Why Embryonic Stem Cell Research is Wrong and Obsolete

Theology and science.

Published on April 11, 2008 By erathoniel In Religion

Now, everyone should know, before reading this, that I am against two things with a vengeance. Abortion, and embryonic stem cell research are major evils in today's society.

Embryonic stem cell research and abortion are similar, yet different. Abortion involves chopping up a baby at some point in its developmental state. Embryonic stem cell research involves removing parts of a baby at some part of its development (before it even forms). Either kill the babies.

Now, I could rant on about exactly why they are wrong. But I'll tell you this much. It involves taking of innocent life for convenience. Now you could say that embryonic stem cell research has great benefits. It involves taking an unborn life and putting it to help an old, near failing life. There is something wrong when we kill our children for the sake of ourselves.

Embryonic stem cell research is not only wrong, but entirely unnecessary. You can ask me: "But, why is it wrong? It helps our future." And I will respond with one link.

Link

Comments (Page 2)

SanChonino

on Apr 15, 2008

Think of how many brilliant scientists and atheletes and politicians abortioins, stem cell research, and more have killed.

None. Because they aren't any of those things. They are dead matter, disposed of properly.

I'm not saying that I agree with abortion (which, as a general rule, I don't), I'm just saying that you're really good at spewing talking points without any real substance. I mean, I guess that works around here (look at all the conservatives up in here, they do that shit all the time, all fluff and no substance) but you still look like a tool, just like psychx said.

cactoblasta

on Apr 15, 2008

Abortion is evil. Any country that legitimizes killing its own progeny is doomed.

Which countries are you talking about? None except maybe China could be said to have survived very long, and even China had an enormous number of different dynasties. It also allowed abortion through herbal methods.

Can you name a country in particular which held the unborn sacred and survived all that long? None really jump out to me, but I did Asian rather than European history, so maybe you have an example.

lulapilgrim

on Apr 15, 2008

Abortion is evil. Any country that legitimizes killing its own progeny is doomed.

Which countries are you talking about?

Any country that officially recognizes abortion on demand. The USA, ever since 1973 when a majority decision of Supreme Court Justices recognized abortion on demand as a "woman's reproductive right to privacy". Problem is we don't reproduce something by killing it.

Roe v. Wade is an evil law and must be overturned or our nation is doomed.

Those countries in Europe which are still holding out from officially legitimizing abortion on demand are being hit hard by the European Union to buckle under.

erathoniel

on Apr 15, 2008

I seem to recall that one of the people who brought about Roe v. Wade found it an incorrect interpretation of their intentions. The client, if I'm correct.

lulapilgrim

on Apr 15, 2008

I seem to recall that one of the people who brought about Roe v. Wade found it an incorrect interpretation of their intentions. The client, if I'm correct.

Yes, Norma McCorvey is Jane Roe of that fateful day of January, 1973. She suffered tremendous trauma as a result of her participation in legalized abortion at any time during pregnancy (infanticide). Since then she deeply regretted her part and has experienced a complete conversion and found her way into the Church.

Another one who repented and converted was Dr. Bernard N. Nathanson of Vanderbuilt Univ. He started NARAL in 1968 and was the owner of the largest abortion clinic in thie country (at least at that time). Once he realized that abortion was the taking of a human life and realized the suffering it caused women, he shut his clinic down...for good.

lulapilgrim

on Apr 15, 2008

None except maybe China could be said to have survived very long, and even China had an enormous number of different dynasties. It also allowed abortion through herbal methods.

Speaking of China, last Feburary, I read probably one of the most disturbing news report ever. It's details from Dr. Mark Miravalles book, The Seven Sorrows of China and it give the accounts of brutality of the one-child policy and its effects upon the Chinese people.

He laments that the greatest sorrow of all is that the majority of CHinese people have no problem with with having an abortion, it's like going to the dentist.

Anyway, he writes that in one province, 5 restaurants began serving "fetal soup" at the price of 300 Yuan, ($40.00) a bowl!

SilentPoet

on Apr 15, 2008

This is an emotional issues, plain and simple. It will never ever be solved, why, because you're going to have one of the sides crying foul if the other is "winning." It all comes down to personal ethics/morals. Personal is the operative word. Same thing with the other emotional issues.

erathoniel

on Apr 15, 2008

Personally, life happens. You get pregnant, love the child.

cactoblasta

on Apr 15, 2008

Lula: I was unclear. Which countries have lasted forever as a result of their anti-abortion stance? I can't think of a single country which rose or fell where its stance on abortion was even remotely influential.

Perhaps the best counter-example is Rome. It was all peachy up until it got God and abandoned abortion. Then it collapsed rather messily. Not that I think there's a causation there. From what I've seen and read abortion is at best an extremely minor factor in the life of states.

Unless you have evidence to the contrary?

Yes, and the methods can be particularly brutal. It's not a socially uplifting policy, but they had the choice of continuing their rampant overpopulation and being forced to seize additional land or cutting back on growth. I think the world should be grateful they went for the latter even if it does make baby Jesus cry.

erathoniel

on Apr 15, 2008

Yes, but is there not something immoral about the killing of innocents, even if for the good of the whole? Why not let the guilty whole fall for the sake of the innocents?

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!