Unacceptable, even if true.
Agreed. My hope is if stem cells can be used to cure blindness, the source of those stem cells can be resourced from embryonic to a mature donor. Using stem cells harvested from the patient reduces the risk of rejection of the resulting tissues. Embryonic stem cells have never been successfully used for any clinical trials.
There is a prophecy among Orthodox Christians that in the days of the Antichrist, all of Christ's miracles will be duplicated, except that the dead will not be raised.
Just so that you all know that there is room for dissention among us on such issues--
I am a pro-choice but hard core conservative. Call me libertarian in this regard if you will. Though I do not personally approve of the act of abortion, I would restrict it in some ways, but not outlaw it.
And in the same way that I would condone the use of ill-gotten goods (say confiscated drug money) to be used for some other good purpose, I tentatively condone the use of embryonic stem cells to improve the lives of the living.
So far, I have seen evidence that these cells can be used for good, even though it is likely that they were not obtained through any act of goodness.
I'm sorry, but I am against many of you here. And yes, it is true that I am not religious, and that seems to be what most of the objection to the practice of abortion is predicated on-- though I do view the Christian religion as a great source of good in the world, and I am in fact envious of those who conjure belief.
I respect your point of view, greatly, but I will not yield on my point of view. You can reply to this post if you wish and I will read them, but I will not reply back, because this is an issue that we can never find common ground on or work out through debate.