I Would like Answers
The reasoning against embryonic stem cell research is an assumption. Like many other right-wing reasoning, this research will lead to cloning. This writter claims that liberals only look at the positives about the research without looking at the negative. Well why do conservatives do the opposite? Where is the proof that people will do the worst and clone humans?
This position reflects many conservative beliefs, mainly gay marriage and yes I am bringing it up. With many initiatives on the ballots, this issue will play a major role in politics. Therefore, there needs to be an informative debate on the issue. Why does the right seem to think the worst when it comes to homosexuals? If they can marry, then why can’t zoophilia or pedophilia also be accepted? You cannot link these issues together without any evidence. If you don’t, it looks remarkably like discrimination.
I’m not a hardcore liberal that wants to poke fun at conservatives. Rather, I am a curious student who wants to know the issues to base my opinions. Everything I see about the right is negative, and I don’t want to that to mare my beliefs.
LiberTEA 4all Says: November 5th, 2006 at 11:47 pm
Exactly! And everyone knows what assumptions lead to?
Both sides are guilty of playing in the assumption sandbox. But as far as I can tell, when the left uses assumptions they are based on scientific evidence, comparative analysis, systematic and logical “assumptions”. Not unsubstantiated beliefs.
If A>B and B
admin Says: November 6th, 2006 at 4:25 pm
Dear LiberTEA,
The real concern about embryonic stem cell research among conservatives is not human cloning, it is the continued degredation for the respect of human life and of humans as creations of God. We don’t need to wait and see if that’s going to happen with embryonic stem cell research. We believe thats what it is. A devaluation of human life. There is no law against embryonic stem cell research in the private sector. Any company that wants to can invest millions of dollars and acquire as many embryonic stem cell lines as they so choose. Want liberals want is to force me to accept that my tax dollars must pay for it. I don’t like that.
The conservative postition on stem cell research, abortion and homosexuality is consistent with the idea that human life is sacred and before say…”but what about the death penalty?’… Support of the death penalty is also consistent with this belief in that the taking of a human life is such a heinious crime, the only fitting punishment is to eliminate permanently the person capable of commiting such a crime.
Liberals use the political equivilant to licking your finger and sticking it in the air to see which way the wind is blowing. It makes you feel good to say you want to help Michael J. Fox by supporting embryonic stem cell research, but the truth is adult stem cell research is more likely to help find a cure than embryonic stem cell research and that is something that conservatives support 100%.
British_Nationalist Says: November 6th, 2006 at 11:45 pm
Buck,
I think it is a supremely unwise move to bring ‘God’ into this debate. Stem cell research is contentious enough without introducing that particular fire-cracker to the mix.
LiberTEA 4all Says: November 7th, 2006 at 5:10 am
Guess which licked finger I’m holding up in the air. Haha, I couldn’t resist.
The conservative position on stem cells isn’t the idea that every life is sacred or the devaluation of human life. If that’s the case, sign me up. The actual position is that a jar of metabolic goo is a human life, let’s be real. It’s an argument of life and potential life, of scientific evidence and beliefs.
Which came first the chicken or the egg? THE EMBRYO OF COURSE!
Since your the expert on potential life according to God, when does potential life start? Is it on fertilization? What about all those rosy cheeked eggs in a women’s body? Don’t they have the potential to be life? How about all those rascally sperm? Shouldn’t we harvest those helpless potential lives and force them to grow up to love Jesus? Is that a better use for our tax dollar? How about supporting all of those beautiful babies? Is that a better use of our tax dollar.
As you ridicule the left for being idealistic and unreasonable, please look in the mirror.
“You don’t like taxes going towards stem cell research”? That’s it?
I don’t like that churches get a free-ride without paying taxes.
I don’t like that religion is the number one cause of all bloodshed on the planet.
I don’t like that my tax dollars went to the oil barrons this year.
I don’t like that I pay more out of my pocket so that corporations pay less.
I don’t like a LOT of things.
Look around the corner, I’ll bet there’s an actual living person that could use all of your good will towards human life. But then again they have boot straps don’t they.
The truth is, doing both would double our chances of “more likely” finding a cure…. I like those odds much better.
Don’t pretend to care… it shows.
Joy Says: November 7th, 2006 at 11:06 am
Liber etc.,
Being my usual blunt self, I’m going on record as saying that you sound like you’ve been brought through the liberal brainwash system…er, I mean modern public education without a rudder to steer you; or you threw the rudder out as “old fashioned” and so are swept into that whirlpool of holding your hands over your ears while claiming to want to hear other views. Your pre-judgemental statements are pretty clear as to how open you were(n’t) at the time of their writing. Hold those views if you want to, but please try to not kid yourself that you’re being open or considering the validity of other views, when you seem to think you’ve got the corner on all conservative reasoning.
1. There are a lot of things that all of our tax dollars go toward which are serious ‘pork’ so to speak. If you think that liberals running the government will use less of your paycheck, if you earn one, maybe you haven’t paid much attention to how all those wonderful government aid programs are funded. You know, like stem cell research, welfare, fat white rich liberal congress people’s vacations/trysts/business meetings and bribes (I had to throw that in), special programs for illegal aliens, better medical care for terrorist prisoners than impoverished Americans get, a better diet for terrorist prisoners than impoverished Americans get. If you think there would be more for you to spend if liberals were in power, you need to pay attention to real life! Liberals always always always RAISE taxes…and do you think they’re coming to your door for your opinion on how to spend your money? All they’ll do is ‘feel your pain’ verbally while giving it to you physically.
2. Any 3rd grader can tell you when human life begins. (Check that. They SHOULD be able to tell you) Hmmm…think real hard…when all the genetic makeup is present together? Very good! You’ve passed 3rd grade! You’ve got potential! We might let you grow up to love Jesus! If your cheeks are rosy enough.
See, I’m one who doesn’t pretend to care…I either do or I don’t.
Logical, bright, intelligent people are on all sides of many debates (and in Iraq, I might add..haha). You might want to join them (especially the ones in Iraq…hahaha!) It will require you taking your fingers out of your ears and actually asking things like “What do you mean by that” and “What about this”, and so forth, rather than telling conservatives what they think/mean and how they perceive things.
On that note, I’m open to you pointing out anything that you perceive me as having a double standard in. You’re free to be wrong….as you know from experience. zing!
Joy Says: November 7th, 2006 at 11:16 am
“If you do, it looks remarkably like discrimination”. When did ‘discrimination’ become a bad word?
Here are some thesaurus words for you to ponder:
“Discrimination - good taste, judgement, discernment, insight, acumen, perception, refinement”
Come to think of it, I agree with your statement quoted above. Yes, it looks remarkably like good taste, insight, discernment, good taste, acument, perception and refinement. Good call.
Joy Says: November 7th, 2006 at 12:04 pm
British Nationalist,
Fear not. Because we know God exists, we will not strap bombs to ourselves and blow you up, nor raid your house and rape your females then beat you senseless in front of them if you disagree with us. It’ll be ok if God is mentioned here.
By the way, to not believe in God is a ‘fire-cracker’. A big local noise, but not overly powerful compared to the power in the universe.
Have you heard the one where man claimed he could make a human, just like God did? He’s still working on it… doesn’t know where to get his own ingredients.
Non-believers can just learn to listen when people refer to God. Their ears won’t shrivel, their brains won’t go any number, get over it! We’ve been careful and tried to not offend for so long that many started to feel like we had to apologize for OUR beliefs. Enough already! You choose to not believe in God. We choose to acknowledge His existence. I don’t see where Buck said “Believe in God or your off the blog” or anything else like that. Censor your own blinking self, but I, for one, will mention God whenever I deem it necessary and prudent. Stop trying to throw God out of the mix. If you create a living being capable of reproducing itself, then throw yourself out of the mix if you like…if it wouldn’t throw you out first. Keep God out of your debate if you want, but He’ll be heard about from this person, at least.
By the way, if there is no God, there is no “supreme”…since it’s a term that means “highest”, which couldn’t accurately be used since all below it would only be “high” compared to low things. We could only accurately say,”Low, lower, lowest.” Think about it. We don’t even use 1/2 our brain, yet we consider someone “supremely intelligent” who still doesn’t use 1/2 of their brain! See? Low, lower, lowest. If that’s how you want to see your world, go for it. Personally, I like to have my sights a lot higher.
Joy Says: November 7th, 2006 at 4:04 pm
Liber,
Me again. “Metabolic goo”? Really. Well, metabolic goo-breath, how’s it feel to be allowed to walk around and make some choices about your life? Choices like, how to not put much effort into learning to spell. So, carbon-based life form…who’s to say you shouldn’t be given to research right now? We can learn alot from someone your age…whatever it may be.
Say someone is too young to vote, then why waste space?
Say someone is old enough to vote, but doesn’t - why take up room and valuable air?
Since you don’t spell as well as I do, why be allowed to write before you’ve reached your full potential in that area? If you won’t apply yourself to get some actual facts before you start parroting liberal prof propaganda, oh student-who-wants-to-learn-with-closed-mind, why not just donate your body to science and be a human experiment? On second thought, I, personally, have decided that you are just overgrown metabolic goo that must be made more useful. I’m likely older than you, so I’ll pull seniority here. Off with you to the labs. If you’re female, maybe we could use you to perfect sterilization techniques…oh, wait, that’s already being done via banned parenthood. Hmmm…maybe we could see the effect of the fastest growing killer of females - shoot, that right! Planned Barrenhood has already cornered that market also! Ah! The very thing! Are you a guy? You could become the first pregnant male! As with your logic…you could figure out how the baby - oh pardon me, er, ‘metabolic goo’ would come out AFTER they attach the metabolic goo to your insides. Of course, you’d have to have a few operations to even get to that point….oh well, It’s all good! You won’t mind a bit. You’ll have a nice specialized petrie dish to live in. You’ll be doing a great service and maybe might some distant future day possibly sort of make a positive difference in someone’s life by quietly fulfilling your duty to science now and letting highly trained doctors and scientist practice on you. After all, you’re just going to die some day anyway. Why not be made useful in the meantime?
admin Says: November 7th, 2006 at 9:35 pm
I just got back from voting NO on the stem cell amendment in Missouri and I’m still amused that all of you do-good liberals still can’t come up with an answer for the question I asked nutlsikebush a while back.
If this reasearch is so good, why do we need constitutional amendment to protect it? And furthermore, why do the authors of the amendment feel the need to write in such away as to confuse the public. Why didn’t they just call it an amendment to prohibit government interference in stem cell research?
nutslikebush Says: November 7th, 2006 at 11:35 pm
Buck,
I must have missed your answer to my earlier questions - i.e., what is the moral difference between embryonic and adult stem cell research? Correct answer, there isn’t one. Why do you prefer for the cells to be destroyed rather than to be used to make discoveries? Did you even read my answer to your question about why an amendment would be useful (answer: to prevent the technology from ever being used for human cloning. A vote against the amendment is a vote for unregulated use of embryonic stem cells by anyone who wishes to do it.). I assumed that your failure to respond indicated that you didn’t have a response.
kolran Says: November 8th, 2006 at 4:59 am
The thing is our government has laws, and that’s all they have. So, if they have laws over everything, and people pay taxes to keep those laws in place then the government is in business. I have been doing a lot of research on history and I am wondering why the government has us pay taxes. They should start a business, and not regulate other busnisses (but keep the no monopoly rule in effect as well as nuclear weapons ect.). That way if another company went in to cloning the government wouldn’t be responsible because they would have their own company that didn’t do cloning. I guess it is more of an idea as to getting rid of taxes as it is bended to argue that any company should be able to do what they want (I do not beleive this). Think of ancient rome, they held entertainment to pay for part of the government (gladiators, chariot races, ect..). Anyways, as far as stem cell research goes I find this is the first thing I am disagreeing with you on, buck. I have a cousin who is disabled and has alergies and if making stem cell research a free for all may help cure him of his illness then let them go for it. I have theory of why they wrapped the whole thing up too, but please don’t argue with me because I know it is wrong. What if the authors were afraid that the strong humanist activists would be the ONLY people coming to vote if everybody knew it was about some stem cell thing. Where if they have no clue mabye only a few nobody’s will turn up (no offense buck). We do have one of the saddest voting percentages in the world. Man, I got to get to bed, have I lost my mind, that made no sense what so ever. Mabye you can go to google translater and get it to make cents.
British_Nationalist Says: November 8th, 2006 at 6:21 pm
Joy,
I find your blunt assumption that just because I do not believe in invoking the lord’s name as support for an argument that therefore I must be an atheist utterly appalling. In no part of my post did I mention my own religious (or irreligious for that matter) stance. I was merely suggesting that there are good many atheists and secularists in the world for whom it will take more than the mention of the almighty to convince them that your point of view is right. A much more intelligent and rational argument is required for that.
The Other Side Says: November 10th, 2006 at 10:10 pm
Well Joy, you just represented the right’s assumptions better than I could. You assume that I’m not religious or intelligent becuase I happen to have some liberal beliefs. But thats the reason why I’m here, to learn the other side’s beliefs. You can attack my words because they are based off the only information that I know, but don’t attack my intentions because you have no idea.
Joy Says: November 10th, 2006 at 10:49 pm
Hi other side,
What other name do you go by on here? I don’t know if I’ve referred to your intelligence, words or belief since I don’t know who you are, so to speak. Also, why would you choose me as the representative for ‘the right’? I’m one voice and I don’t know as I represent any other person when I state my opinion.
Could you clarify?
The Other Side Says: November 11th, 2006 at 2:36 am
Wow, i sure got quite the response from people especially someone not too joyful. Well, it is hard to not sound quite as liberal when i do go to a liberal college and, good call, did go to public school.
But these responses discredit what I’m trying to do. You may not believe my sincerity of trying to learn about conservatives, but I want to. I’m trying to be civil and hear what people have to say on the other side of the debate. I constantly hear liberal talk everywhere, and when i hear about conservatives, its all negative.
However, when i get responses that belittle my intelligence and patronize me and my beliefs, it destroys the debate I want to hear and furthers my negativity towards Republicans. It seems that Joy has some real issues with liberals and needs to calm down, not every Democrat is as partisan as you. And never attack my religous beliefs. I am a diehard Catholic and love Jesus. You justified my last post about assumptions made by Republicans.
Back to my mission, I would like to know why Republicans are so against taxes. Taxes aren’t going to kill you, but every conservative campaigning seemed to bring it up and how they won’t raise taxes. Well, there needs to be some way to lessen the debt and taxing the rich makes sense. I may not be that informed on this, but we keep digging a hole that we need to address. Reaganomics assumes that the rich will buy things and that the money will trickle down. Money has to come from somewhere.