[Old Man G Funk]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301746.html

The legislation, which Bush has repeatedly threatened to veto, would allow the National Institutes of Health to fund research on human embryos slated for destruction at fertility clinics. It is backed by science and patient-advocacy groups, and was endorsed by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) last summer, when momentum behind the research was at a peak.

Of course, Frist in his zeal to appeal to evangelicals has so far tabled the idea, but he may bring it up. Bush has said he will veto it.

So, my question is this, are there any evangelical monkeys out there who can explain why it is morally reprehensible to them to perform what could be life-saving research on embryos that are going to be thrown out anyway?

 

[BurlyShirley]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301746.html



Of course, Frist in his zeal to appeal to evangelicals has so far tabled the idea, but he may bring it up. Bush has said he will veto it.

So, my question is this, are there any evangelical monkeys out there who can explain why it is morally reprehensible to them to perform what could be life-saving research on embryos that are going to be thrown out anyway?

Are you actually looking for some sound argument here? These tards just dont want anyone "experimentin' on babies" no matter how you verb it.

 

[Tenchiro]

Science is teh evilz!

 

[DRB]

Their concern is that if you allow it on embryos that are going to be disposed, that more will be created to be "disposed of".

 

[fluff]

Can we still experiment on embryos that are going to be kept?

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Are you actually looking for some sound argument here? These tards just dont want anyone "experimentin' on babies" no matter how you verb it.

It would be a pleasant surprise to be confronted with a sound argument, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Their concern is that if you allow it on embryos that are going to be disposed, that more will be created to be "disposed of".

That sort of sounds like the argument over the Cervical Cancer Vaccine.

 

[reflux]

I believe its due to the fact that we would be messin' with "life." Evangelicals say, "who are we to play God?"

 

[kinghami3]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301746.html



Of course, Frist in his zeal to appeal to evangelicals has so far tabled the idea, but he may bring it up. Bush has said he will veto it.

So, my question is this, are there any evangelical monkeys out there who can explain why it is morally reprehensible to them to perform what could be life-saving research on embryos that are going to be thrown out anyway?

I have no fvcking clue anymore. :nonono: Because it will save lives? :dancing: None of this makes sense to me, and there is no logical reason, even from the Christian evangelical perspective, why Bush would veto this. I see it as God giving us a great opportunity to save some lives, and Bush is flushing it down the toilet...

I believe its due to the fact that we would be messin' with "life." Evangelicals say, "who are we to play God?"

except the evangelical belief is that we are created in the image of God, and therefore are creative beings. However, your answer is the best reason to veto that I can think of so far. Crappy reason, but whatever.

 

[Transcend]

Their concern is that if you allow it on embryos that are going to be disposed, that more will be created to be "disposed of".

More will be created because they don't allow birth control and they refuse to teach safe sex in school, duh!

 

[Tenchiro]

I believe its due to the fact that we would be messin' with "life." Evangelicals say, "who are we to play God?"

When it comes to a few cells unable to sustain life, then yes. But when they are talking about Arabs or Prisoners, then anything goes really.

 

[Ridemonkey]

He just doesn't want anyone to isolate the gene that makes him a ****ing moron.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

He just doesn't want anyone to isolate the gene that makes him a ****ing moron.

Approved!

 

[Old Man G Funk]

I believe its due to the fact that we would be messin' with "life." Evangelicals say, "who are we to play God?"

Life that's to be thrown away. I don't think that gets stressed enough. We are basically killing this clump of cells anyway, so why not get some useful research out of it?

 

[Old Man G Funk]

I have no fvcking clue anymore. :nonono: Because it will save lives? :dancing: None of this makes sense to me, and there is no logical reason, even from the Christian evangelical perspective, why Bush would veto this. I see it as God giving us a great opportunity to save some lives, and Bush is flushing it down the toilet...

except the evangelical belief is that we are created in the image of God, and therefore are creative beings. However, your answer is the best reason to veto that I can think of so far. Crappy reason, but whatever.

Yeah, I recall you voicing a similar opinion. I think you and Andyman are both in agreement that this should not be vetoed. I'm just wondering what evangelicals that agree with the veto would say.

 

[Silver]

It's a political bone that he can throw them to make it look like he'd doing something.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

It's a political bone that he can throw them to make it look like he'd doing something.

Right. But that only works because some evangelicals see some moral advantage to chucking these cells in the trash can instead of trying to do some research which might save lives.

 

[DaveW]

He just doesn't want anyone to isolate the gene that makes him a ****ing moron.

Ahahahahahahahaha Oh course it's all so clear now!

 

[Andyman_1970]

I think you and Andyman are both in agreement that this should not be vetoed.

You are correct, I oppose the veto. I think some more conservative Christians fear this will either give abortion more of a foothold, or be misused by creating embryo’s just for research.

