Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

It Is Time To Ban All Human Cloning
FreeRepublic ^ | 2/27/2003 | MHGinTN

Posted on 02/27/2003 12:02:54 PM PST by MHGinTN

Why did the President call for a ban on human cloning?

For the vast majority of Americans, the acceptance quotient regarding nascent life falls somewhere between ‘legal protection for all conceived individual human life’ and ‘legal protection for partial birth abortion.’ With acceptance of in vitro fertilization, followed eventually by the apparent necessity for some legal abortion, our society too quickly arrived at acceptance of, no, defense of, infanticide. Our society can degenerate further.

A straight-line course from our current reality will have us embracing the notion that ‘exploitation of embryonic life is needed to bolster unencumbered lives of worthy pursuit.’ Those forces pushing for therapeutic cloning and exploitation of embryonic stem cells assume (in New Jersey, at least, and now democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives are trying the same tactics) that the American people will accept conception of individual human lives and then killing those individuals for their body parts (embryonic stem cell exploitation). Folks, that’s cannibalism as surely as if you were directed to eat embryonic individual humans for medical treatment.

To legally exploit individual embryonic life, someone must arrange our agreement that killing and harvesting embryos is not the same as killing an individual. Scientists who would carry out these medical marvels know this is a lie but they do not correct the lie because it serves their purposes. Here's the key to the deception: the science of Embryology holds as axiomatic that individual life is a continuum with a beginning at conception (an unbroken chain of events hallmarked by form and function at each age of an individual life; if the chain is broken, death of an individual life occurs); those seeking legalization for embryonic exploitation must promote the blatant lie that ‘embryos are not individual human life’ ... or worse, have the nation agree that these are individual human lives, exploited in earliest stage of their ‘less worthy life’, defining a higher purpose for the body parts of these embryonic individuals, to sustain others.

The first level of agreement those promoting therapeutic cloning seek from us is based on a calculated lie; the second descending level of agreement is acceptance of cannibalism based on that same lie that embryos are not human individuals existing at a normal age in a human lifetime.

Many people warned of a slippery slope back when outrage over in vitro fertilization was squelched. Our nation is already far down that slope, gaining speed in our decline.

Exploitation of nascent life is now a reality: the fetal tissue harvesting industry, with more than a billion dollars in business receipts, already influences when some women ought to have the abortions they seek, because fetal tissue differentiation makes later rather than earlier killing and harvesting of the preborn more desirable to those who will profit from the killing. But things can get worse: 1) embryonic stem cell exploitation now demands the conception and killing of untold numbers of embryos; 2) therapeutic cloning is based on the in vitro fertilization / conception of individual human life, with killing and harvesting as the goal when the embryo has differentiated sufficiently to make specific target-cell identification reliable. Both of these 'scientific advances', if they are not to be outlawed, require our nation to accept the specious notion that an individual human life doesn't begin with at least first cell division (onset of mitosis).

Having read this far, some will assert, "But an embryo in a petri dish is not the same as an implanted embryo, not the same as a fetus, not the same as a born child, not the same as a toddler, not the same as …" That’s using the continuum concept to define the life of an individual human being. Using a continuum argument to arbitrarily eliminate earlier ages along the continuum glares paradoxically and perniciously, for the very science now hurrying to exploit embryonic life is convinced an embryo IS an individual human lifetime begun. "Outrageous assertion,” some will say. Okay, let the goals of the scientific pursuits speak for the scientists covering for the lies.

With in vitro fertilization, a female gamete is fertilized by a male gamete (gametes are the ‘sex cells’ of the adult male or female). Once cell division is evidenced and the embryo reaches a desired number of body parts (the embryo’s stem cells), the individual embryo is placed into the uterus of the target woman. [In most cases, several individual embryos are implanted at the same time; if too many achieve life support, the attending medical personnel will advise aborting one or more, to improve the odds for the escaping survivor].

The technician watching the product of fertilization in the ‘petri dish’ is looking for cell division, to assure that an individual human life has begun to express itself, to grow.

The technicians must achieve transfer from petri dish to human uterus at a specific stage in cell division; if they try implanting too early, the embryo will not have the sticky coating it creates which allows for attachment to the uterine wall. The individual life, after it implants in the uterine lining, forms its own protective barrier, to prevent the woman’s body from identifying it as a separate life from her body. The attached individual life sends out chemical signals, to induce the woman’s body to send nutrients for life support. The individual life builds its own protective capsule while building its own individual body, incorporating portions of the capsule into the developing body to be part of the later gut and ligaments (for example) of the later aged body of the preborn. Timing is crucial along this life continuum as the embryo seeks to survive. [If you’re still wondering, this continuum concept of individual human existence is the same reasoning regarding the onset of puberty, for example, as a normal stage in a human lifetime. Note again that the life continuum is hallmarked by form and function; even the embryo is defined by form and function of its body parts, its stem cells.]

The methodology of technicians seeking embryonic stem cells or technicians seeking to clone life have much in common with the in vitro fertilization process. All cloning, whether therapeutic or reproductive, begins with reproduction, conceiving a unique individual human being for exploitative harvesting or birth.

The clone is a close genetic duplicate of a parent DNA donor. With the goal of a conceptus in mind, the clone technician seeks to use a mature female gamete only, from which the chromosomal nuclear ball has been removed and the 46 chromosome nuclear material of the ‘adult donor’ is inserted (called somatic cell nuclear transfer). [‘Adult donor’ refers to an organism with a normal compliment of 46 chromosomes, not to the age of the donor.] In some cloning procedures, the product of male/female conception (sexual reproduction) is stripped of 46 resulting chromosomes prior to first cell division, and the 46 chromosomes of the donor are inserted.

If the cloning technician seeks to fully reproduce the genetic donor, the conceptus is observed for evidence of cell division (proving it is expressing its individual life), then, just as with typical in vitro reproduction, the embryo is inserted into a woman’s uterus (for continued life support of a proven individual human organism that is a close genetic duplicate of the DNA donor).

If the technician desires ‘therapeutic cloning’, instead of reproduction for a fully expressed parent donor, the embryo is not always implanted in a woman’s body (but in some procedures it is); before too many months, this individual is ‘harvested’, killing a being conceived for a ‘tissue specific’ cloning purpose. [To be sure, the current arguments cite the embryonic clones being allowed to live for only fourteen days, to allow sufficient stem cell division for differentiation, killing, and harvesting, but not to reach the fetal stage through implantation. Science will eventually figure out how to produce an artificial womb, and then these ‘non-human individuals’ will be raised into the fetal stages before killing and harvesting, you can be sure of that because tissues and organs of these cloned individuals will be more desirably differentiated!] Both types of cloning reproduce the donor; the chosen destiny for the newly conceived clone defines the procedure … a short lifetime for a harvesting target (so called therapeutic cloning), or a long lifetime as an individual identical twin (so called reproductive cloning).

Why is it important to realize that an embryo is a human being at an early age along a continuum of individual life? Because therapeutic cloning coupled with embryonic stem cell harvesting aim to cannibalize individual human life.

Defenders of therapeutic cloning are seeking to characterize that ‘type’ of human cloning as non-reproductive, but the truth is, ALL cloning is reproductive, all cloning conceives an individual human life. Defenders and promoters of therapeutic cloning deny that the embryonic individual life is a human being at that age of a lifetime begun at conception. Democrat elected representatives stand before the U.S. House of Representatives and purposely mischaracterize therapeutic cloning as merely the creation of stem cells, purposely omitting the truth that these stem cells are the body parts of an individual human life conceived for the purpose of harvesting the stem cells, the body parts, thus they support killing the newly conceived individual human being before further ages can be reached along the continuum of life begun at a designer, cloning, conception.

The science of Embryology holds as fundamental truth that even an embryo no bigger than a grain of sugar is an individual human life. Is it acceptable to kill that individual for body parts? If it is, that's cannibalism as surely as eating body parts or whole embryos for medical cures. That's why this President has called for a ban on all human cloning. It’s time to expose the lies and dissembling now moving this nation into acceptance of cannibalism as enlightened medical advance.


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Announcements; Culture/Society; Editorial; Free Republic; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: exploitation; stemcells; therapeuticcloning
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-173 next last
No doubt the comment that 'reasonable people can disagree' will arise if extended debate over this essay occurs. Please note that such a comment is akin to the democrat's definition of bi-partisan, 'only if you agree with the democrats can you be bi-partisan' for no other perspective will be tolerated. Only if lies are allowed to be considered as reasonable can one accept that embryonic human life is not a foundational age, not part of the life continuum of an individual human being. 'Reasonable people can disagree on democrat terms' only if truth can be rejected and that rejection accepted as reasonable.
1 posted on 02/27/2003 12:02:54 PM PST by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: blam; Alamo-Girl; backhoe; Woahhs; Victoria Delsoul; William Wallace; f.Christian; Bryan; ...
(((PING))))))
2 posted on 02/27/2003 12:11:49 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Folks, this is getting 'series.'
3 posted on 02/27/2003 12:13:24 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
BTTT!!!!!
4 posted on 02/27/2003 12:24:24 PM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Jeremiah 1:5
Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

Psalm 139:13
For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb.
14 :
I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.
15 :
My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.
16 :
Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

Galatians 1:15
But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,…

Isaiah 49:1 :
Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name.

Matthew 18:5
And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me.

Deuteronomy 30:19
"I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and
death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live."
5 posted on 02/27/2003 12:47:39 PM PST by PaxMacian (Gen 1:29)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
BTTT! and note to self to bookmark/profile this one once FR gets back up.

I ask you to protect infants at the very hour of their birth and end the practice of partial-birth abortion. And because no human life should be started or ended as the object of an experiment, I ask you to set a high standard for humanity, and pass a law against all human cloning.
President George W. Bush, State of the Union Address, January 28, 2003.

6 posted on 02/27/2003 2:00:57 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (3 rights make a left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
As to human cloning. This should not be done at all even assuming it is a perfect technology. There will be ethical, moral, and legal problems, at least.
7 posted on 02/27/2003 2:15:42 PM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
I agree human cloning should be banned. On the other hand, I think organ cloning is acceptable - think of how our lives could be saved if an organ in our body was failing and we needed a transplant. No more risk of rejection or being put on a waiting list only to die cause a matching donor wasn't available. There's a difference between making carbon copies of us as human beings and making carbon copies of our body parts for the purpose of saving our lives should the need arise for it. We can and should establish conditions under which organ cloning can be facilitated without opening the door to human cloning in the future.
8 posted on 02/27/2003 2:26:57 PM PST by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
MHGinTN,

Great job! If only THEY could be honest and see this for what it truly is.

9 posted on 02/27/2003 2:28:33 PM PST by cpforlife.org
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Free Republic Highlights, 2/27/03
10 posted on 02/27/2003 2:46:48 PM PST by I Am Not A Mod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
You assert that 'organ cloning' is acceptable. Can science take stem cells from your body and grow a replacement organ for your body without conceiving an individual clone of you from whom (the clone) they would take the cells to grow the organ? Either you have misunderstood the term 'clone' or you are being purposely deceptive. The term clone is defined as conceiving a unique close copy of the INDIVIDUAL from whom the nuclear material is taken. Be honest, are you asserting that somatic nuclear transfer is okay as long as the tissues/organs of the individual so conceived are taken from that embryonic individual human life not allowing that individual human clone to age to the point of birth? Are you relying on obfuscation to achieve tacit acceptance of conceiving new individual humans from whom you feel it is okay to harvest organs and tissues as long as the individual life is not allowed to be life supported to birth?

You opened your yapper to defend this cannibalism, now be honest. If you think taking cells from your body and growing a replacement organ for you, without cloning a reproduction copy of you, is cloning organs, you are sadly uninformed. Such an action is not cloning because by definition cloning is reproduction of you, creating an identical twin, for killing and harvesting or to be life supported to birth. You either need to get your science facts straight or be honest with readers.

11 posted on 02/27/2003 3:23:50 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: I Am Not A Mod; Jim Robinson
Hey! Way to go!

See post 10!

12 posted on 02/27/2003 3:29:19 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (3 rights make a left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; Registered
Registered, read this article, then see reply 11. When you have time, I'd like to finish our discussion on this.
13 posted on 02/27/2003 3:35:44 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (3 rights make a left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
I'm NOT defending the cloning of human beings. Go back and read my post. I am in favor of allowing the cloning of spare parts from our own bodies to save our lives if the need should arise. Too many people today are on waiting lists only to die cause they can't get a donor match and the lucky few who do get a replacement body organ have to live on anti-rejection drugs for the rest of their lives. I'm sure we'd able to discover how to grow a stem cell into a specialized organ without creating a whole new human being in the process. The fact cloning has a dark side we don't want or need is no reason to deprive ourselves of a legitimate benefit that could save people alive today. And since life is a precious gift from God I think that if there was even a remote chance cloning spare parts from us was a possibility that could save our lives at some point in the future, it definitely ought to be pursued. All of which should have nothing to do with bringing about the cloning of human beings themselves.
14 posted on 02/27/2003 3:42:49 PM PST by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; goldstategop
Multipotent adult progenitor cells (MAPCs) have shown some promise in producing replacement tissue and organs absent therapeuitc cloning. It would seem to be theoretically possible.

John

15 posted on 02/27/2003 3:51:24 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
ALL cloning is reproductive. ALL cloning starts with nuclear transfer of the chromosomal mass from a cell donate, into the denucleated ovum. That is reproductive by definition, the donor of the genetic material is duplicated at the embryonic age, then the individual embryonic human being is killed to harvest stem cells.

If, on the other hand, you are trying to convey the idea that it is okay to take your stem cells and grow a replacement organ, without going through the nuclear transfer of your chromosomal data into a denucleated ovum, then you are not talking about cloning. Again, cloning is the nuclear transfer of your genetic data into a denucleated ovum, thus conceiving a close copy of you at your age of embryo. If you aren't stealth defending this creation then killing for harvest, don't use the term 'cloning' with the term organ. If you are defending this conceiving of duplicates (embryonic individual humans) from whom to harvest organs and tissues, then be honest.

16 posted on 02/27/2003 3:55:42 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
I'm trying to convey the latter idea. Sorry for my clumsy terminology but there doesn't seem to be a suitable shorthand for making replacement organs that comes close. Again no one I know of is defending the exact cloning of human beings. Most people including you would like to have a copy of your vital organs made so they can be transplanted into you if one of the ones you have should fail. If that technology where available today, a dear friend of mine who recently passed away might be alive today. We have the obligation and the duty to preserve and extend our lives with every means including untried medical therapies that don't yet exist.
17 posted on 02/27/2003 4:06:02 PM PST by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
I agree with growing replacement organs for our maladies. I don't like the way the word cloning has been used in a stealth mode. The democrats trying to get protection for medical cloning are despicable. They are trying to achieve tacit acceptance of the cloning of embryos under the sneaky lie that conceiving embryos then harvesting those individual lives for the stem cells is not 'reproductive cloning'. ALL CLONING IS REPRODUCTIVE. Taking a cell from your body and inserting the nuclear material from your cell into a denucleated ovum creates/conceives a close duplicate of you at your age of embryo. The evil of the stealthy effort lies in trying to sneak past the public the truth that an individual human being is conceived in ALL cloning, else it wouldn't be cloning. If organs can be grown without nuclear transefer and conceiving embryos, I'm all for it. Sadly, that is not what these lairs have been trying to get tacit support for. They have been trying to skirt the truth that cloning conceives individual human embryonic beings from whom the stem cells are to be extracted, killing the embryos for thier body parts.
18 posted on 02/27/2003 4:17:07 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Thanks
19 posted on 02/27/2003 4:18:33 PM PST by 185JHP ( Brisance. Puissance. Resolve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
I agree with growing replacement organs for our maladies. I don't like the way the word cloning has been used in a stealth mode. The democrats trying to get protection for medical cloning are despicable. They are trying to achieve tacit acceptance of the cloning of embryos under the sneaky lie that conceiving embryos then harvesting those individual lives for the stem cells is not 'reproductive cloning'. ALL CLONING IS REPRODUCTIVE. Taking a cell from your body and inserting the nuclear material from your cell into a denucleated ovum creates/conceives a close duplicate of you at your age of embryo. The evil of the stealthy effort lies in trying to sneak past the public the truth that an individual human being is conceived in ALL cloning, else it wouldn't be cloning. If organs can be grown without nuclear transefer and conceiving embryos, I'm all for it. Sadly, that is not what these liars have been trying to get tacit support for. They have been trying to skirt the truth that cloning conceives individual human embryonic beings from whom the stem cells are to be extracted, killing the embryos for their body parts. That is cannibalism and they want this nation to accept it because of the possible medical treatments the scientists might achieve through the cannibalism.
20 posted on 02/27/2003 4:18:44 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Again no one I know of is defending the exact cloning of human beings. In clintonian parsing, the twist democrats have put to your statement would follow like this: 'no one is defending cloning of human beings because those trying to get protection for therapeutic cloning, cloning organs, would assert that an embryo is not a human being.'
21 posted on 02/27/2003 4:22:16 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Are you of the camp that doesn't consider the embryo to be a human being?... And thus you would agree with cloning embryos to harvest their body parts, their stem cells?
22 posted on 02/27/2003 5:43:22 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Bump!
23 posted on 02/27/2003 7:00:33 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
We have the obligation and the duty to preserve and extend our lives with every means including untried medical therapies that don't yet exist. posted by goldstategop Not by every means. I would assume that you do not favor cannibalism, that cannibalizing alive individuals is not acceptable to your civilized society. Is that correct, or do we have an issue or two to debate here.
24 posted on 02/27/2003 8:09:52 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
I think you've made a huge distinction between cloning and growth of replacement organs in posts 13, 16, 18, and 20 for those of us that are scientifically illiterate. :)

Please tell me about adult stem cells. Can they be and are they being used without cloning?

I saw Mary Tyler Moore one night on Larry King Live pushing the embryonic stem cell research issue, pleading that it be allowed to continue to save lives, blah blah blah. I forget who the guest host was, but it was not your typical CNN lib. Who was it? Maybe someone else will remember. It was a conservative. Argh! I hate it when I can't remember! Anyway, he asked MTM if she understood the difference between embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells. She looked puzzled and said not really. He went on to tell her the difference (one comes from an embryo and one comes from an adult, usually the spine (?)) She said she had never heard that before. He then asked her if she would continue to support abortion for research if stem cells from adults could be used. She was just shaking her head. She kept saying how she did not know that was possible and how it changed everything. She apologized for not having all the information available before taking such a stand on a cause. I really think she was surprised. Her answer to his question was no, she would not support abortion if another alternative was available and could he give her the place to start researching adult stem cells.

I've always thought adult stem cells were the answer, but if you still have to clone in order to reproduce body parts, then there is no difference between the two, and it is still premeditated murder, or cannibalism as you accurately call it.

Can adult stem cells be used to reproduce body parts without cloning? Is "reproduce" the key word here?

25 posted on 02/27/2003 8:24:11 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (3 rights make a left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi; hocndoc; Remedy; Askel5; BibChr; Polycarp
Yes, reproduce is the proper term for growing another organ from stem cells removed and manipulated from the body of the patient to be treated. But if the term cloning is used, then the term reproduce is conveying the conceiving of a new individual human being, and to get tissues for the patient, the donor of the 46 chromosomes of the clone, the embryonic individual is then killed and its body parts, its embryonic stem cells are taken/harvested.

Research is ongoing to remove precursor cells, or stem cells, from a patient then manipulate those cells to 'grow' the needed organ or tissue to treat the patient from whom the stem cells were removed. But that effort to grow organs/tissues is not a cloning procedure. If the stem cells are used to derive a nuclear transfer into a denucleated ovum, then that is cloning for an identical twin to be harvested (cannibalism) or to be life supported to birth and a continuing lifetime.

What is essential for understanding (so that the liars cannot manipulate tacit acceptance of something society rejects if the truth is opened up) is a grasp of what the embryo is. The embryo is one age of an individual lifetime begun at fecundation/conception. It is as real an age/stage of an individual human being's lifetime as birth, or puberty, or menopause. What defines any age of an individual's lifetime is the form and function of the body in which the individual soul dwells.

An embryo is a completely normal age for the individual at the early stage of the lifetime and it, the individual human embryo, is doing all it can to survive. If the embryo age is ended, the later ages/stages will not happen in that individual's lifetime. The exact same can be said for a toddler killed before puberty. From the moment of death onward, none of the later stages/ages will be realized for that individual human being. The stem cells of an embryo are the body parts of the individual human being alive at the embryo age for their lifetime begun at conception.

If one refers to 'embryonic stem cells', they are the body parts essential to staying alive, for the embryo (like removing the lungs of an adult). If adult stem cells are referred to, that can mean stem cells taken from an embryo or fetus all the way to stem cells taken from an octogenarian. Stem cells are precursor cells, less differentiated cells that may become the organs and replacement tissues of the human body. Stem cells may be found in a wide variety of places, besides in embryonic individuals. Placental cord blood is rich in stem cells. Red bone (like breastbone or pelvis) is another good source. So far, no organ has been grown from stem cells taken out of a patient then manipulated to grow target tissue. But there have been a few dramatic successes in growing target cells from a patient's own stem cells.

[[There is a flow chart approach to stem cells: totipotent = can develop into all the tissues and organs of the body; pluripotent = can grow into specific tissue and organs systems; multipotent = can grow into the different range of cellular structures of an organ, etc. Of a truth, the first cell produced with the union of the gametes (sex cells, sperm and ovum) is the most complete age of an individual human being. From the first cell division onward, the genetic information contained in the first cell is differentiated more and more, and the ability to become all the portions of the placenta and individual is gradually lost by a coding/methylation system. The great boon to humankind would be to figure out how to take an adult stem cell and back it up, to de-methylate it back to a pluripotent or multipotent age/stage then bring it forward as a specific tissue or organ. Science will learn to do that, but experiementing with living embryos, killing them for their stem cells, is cannibalizing individual human life.]]

26 posted on 02/27/2003 9:06:20 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway; Canticle_of_Deborah
Ping-a-ling ... FYI thread
27 posted on 02/27/2003 9:15:39 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Thank you very much.

Keep up the good work posting on FR and keep me on your ping list!

28 posted on 02/27/2003 9:17:19 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (3 rights make a left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi
This essay was published in the Washington Dispatch today. The Seante will eventually take up the issues of cloning, if the democrats end their obstructionism. It is essentially that as many Americans as possible come to understand the deceptive attempt by those trying to sneak cannibalism in on this nation in the name of enlightened medical advance.
29 posted on 02/27/2003 9:24:01 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org
Ping-ka-ching
30 posted on 02/28/2003 8:35:27 AM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Ms. AntiFeminazi
Here's a link to the essay at Washington Dispatch, if you wish to use it somehow.
31 posted on 02/28/2003 9:33:46 AM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Test ping ... "Just one ping, Vassily."
32 posted on 02/28/2003 10:54:07 AM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

Yet another test ping ...
33 posted on 02/28/2003 11:21:44 AM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

Judging from the paucity of discussion posts, this essay was too long for the average freeper to have time to read it. Sorry folks, this is not an easy issue to sketch in few words.
34 posted on 02/28/2003 11:30:50 AM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; HumanaeVitae
Ping-a-ling
35 posted on 02/28/2003 12:01:44 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ThomasMore; biblewonk; Dog Gone
Ping-a-ling ... In the above essay, I've tried to address the fact that even an embryo is an individual human being existing at a natural age along the continuum of an individual human life.
36 posted on 02/28/2003 12:43:35 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Amen Bump!
37 posted on 02/28/2003 12:52:13 PM PST by ThomasMore ([1 Pet 3:15-16])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Dad was my hero
Ping-a-ling ... May I add you to my ping list?
38 posted on 02/28/2003 1:00:40 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: laredo44; rightwingreligiousfanatic
Ping-a-ling ... In the above essay, I've tried to address the fact that even an embryo is an individual human being existing at a natural age along the continuum of an individual human life. ... May I add you to my ping list?
39 posted on 02/28/2003 1:10:43 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Dear MHGinTN, Your anti-cannibalism/abortion bud here!

Your column was great. It was not too long, but it is complicated (at least for me), and I suppose that’s why few people will engage.

It is vitally important that people understand this as well as they can. Without thorough and proper comprehension on these matters we are doomed to have the lies take hold.

Case in point: In another great work exposing the industry of death, several facts were revealed the left must fume about: (some excerpts) source: http://www.leaderu.com/humanities/casey/ch3.html#S4

Pro-Choice Advocates Agree that Abortion Kills Humans. Many abortion advocates have agreed that abortion kills human life: A 1963 Planned Parenthood brochure says that life begins at conception: "An abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun." Plan Your Children (Planned Parenthood, 1963). (On file with author.) (The pamphlet also informs the reader that "[abortion] is dangerous to your life and health. it may make you sterile, so that when you want a child you cannot have it ... [in comparison] [b]irth control merely postpones the beginning of life.").

Similarly, Dr. Mary Calderone, former director of Planned Parenthood has stated that "[a]bortion is the taking of a human life"{69} and Dr. Alan Guttmacher,{70} former president of Planned Parenthood and founder of the Guttmacher Institute, the research affiliate of Planned Parenthood, has stated "[f]ertilization has then taken place; a baby has been conceived."{71} {72} While many abortion defenders readily concede that abortion kills human life, it is necessary to expound on this point because examining the nature of the unborn human being at the point of conception shows the inherent dignity that we all share from our biologic beginnings that are hidden from eyes of the world.

Not only have representatives from the nations largest abortion provider agreed that life begins at conception, but others who support abortion have agreed that abortion is murder. Dr. Magda Denes who performed two years of research in an abortion facility and compiled her results{73} told a Chicago newspaper "There wasn’t an (abortion) doctor who at one time or another in the questioning did not say ‘this is murder.’"{74} Even Kate Michelman, President of N.AR.A.L. seems to be moving in the direction of agreeing that abortion is murder by her statement that "[a]bortion is a bad thing."{75} Others who have at one time been heavily involved with abortion have later agreed, such as "Jane Roe" Norma McCorvey, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, and Carol Everett.

In addition, everyone who uses the term "fetus" unwittingly acknowledges that the unborn human is an unborn child because fetus is Latin for "unborn child." Unfortunately for the unborn child, the term fetus has fallen into use as a way of dehumanizing the unborn child, as shown by the primary use of this term by people when they are arguing for abortion rights, in comparison to when they are discussing a baby that is wanted by the mother.

40 posted on 02/28/2003 1:25:22 PM PST by cpforlife.org ((Life is precious from conception to natural death))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
About time!
41 posted on 02/28/2003 1:40:08 PM PST by Remedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org
Sadly, too many Americans have already made it known that even if harvesting the body parts of embryonic individual human beings is cannibalism, they will endorse it as a means to cure a malady. THAT is how far down the slippery slope our culture, our society, our collective morality has slinked. I am praying that cannibalism is still repugnant to the majority of my fellow Americans, thus I'm trying my darndest to get the message out loud and clear and right away that embryonic stem cell exploitation and therapeutic cloning ARE CANNIBALISM! If that message deosn't egt out soon, those desiring this form of cannibalism will have accomplished their goal of our tacit acceptance because once they are doing these heinous exploitations without the law going after them, the use of individual human beings will be a reality and our people are weak to not repudiate that which has some nebulous stamp of legality to it ... witness the heinous slide to tacit acceptance of partial birth infanticide based on the lack of awareness until the reality is with us to the tune of 5,000 to 15,000 partial birth killings per year now.
42 posted on 02/28/2003 1:51:48 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; Remedy
From: A NEW LANGUAGE FOR THE CULTURE OF LIFE: Re-Humanizing the VERY YOUNG CITIZEN

The pro-abortion/Cloning forces have masterfully used language to promote and control their agenda. Words have power. Their "Semantic Gymnastics" have been used since the 60's, and earlier in the process of laying the groundwork for their industry of death.

The result is a "Language Barrier" of the worst kind. More than just a barrier, a "wall of separation" between the falsehood of "choice" and the truth that abortion is murder. It's origin is from the one who is the father of lies and a murderer from the beginning.

Through the manipulation of language, the culture of death has the majority of Americans thinking of their fellow citizens waiting to be born as anything and everything but citizens with equal rights. And the fact is most people don't concern themselves with others they can't see and never meet.

See Dr. William Brennan's excellent work Dehumanizing the Vulnerable: When Word Games Take Lives It explains how this whole system of deciet got started.

43 posted on 02/28/2003 2:02:17 PM PST by cpforlife.org ((Life is precious from conception to natural death))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Thanks for the link.

As for the length of your essay being too long to read, it depends on the audience you're trying to reach. Those of us who find this topic interesting and important will take the time to read it. I believe you write in plain English. We (freepers) have a very big advantage because we can always ask you to explain those things we don't understand. You are always available and patient to answer our questions. I appreciate that. Thank you.

One more BTTT! while I can get FR to work for me :)

44 posted on 02/28/2003 2:05:43 PM PST by Ms. AntiFeminazi (3 rights make a left)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org
THE HUMAN LIFE REVIEW "Semanticide"

abortion: a. constitutional right, under the penumbra and responsive to the emanations, of the right to privacy, as spelled out in Roe v. Wade and inhering in female citizens of the United States, to elect the termination of a pregnancy prior to natural term. b. (obsolete) Medical destruction, inside the mother’s womb, of a child yet unborn, possessed of soul and human properties.

abortionist: (obsolete), pejorative term used to describe health providers assisting women in exercising anticipated right to terminate a pregnancy. (See "health provider.")

anti-choice: useful name for right-wing fanatics seeking to deprive American women of right to choose termination of a pregnancy. Often associated with narrow fundamentalist churches; also with Roman Catholics in sympathy with outlook and purposes of Vatican. (See "choice.")

abortion mill: (obsolete) Medical office where dirty, unsafe abortions were performed; pejorative term used before restoration of right to choose termination of a pregnancy, 1973, in Roe v. Wade.

baby: name for former occupant of womb. Not to be used during occupant’s stay in womb.

Bible: book formerly deemed authoritative by Christians and Jews; used to disparage exercise of right to choose termination of pregnancy. Passages affirming "right to life" widely regarded as strained in meaning and application. Widely discredited for failure to demonstrate understanding of quest for justice and equality.

Blackmun, Harry. Associate Justice, U.S. Supreme Court, 1970-93. Author of Roe v. Wade. Hero of struggle for right to choose the termination of a pregnancy. (See "choice.")

clinic: (see "abortion mill"). Medical office where clean, safe, loving abortions are performed under direction of trained and compassionate health providers. Sites often become focal points for mob action by fundamentalist opponents of choice.

compassion: supreme virtue of late 20th century. Generally connotes acceptance of right to terminate pregnancy.

death with dignity: outcome desired by patients of Dr. Jack Kevorkian (q.v.).

embryo: golliwog-like organism in early stages of development, how early depending on stage at which abortion is performed. Preferred for reference to womb-occupants unless advanced age of same makes "fetus" (q.v.) more appropriate.

fetus (see also "product of conception"): alternative name for embryo. Technical name applied to womb-occupant where embryo may be deemed inappropriate, generally because of advanced age.

fundamentalist: member of narrow religious sect seeking to impose on American women anti-modern view of family, parenthood, and submission to Bible (q.v.) and its standards. Can refer to Roman Catholics as well as evangelicals. Adherents often take part in demonstrations intended to deprive women of constitutional right to termination of pregnancy.

health provider: doctor sensitive to constitutional rights of women, as established under Roe v. Wade. Terminates pregnancies on request, with few if any questions asked. Disclaims knowledge of Hippocratic Oath or at least of those sections frowning on abortion. Often risks life to bring health and hope. Is frequent target for redneck fundamentalist gunmen with grudge against women and/or misplaced patriarchal feelings of protection toward them.

Kevorkian, Jack. Medical pioneer noted for compassion to incurably ill and despondent. Victim of patriarchalist justice sytsem. Imprisoned (1998) for efforts to defend right of choice in extension or non-extension of life.

product of conception: term for fetus, especially in articles written for the New York Times Op-Ed page and similar venues.

right to die: American constitutional right, traceable to Magna Carta and Declaration of Independence, though not officially affirmed by U.S. Supreme Court. Strenuously affirmed by compassionate citizens.

termination: outcome of procedure accomplished in clinic (q.v.) by health provider (q.v.) despite opposition of fundamentalists (q.v.).

women: class historically discriminated against by males through assertion of brute strength and cruelty; caused, against their will, to carry embryos to term, prior to intervention of Harry Blackmun (q.v.) and U.S. Supreme Court.

* * *

 

 

45 posted on 02/28/2003 2:08:36 PM PST by Remedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Remedy
Ugh, it is so repugnant when aligned in words and their 'new-age' enlightened definitions.
46 posted on 02/28/2003 2:45:46 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
The cloning of embryos (humans) and organs and tissues using adult or umbilical chord stem cells are - or should be - two separate subjects.

There is hope, and good evidence, that the cloning of organs and tissues is possible without the creation of embryonic humans.
47 posted on 03/01/2003 10:16:00 AM PST by hocndoc (Choice is the # 1 killer in the US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Actually, "cloning" can mean the duplication of cells, tissues, organs, and organisms.
The current bills concerning human cloning in the House and Senate deal with the cloning of organisms (which happen to be human beings)

The ideal would be to have vats of organs and tissues (or matrices that will develop into organs and tissues when the donor/recipient's own stem cells are introduced), without the need for an embryo or fetus or whole-body support system needed. There is great work going on along these lines.
48 posted on 03/01/2003 10:21:52 AM PST by hocndoc (Choice is the # 1 killer in the US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Did you see this - you're a Town Hall reference, look under February 27th:
http://www.townhall.com/issueslibrary/healthcare/
49 posted on 03/01/2003 10:31:29 AM PST by hocndoc (Choice is the # 1 killer in the US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc
Actually, "cloning" can mean the duplication of cells, tissues, organs, and organisms. Somatic cell nuclear transfer is, technically, not cloning by the definition below. If the nuclear transfer is made into a denucleated ovum, then it is cloning, reproductive of an individual being, for birth or for harvesting exploitation. It is theoretically possible to take bone cells or brain cells from a donor and denucleate them then insert the chromosomal material of your cell into that denucleated cell after 'stimulating' the telomeres of your genes using telomerase, to entice growth/proliferation of the bone or brain cell into many copies having your genetic imprint. Such replication would not be cloning by definition. The problems so far encountered involve the mitochondria of the denucleated cell ... the genetic material within that denucleated cell's mitochondria is foreign to your body/proteins/immune system. [The case of Henrietta Flack's cancerous cervical cells and the endless proliferation of those cells is instructive. The proliferation is not cloning, merely endless replication. Were you to take her cells and denucleate them to insert your genetic imprint, that wouldn't be cloning, per se.] clone \klon\ n [Gk klon twig, slip] 1 : the offspring produced asexually from an individual (as a plant increased by grafting); also : a group of replicas of all or part of a large biological molecule (as DNA) 2 : an individual grown from a single body cell of its parent and genetically identical to the parent 3 : one that appears to be a copy of an original form clonal \klon-el\ adj clone vb (C) 1995 Zane Publishing, Inc. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary (C) 1994 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated
50 posted on 03/01/2003 1:25:09 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-173 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson