stance?
2) If the issue is really at it's heart a religious one, should you really expect everyone to be subjected to it by having the government mix religion into its policies?
3) Do any of you believe that a soul is transferred to the zygote during a stage in it's development (if so, when; do only those destined to develop into person-hood get souls?) and are scientists then essentially messing with god's plan?

Anti abortion and stem cell research are two different concepts. Should stem and artificial insemination not be lumped together? I am anti abortion as I feel it is an unnecessary evil. I do not go for that crappy argument about " what can a mother do if not have an abortion", there are many other options. The rape victim is not an easy one to answer, however it was against her will, the rape was intolerable and therefore it is her decision. You made a statement referring to morals and where they come from, they all originate from the Bible, that they have been screwed up is quite obvious, but that has come about because of a lack of moral fibre. There is now no more such a thing as absolutes, absolutes have been done away with,now anything goes, there is only one important thing left and that is personal satisfaction, this is now obtained by any means possible, regardless of the consequences.The morals suggested in the Bible are beyond the present day peoples acceptance. Even if you do not believe in what the Bible proclaims, there can be no doubt that the suggested morals are beyond reproach. One of them is that the easy way out may not be the best path.

Regarding stem cell research, how can I find a problem with it? As yet no one has any idea what will become of this research, suffice to say that the way the world is progressing, stem cells will be used for various degenerate so called cures in the future. The same applies to cloning, I am against it but what does that matter? In this degenerate world that we live in my feelings are a drop in the ocean of madness. With regard to artificial insemination, the proper way is much more fun, in certain circumstances I would certainly condone, but in the case of Reginald Kenneth Dwight I would not.

The issue at heart is a religious one, I am vehemently opposed to religion, like abortion, stem cell research and cloning, religion knows no bounds. Religion is a man- made order, it does not even resemble the beliefs as offered in the Bible. Religion is a vitriolic and destructive politic practised by various followers of religion to enhance themselves and the business they run . That has surprised you has it not, come on admit it? As to religion and government, my belief is that the two cannot mix, governments have no right to interfere with what I believe; therefore I am a proponent of a secular state. If we take the government that South Africa has voted in by majority, perhaps you may see my point. Believing in the Bible is not a religious act but one of a relationship with the Saviour of the world. This is what makes believers different from the rest, believers are supposed to be different, supposed to follow the Word of God, to respect their fellow man, respect Gods word and attempt to live this Word.

Zygote is a word that has suddenly cropped up in this thread, I believe that I have answered this question fully in a previous post. A baby when conceived in the mothers womb has a soul, enough said. Because I believe I can back all I say with scriptures from the Bible. But of course not many believe that to be a reliable source anyway.
Enough to say, God does not believe in atheists; therefore they do not exist.

I hope that I have answered your questions from my personal perspective.