This makes about as much sense as the evangelical right being all wound up about reducing the number of abortions (which I’m all for) but refusing to “allow” things like handing out condoms or making birth control easily accessible to those who need it.

I find it ironic evangelical Christian scream about how research on embryos equals murder, and in their fervor to “save lives” turn a blind eye to the 9000+ a day that die in Africa due to poverty and AIDS.

Anyway……………..

 

[Changleen]

Some people really need to get punched in the face. This makes me mad. No no, let's not significantly help out the cutting edge of medical research because we have a fvcked up set of 'rigid' morals dictated to us by a story book.

Fvck you and all who sail in you, religious freaknuts. This is how religion is evil.

 

[GoldCoast1969]

I believe its due to the fact that we would be messin' with "life." Evangelicals say, "who are we to play God?"

Come on, all we do is play God. How can some people support the death penalty and condemn embryonic research? I think more good will come out of life-saving research than the electric chair anyways.

 

[Silver]

This is going to descend into a circle jerk. We're just waiting for a Christian to come along and lay down some logic here so we can fall on it like a starving dog on a steak.

Where's DT when you need him?

(I'm such a good boy. Do you have any idea how hard it was to not put quote marks around logic?)

 

[Secret Squirrel]

This is going to descend into a circle jerk. We're just waiting for a Christian to come along and lay down some logic here so we can fall on it like a starving dog on a steak.

Where's DT when you need him?

(I'm such a good boy. Do you have any idea how hard it was to not put quote marks around logic?)

Is "logic" kinda like fuzzy logic?

 

[kinghami3]

This is going to descend into a circle jerk. We're just waiting for a Christian to come along and lay down some logic here so we can fall on it like a starving dog on a steak.

Where's DT when you need him?

(I'm such a good boy. Do you have any idea how hard it was to not put quote marks around logic?)

I am inclined to agree. I can't think of any Christians on this board who would follow Bush's logic, myself included. I will take a stab at it though.

Bush = the Pope of the religious right. Bush says that it is immoral, therefore it is. Why? Because Bush is sent from God to save this heathen nation. Because Bush says so, saving lives is clearly not a priority of God. Or the Pope. Testing stem cells is the equivalent to abortion because in some people's minds it promotes the unrealistic and slightest possibility of abortion. Therefore we should ban abortions and kill the people who perform abortions in order to stop the killing. Hmm... that sounds strangely similar to the logic behind the war . Anyhow, killing babies is bad, and anything remotely associated with killing babies is bad and needs to be killed, even if it isn't really, and saving lives isn't really that important, since God was probably going to smite them anyhow, since Christians don't get cancer. I think.

(edit: I have a lot of respect for the Pope, none for Bush)

 

[Secret Squirrel]

I am inclined to agree. I can't think of any Christians on this board who would follow Bush's logic, myself included. I will take a stab at it though.

Bush = the Pope. Bush says that it is immoral, therefore it is. Why? Because Bush is sent from God to save this heathen nation. Because Bush says so, saving lives is clearly not a priority of God. Or the Pope. Testing stem cells is the equivalent to abortion because in some people's minds it promotes the unrealistic and slightest possibility of abortion. Therefore we should ban abortions and kill the people who perform abortions in order to stop the killing. Hmm... that sounds strangely similar to the logic behind the war . Anyhow, killing babies is bad, and anything remotely associated with killing babies is bad and needs to be killed, even if it isn't really, and saving lives isn't really that important, since God was probably going to smite them anyhow, since Christians don't get cancer. I think.

(edit: I have a lot of respect for the Pope, none for Bush)

You just made my head hurt horribly badly with that...I leave work now and drink copious amounts of really good scotch.

 

[Changleen]

I am inclined to agree. I can't think of any Christians on this board who would follow Bush's logic, myself included. I will take a stab at it though.

Bush = the Pope. Bush says that it is immoral, therefore it is. Why? Because Bush is sent from God to save this heathen nation. Because Bush says so, saving lives is clearly not a priority of God. Or the Pope. Testing stem cells is the equivalent to abortion because in some people's minds it promotes the unrealistic and slightest possibility of abortion. Therefore we should ban abortions and kill the people who perform abortions in order to stop the killing. Hmm... that sounds strangely similar to the logic behind the war . Anyhow, killing babies is bad, and anything remotely associated with killing babies is bad and needs to be killed, even if it isn't really, and saving lives isn't really that important, since God was probably going to smite them anyhow, since Christians don't get cancer. I think.

Your logic bone was working just fine, until:

(edit: I have a lot of respect for the Pope, none for Bush)

Do you have some sort of disociative congnative impairment? You pointed out everything that was was wrong with both the Pope and Bush's way of thinking, and bashed Bush for it, but you're OK, nay, respectful of the pope doing it?

 

[Silver]

I have a shirt that has a photo of JP2 on it with the quote "I asked the Pope, gold is still dope..."

I get dirty looks in the Mexican markets around here

 

[kinghami3]

Your logic bone was working just fine, until:

Do you have some sort of disociative congnative impairment? You pointed out everything that was was wrong with both the Pope and Bush's way of thinking, and bashed Bush for it, but you're OK, nay, respectful of the pope doing it?

Sorry, I meant that Bush is to the religious right as the Pope is to the Catholic church. I stand behind my respect for the Pope, he is a good man, though not perfect.

 

[Silver]

Sorry, I meant that Bush is to the religious right as the Pope is to the Catholic church. I stand behind my respect for the Pope, he is a good man.

The Nazi one, or that one that helped AIDS spread in Africa?

 

[Secret Squirrel]

The Nazi one, or that one that helped AIDS spread in Africa?

At this point, what the hell does it matter....and I'm being completely serious.

 

[Changleen]

It wouldn't matter if there weren't so many catholics.

 

[Silver]

At this point, what the hell does it matter....and I'm being completely serious.

Well, only one of them was actually a Nazi.

Interestingly enough, his excuse was that everyone did it at the time and he didn't really subscribe to it. Now he preaches against the evils of moral relativism.

Have you ever read this Steven Weinberg quote?

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."

I think JP2 was the good person doing evil things due to religion. The Nazi pope...well, let's just say I'm much less convinced of his intrinsic goodness.

 

[Silver]

Cheap shot? I'm ashamed of my own youth. And I don't use the excuse that all my family and friends were doing it.

Personally, I expect more from God's personal representative on earth. (Actually, recalling my Bible again, no I don't. God's sort of a dick. Maybe Ratzinger is perfect.)

 

[kinghami3]

Cheap shot? I'm ashamed of my own youth. And I don't use the excuse that all my family and friends were doing it.

Personally, I expect more from God's personal representative on earth. (Actually, recalling my Bible again, no I don't. God's sort of a dick. Maybe Ratzinger is perfect.)

Not to mention he was forced into it. It was pretty much the boyscouts of his day, not exactly something to be ashamed of at the time. I would love to continue this discussion, but a.) I've gotta go to class, b.) I don't really care that much, and c.) all I said is that I have a lot more respect for the Pope than I do Bush. I am not Catholic, and I do not submit myself to his papal authority. He is not perfect in any way, and you can even say that he has a dark history. However, the church is centered on forgiveness and love, and to me it is evident that Benedict the 16th is truly repentant and a humble man.

 

[Changleen]

However, the church is centered on forgiveness and love

Is it? It seems pretty obvious to me it is centred on money and power.

 

[noname]

I was going to contribute, but it seems to have devolved before I could.

 

[kinghami3]

Is it? It seems pretty obvious to me it is centred on money and power.

I'm not going to argue with you, because in many cases you're right to say that the church is focused on money (just watch TBN), but for once I would like to see you back up your arguments with real knowledge of Christianity, like OMGF. I'm getting to the point where I just skip over your posts because they are hollow assertions with no argumentative value. In general, you are partially correct, and partially incorrect because it's obvious to me that you're missing out on seeing the good aspects of the church, focusing on the corruption that exists in the church for the sole reason that the church is made up entirely out of imperfect, greedy, sleazy, hateful and sinful people. Some are there for self advancement, and are the people who you see in the spotlight, while others are there to serve the rest of the world and share the new love that they have found, and remain generally unseen. [/preaching]

 

[kinghami3]

I was going to contribute, but it seems to have devolved before I could.

Welcome to the Monkey.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

I am inclined to agree. I can't think of any Christians on this board who would follow Bush's logic, myself included. I will take a stab at it though.

Bush = the Pope of the religious right. Bush says that it is immoral, therefore it is. Why? Because Bush is sent from God to save this heathen nation. Because Bush says so, saving lives is clearly not a priority of God. Or the Pope. Testing stem cells is the equivalent to abortion because in some people's minds it promotes the unrealistic and slightest possibility of abortion. Therefore we should ban abortions and kill the people who perform abortions in order to stop the killing. Hmm... that sounds strangely similar to the logic behind the war . Anyhow, killing babies is bad, and anything remotely associated with killing babies is bad and needs to be killed, even if it isn't really, and saving lives isn't really that important, since God was probably going to smite them anyhow, since Christians don't get cancer. I think.

(edit: I have a lot of respect for the Pope, none for Bush)

Back on topic, I found this comment to be extremely interesting. Hami, if the religious right looks to Bush as a pope figure it would counter my thought that Bush was pandering to the religious right. I was more under the impression that the religious leaders of the evangelical right were against this, so Bush had to be against it in order to appease his base. But if you are right, it would put even more blame on Bush for this sad state of affairs.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

I'm not going to argue with you, because in many cases you're right to say that the church is focused on money (just watch TBN), but for once I would like to see you back up your arguments with real knowledge of Christianity, like OMGF.

Awwww, shucks. Thanks. :love: