Slashdot Mirror


China Ahead in Stem-Cell Research

Andrew writes: "New Scientist is reporting (for free) on the WSJ's China clones human embryos story: "Chinese scientists are claiming a great leap forward in human cloning - the creation of dozens of cloned embryos advanced enough to harvest embryonic stem cells."" The lengthy Wall Street Journal story is also on MSNBC.

395 comments

  1. Ok, so the chinese can clone embryos... by Tebriel · · Score: 5, Funny

    But where are they going to put all these extra people?

    --
    The Blaster Master Fighting for Truth, Justice, and Evil Pie since 1979
    1. Re:Ok, so the chinese can clone embryos... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This could be funny except for the fact that they're not going to have to find room for these "people" - they are growing these people for the sole purpose of harvesting them.

  2. well, thank god. by macsox · · Score: 0, Redundant

    it's about time that china found a good way to rapidly increase its population.

    and for that matter to, in one stroke, increase their citizen's longevity.

  3. What does it say when... by cliffy2000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When a Communist nation allows scientists greater freedom than a Democracy? Just saying...

    1. Re:What does it say when... by Tebriel · · Score: 1

      When it reduces the rights of the citizen for "the good of the state"

      --
      The Blaster Master Fighting for Truth, Justice, and Evil Pie since 1979
    2. Re:What does it say when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Nazi doctors were allowed a great deal of freedom with their expirements. Just saying . . .

    3. Re:What does it say when... by Filter · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Like the freedom scientists had to experiment on humans under Hitler?

      --

      "better ways of doing things eventually just replace the inferior things" - Linus Torvalds 09-08-07

    4. Re:What does it say when... by mqduck · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A nation allows more "freedom" to its corporations than its dissenting individuals? It's called Capitalism.

      --
      Property is theft.
    5. Re:What does it say when... by NixterAg · · Score: 1, Troll

      Please, laude all of the wonderful benefits of socialism for us. The people of the former Soviet Union, Cuba, and North Korea are listening.

    6. Re:What does it say when... by JonKatzIsAnIdiot · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It says that one respects human life and the other doesn't.

    7. Re:What does it say when... by enjo13 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ok troll, i'll play.

      Democracy != absolute freedom.

      A democratic nation can certainly limit freedoms, and any fruitful democracy does. In this case the democracy has thus far decided (although not clearly in one direction or the other) that the moral cost of stem cell research is not worth the scientific gain. Arriving at this decision is complex and cumbersome process.. that is the wonder of democracy. The people have effectively put controls on this research themselves.

      A communist nation (or dictatorship) has another method of arriving at decisions. In this case a single ruler (or single party) gets to make the decisions about what freedoms to limit. Traditionally China has placed great limits on the freedom of its people, but in this case the ruler has chosen to let stem cell research continue. This shouldn't really be surprising, it is certainly easier to convince a communist leader with limited responsibility to the wants of the people to pursue a potentially controversial policy.

      This mirrors what we saw in the Soviet Union. They accelerated their space program because the leadership had limited responsibility for the lives of the people involved. They didn't have to care what the people thought.

      --
      Turn s60 photos into awesome videos with mScrapbook for all S60 3rd edition phones!
    8. Re:What does it say when... by Ooblek · · Score: 2

      Actually, I would wonder about the freedom part. Studies on sociology and economics say that communism has to participate in capitalism on a global scale. My guess is that it is profit that is their motive, not the greater good of humans or any sort of step towards freedom. Besides, wasn't it one of the Asian countries that William Gibson portrayed as a place where you could get *ANYTHING* you could ever want if the price was right? Maybe someone over there liked Gibson.

    9. Re:What does it say when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      usa ain't a democracy. usa is an election monarchy

    10. Re:What does it say when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm... you mean communism, right?
      There are other socialist states that still
      exist, but you're too busy reading slashdot and overclocking you pc with sperm that you couldn't be bothered to learn a little about the world no?

    11. Re:What does it say when... by mqduck · · Score: 1

      A communist nation (or dictatorship) has another method of arriving at decisions. In this case a single ruler (or single party) gets to make the decisions about what freedoms to limit.

      Actually, all debates about reality aside, Marxists and other socialists have been calling for democracy as long as they've been around. In the case of Leninists, there are essentially two (maybe three) differences from capitalist democracy.

      1) The top-level government is elected by direct, anonymous voting. Democracy then works from the top-down, hopefully with direct participation at every level. The idea is that it is more effective to have a central focus, but still vital to be democratic.

      2) There is, of course, mass propaganda from the other side.

      3) Depending on who you ask, the Soviet Union became widely undemocratic and authoritarian... after Lenin died, after Stalin died, around the time Gorbechav (sp?) came to power, or at the very beginning.

      A final word of advice... don't knock something till you've studied from the point of view of its opponents and proponents.

      --
      Property is theft.
    12. Re:What does it say when... by graphicartist82 · · Score: 1

      size does matter.. but more [permission] isn't always better..

    13. Re:What does it say when... by detect · · Score: 1

      So a democratic nation limits freedoms hence making it un-democratic. So the word democracy loses its meaning and is used in place of capitalism.

      The wonder of democracy is that it bogs down even the most simple decisions into a mess of red tape.

      The people put controls on the research? Why is this a good idea? Why should I who know little about stem cell research have any say in whether or not it gets researched or not? Shouldn't the people who know about these things and are actively involved in it be the ones to make the decisions?

      If scientists want to research stem cells they should, the government has no right or expertise to make any decisions on the matter. No matter how much they say 'it is for the people'. I didn't see the matter get put to a referendum.

      --
      // The fastest Alt-Tab in the West
    14. Re:What does it say when... by ziriyab · · Score: 1
      Not to be overly anal, but communism doesn't have to be a dictatorship, or in your terms:

      Communism != Dictatorship
      :)

    15. Re:What does it say when... by C.+Mattix · · Score: 1

      Marxist democracy belongs to the same family as mass-less strings and frictionless surfaces. Great for theories, but you could never find them in the real world.

    16. Re:What does it say when... by Tackhead · · Score: 2
      > Like the freedom scientists had to experiment on humans under Hitler?

      Unethical, yeah, but where do you think some of the drawings in your Anatomy texts came from?

      The difference here is that I have no ethical objection to human cloning, nor to embryo research.

    17. Re:What does it say when... by b-side.org · · Score: 1

      actually, it's a federal republic.

      elected monarchy is probably close enough, tho. ;)

      --
      Indie rock lives! b-side!
    18. Re:What does it say when... by zero2k · · Score: 1

      I believe it's really sad that they're doing this. No alternatives? I've read reports everywhere that there are alternatives to generating stem cells without the process of creating embryos. Truly a lack of respect for life. They just want a quick way out and make money fast, that's the Chinese way of doing things - money money money.

    19. Re:What does it say when... by mqduck · · Score: 1

      Actually, in his (limited) defence, the correct term would definitally be "socialism." There's a BIG difference between being a socialist nation and being a socialist nation with a ruling socialist party.

      It's OPPONENTS of Marxist socialism that started calling socialist nations "Communist." A communist is a Marxist. Communism is a theoretical state that has never existed.

      --
      Property is theft.
    20. Re:What does it say when... by NixterAg · · Score: 1

      Separating communism and socialism is simply splitting hairs. But you were probably too busy smoking weed with the other poli sci grad students to learn a little about reality, no?

    21. Re:What does it say when... by dadragon · · Score: 1

      Uh, monarchies can be (and often are) democracies.

      But you are right, the USA isn't a democracy. It's a democratic republic.

      --
      God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
    22. Re:What does it say when... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And apparently, so are the people of China, who if current trends continue will soon have cures for all kinds of diseases which will continue to kill and cripple Americans.

      Well. Actually, we're not arguing about socialism vs. capitalism; we're arguing about socialism (the government controls the economy) vs. fascism (the government chooses a few large corporations to control the economy, and everyone else can go to hell.) China is getting steadily less socialist because socialism generally doesn't work very well; the US is sliding into fascism because that's what capitalism tends to become if We The People don't pay attention. Real capitalism is an infinitely better choice than either, but right now nobody seems to have the will or interest to maintain it. News flash: capitalism is hard work.

      What does all this have to do with science? Simple. Science flourishes in a zeitgeist of free inquiry and skepticism. Neither socialist bureaucrats nor fascist oligarchs are friendly to such a zeitgeist, because it threatens their power. Both socialism and fascism tend to be profoundly conservative, in a sense that has little to do with the traditional left-right dichotomy. It's a sad irony that Communist China is doing a better job of breaking the stranglehold of that kind of conservatism than the US is.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    23. Re:What does it say when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it is not splitting hairs, and wow, I guess trolling really does work.

      I could go into more detail, but then I'd actually have to stay here at work for longer, so no thanks, I'm going home...

    24. Re:What does it say when... by GreyPoopon · · Score: 2
      In this case the democracy has thus far decided (although not clearly in one direction or the other) that the moral cost of stem cell research is not worth the scientific gain.

      And in doing so, they have provided incentive for obtaining stem cells from elsewhere. Using adult stem cells harvested from the same person who will receive them has obvious advantage, not the least of which is the immune system factor. Score one for democracy.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    25. Re:What does it say when... by mqduck · · Score: 1

      Sorry, that's meant to read "There's a BIG difference between being a socialist nation and being a nation with a ruling socialist party."

      --
      Property is theft.
    26. Re:What does it say when... by HanzoSan · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Theres alternatives to abortion too.

      Funny how millions of people have abortions when they could just do adoption.

      Fact is, if we can do something technology wise, we will do it, theres no point in even making laws to restrict technology.

      What I believe is right or wrong has nothing to do with the freedom of the scientist, the freedom to save lifes. Also the scientists created the life in a lab anyhow.

      I dont know if stem cell research should bee legal or not, but alot of debateable things are legal, and alot of things are illegal which are debateable.

      Theres one thing i know for sure. The law isnt about whats right and whats wrong, the law was set up to protect the citizens of the USA, the country, and to protect the rights of the people of the USA.

      --
      If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    27. Re:What does it say when... by JPRelph · · Score: 1

      Lenin's death had very little effect on how Soviet Communism became a farce, it already had. The military should have handed over power to the people after the revolution, it never happened. People who pointed out that Lenin was corrupting Communism were forced to re-write their work and then "disappeared", this is exactly what happened with Paschoukanis. Marx's ideas were brilliant, but as open to abuse as anything else. Whether they would ever be practicable I don't know, there seem to be far too many greedy people around.

    28. Re:What does it say when... by Filter · · Score: 1

      > where do you think some of the drawings in your Anatomy texts came from?

      Poor example, I think cadavers provided the data for most anatomy books. Much of that artwork predates Nazis.

      Anyway, I believe we have the right to insist that scientists operate within the ethical guidlines of our society, other societies may choose there own ethical environment.

      --

      "better ways of doing things eventually just replace the inferior things" - Linus Torvalds 09-08-07

    29. Re:What does it say when... by mqduck · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm definitally not a Stalinist, but I would argue that socialism under Stalin was largely effective, if not steadily antilibertarian. However, the class shall note that Stalin did to a number of things to further democratize the Soviet Union, such as ammend the constitution to have elections by anonymous ballot.

      --
      Property is theft.
    30. Re:What does it say when... by T5 · · Score: 0

      It says that the blatent disregard for the sanctity of life in this communist regime extends to the unborn in all aspects, including these embryos cloned for research.

      Despite what many would have us believe, there are higher ideals than scientific advancement that strays outside the ethical bounds.

    31. Re:What does it say when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not a democracy, but a constitutional representative republic. And yes, that does make a difference!!

    32. Re:What does it say when... by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 2
      Something that constantly gets missed is this: both China and Russia *never had democratic traditions to begin with* (modulo Kerensky's very very short-lived provisional government.) The current regime in China is *as free a government as they have ever had,* and has more democratic mechanisms than any they have ever had.

      Further, the most purely capitalistic eras of American history did *not* coincide with the freest in terms of civil rights or liberties.

    33. Re:What does it say when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlike Soviet Union though, apparently most people in China don't know how to think. Just ask any "more highly educated" Chinese people. Every Chinese always knows what's best for the rest of them.

    34. Re:What does it say when... by KillerLoop · · Score: 1

      that's the Chinese way of doing things - money money money

      are you american? if yes, this should be most definitely moderated as "funny".

    35. Re:What does it say when... by Zeinfeld · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Well, I'm definitally not a Stalinist, but I would argue that socialism under Stalin was largely effective, if not steadily antilibertarian. However, the class shall note that Stalin did to a number of things to further democratize the Soviet Union, such as ammend the constitution to have elections by anonymous ballot.

      You are deluded. Stalin wrote a really great constitution, he also had practically all the members of the Supreme Soviet that enacted it murdered. Stalin's 'secret ballots' consisted of an option to go behind a curtain to mark your ballot rather than just place it in the box and have it count automatically for the party candidate. In Stalin's time most of the people who went behind the curtain were murdered.

      Stalin's state had little to do with any political creed other than opportunism and the persuit of power. There is even evidence that Stalin originally joined the communist party as a Tsarist mole.

      As for Stalin's effect on the economy, it can only be considered positive compared to the stagnation under the Tsars. Most of the progress took place under Lenin in any case, Stalin was too busy massacring Kulacks by the million and issuing edicts that twenty plants be built when there was material for three with the result that none were completed.

      The only positive effect the communists had was they diverted the massive flows of capital that the Tsars had squandered on themselves and poured it into industrial developments, but that did not require a police state.

      However, that said, it is quite hilarious that the response of US side folk to the thought that China might surpass them scientifically is to dredge up cold war rhetoric. China has not been a Stalinist state since Mao died and the gang of four were liquidated. Today it is merely an under-developed kleptocracy. If China was not a rival to US power and did not call itself communist the GOP hawks would have no trouble at all supporting them no matter how many people the regime kills.

      If you have a billion people and a part way modernised economy you canout perform a country of a quarter your size in a few selected areas of science. There is little reason to believe that the Chinese version of communism will be any more long lasting than the Soviet one. The only difference is that in China the impetus for change is comming from economic success rather than stagnation. Nobody believes in Chinese communism, the issue for Chinas leaders is not whether they adopt a democracy but how they get from where they are to where they want to be.

      If China succeeds in a peaceful democratic transition they will inevitably outstrip US power in the same way and for the same reason that the US suceeded the UK, population size.

      China is planning to become a biotech super-power. That is not the immediate threat to the US however since it is unlikely many US scientists would move to China. Many will move and are moving to the UK and Canada however.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    36. Re:What does it say when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bwa hahaha.

      I thought you Maoisits, with your 'Restoration of Capitalism In the Soviet Union' had shut up and quit your little skit.

      As an aside to everybody else- this guy is one of the nuts who believes that Communism was pure and good and righteous until Stalin was killed. It was those evil rulers after Stalin in the mid 1950's who restored Capitalism in the Soviet Union who ruined it for everybody.

      --------
      Mister Maoist: Nobody believes your shit anymore, except a capitive audience who are only given one distorted version of history.

    37. Re:What does it say when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep.

      'The trains ran on time' under Stalin.

      Just like they did under Mussolini.

    38. Re:What does it say when... by enjo13 · · Score: 1

      The word democracy has absolutely no connection with the word freedom. You can be very free and live in a theocracy, monarchy, or dictatorship. You can be incredibly repressed in a democracy as well.

      In a pure direct democracy you are likely to have very FEW freedoms if you differ greatly from the majority.

      --
      Turn s60 photos into awesome videos with mScrapbook for all S60 3rd edition phones!
    39. Re:What does it say when... by evilned · · Score: 2

      Its been awhile since I read the Communist Manifesto, but for true marxist communism, a dictatorship of the proletariat is a nessecary step. The eventual hope is to remove all the government apparatus and the people will take care of themselves, and communism would spread around the planet, and the concept of a nation state would dissappear. Eventually this would end with no need for government. Considering that the nation state has not dissappeared, and there is no one world government, communism with out dictatorship wouldnt be possible. Perhaps you meant socialism, which economically is very similar to communism. Socialism's only major difference is the method of enacting the policy, generally socialist tried to work within the existing government structure.

      --

      "My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett

    40. Re:What does it say when... by issachar · · Score: 1

      no it isn't tool. It's a Democratic Republic. And your post implies that the President has much greater power than he does. The power of the executive is tempered by the power of the judicial and legislative branches. Compare this to the situation here in Canada. Executive power has been effectively passed from the the Governor General's Office to the Prime Minister's Office, meaning that a single person has near absolute control of both the executive & legislative branches of government. The judicial branch isn't powerful enough to temper this combined power. (Nor should it be since our judges aren't even elected, while the Prime Minister is).

      If anyone has an Elected King, it's Canada, not the USA.

      --
      . --- If you're looking for free e-mail you won't find it here! http://www.noemailhere.com
    41. Re:What does it say when... by mqduck · · Score: 1

      Um...

      Perhaps you are forgetting that communists are a subsect of socialists. And that it is very improper to call a socialist nation, Marxist or non, "Communist." Communism is both a theory and a method, but NOT a government type (except for the theoretical state of communism, which has never existed, and will never exist for many many generations, if ever).

      Also, while it's true that most non-communist political parties (and even many communist ones) have been reformist, that is, they try to work within the existing system instead of overthrow it, many, if not most, socialists, Marxist or non (such as anarchists) would be offended by your generalization.

      --
      Property is theft.
    42. Re:What does it say when... by yintercept · · Score: 2

      When a Communist nation allows scientists greater freedom than a Democracy?

      Well, it says is democracies value the freedom of the individual over the state. Communist nations allowed their scientist to experiment and toy with people's lives. Look at all of horrifying and disgusting experiments done on living people by the USSR and Hitler's Germany.

      Western nations say that science is supposed to serve people...not that people are lab equipment for scientists, and stem cell research borders on experimentation on people.

    43. Re:What does it say when... by lrichardson · · Score: 2

      >Poor example, I think cadavers provided the data for most anatomy books. Much of that artwork predates Nazis.

      Actually, there have been large ethical fights over that issue ... some of the best work came from the Nazis. Many schools have pulled the pictures, arguing that to use them validates the Nazis.

      >Anyway, I believe we have the right to insist that scientists operate within the ethical guidlines of our society, other societies may choose there own ethical environment.

      'Rights' are more illusory than you might think. Rights are only what society gives, no more, no less, and, contrary to what many believe, there are no universal rights. To bring this back to the topic at hand, I live in America, and I totally support stem cell research and cloning. Unfortuantely, with a (scientifically) ignorant President (low shot, mea culpa, he's quite bright as far as politics and power go), with massive right-wing reactionary Christian fundamentalists supporting him, it doesn't really matter whether or not I am in the majority (according to the polls, I am): the laws have been passed which have virtually stopped research in these areas within the US. (I use the word 'virtually' to dramatize the difference between the rate we're going forward and the rest of the world.)

      Now, if you, as a member of the immoral minority get laws passed that run contrary to what large numbers of people agree with, the following occurs: Scientists who disagree may either a/ do what you tell them b/ disregard what the law says and go ahead with the research under threat of severe penalties, or c/ head for some place where the laws allow them to do what they want. Oddly enough, b/ and c/ happen an awful lot more than the politicos would have you believe.

      Now for the really scary scenario. The Chinese government is, for the most part, morally bankrupt. Genetic engineering, where the fetus is brought to term. Remember, there's only a two base pair difference between human and simian muscle tissue, and their's is ~15 times stronger. Think they won't be trying this?

    44. Re:What does it say when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This mirrors what we saw in the Soviet Union. They accelerated their space program because the leadership had limited responsibility for the lives of the people involved. They didn't have to care what the people thought.

      I saw a program about a Russian space program where every step they made was to make sure that the people up there would be safe and arrive safely. They considered a manned lunar landing to be too much of a risk for the lives of the cosmonauts and did not send people up there before the USA did. The USSR could have though, but they didn't want to have a possibility of them dying. After the USA went to the Moon there was little political motivation to continue on that track, so the Russians never landed humans on the Moon, although they were there first.

    45. Re:What does it say when... by Max+von+H. · · Score: 1

      Very true. Here in Switzerland, where everything must be voted, we have a saying that goes "if it's not compulsary, it's forbidden". It's amazing to see how every little detail of one's daily life has some law attached to it.

      Yet, we have probably more freedom than many other "democratic" countries in which I've lived/been. Many things that are banned in the USA or in some European countries are perfectly legal here, especially in regards to personal freedom. OK, pot being legal is only one of the many aforementioned freedoms...

      Just a thought.

      /max

      --
      -- It's always darker before it goes pitch black.
  4. This is not the only ... by ZnoOne · · Score: 3, Funny

    China also ahead in cloning copy right CDs

    1. Re:This is not the only ... by Ooblek · · Score: 2

      Yeah, and their big-screen to DVD process is much faster than it is here in the US. I thought it was amazing back when Batman came out on VHS as fast as it did. Now you can get the DVD a day after the movie premieres in the theater. China must have this efficiency thing down to a recipe!

    2. Re:This is not the only ... by darkonc · · Score: 2
      The chinese government is already complaining about too many people in that country. What's the value of making even more??

      I guess they haven't quite gotten the capitalist concept that when there's a glut in your market, the last thing you need is more production.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    3. Re:This is not the only ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whats the advantage to having more? think about wars! not only would they have more men, but they could have more intelligent people

    4. Re:This is not the only ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CHINA: 2 USA: 0

      Damn, we gotta get our shit in gear.

    5. Re:This is not the only ... by darkonc · · Score: 1

      It seems I forgot the smiley....

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    6. Re:This is not the only ... by dajalas · · Score: 1

      And China is way ahead in forced abortions. Yipee!

  5. Yup by sharkey · · Score: 2


    "Yew must be dem clones I been a-hearing 'bout. Y'all look the same ta me."
    </Southern Senator>

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  6. Stem cells are good for you. by Corpset · · Score: 1

    "Stem cells are master cells that have the ability to differentiate into other cell types, including those in the brain, heart, bones, muscles and skin."

    Stem cells have the potential to help millions of people all around the world and finally we are seeing some results? Go China! As long as the clones produced are entitled the same rights as every other human being I am for it.

    (Some sperms mixed with an egg on a tray is not life.)

    --
    rxvt, suse, vi, solaris, debian, java, c, feel the love. #unix@IRCnet, #gimp & #gnome@GIMPnet
    1. Re:Stem cells are good for you. by TheCaptain · · Score: 1

      (Some sperms mixed with an egg on a tray is not life.)

      Give the result of that experiment a DNA test and see what it tells you it is.

    2. Re:Stem cells are good for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "(Some sperms mixed with an egg on a tray is not life.)"

      Actually one sperm and one egg, and yes, it is; after 9 months anyway.

    3. Re:Stem cells are good for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a matter of fact, that is all the creation of life is - a sperm and an egg hooking up.

    4. Re:Stem cells are good for you. by dadragon · · Score: 1

      (Some sperms mixed with an egg on a tray is not life.)

      Actually, it is. Whether it's a human being entitled to all the rights as the rest of us is a completely different question.

      If a sperm and egg aren't life, then neither are plankton, or bacteria, or ....
      Life, certainly. Lower form of life, that is.

      --
      God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
    5. Re:Stem cells are good for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Some sperms mixed with an egg on a tray is not life.)

      jon katz isn't alive?

    6. Re:Stem cells are good for you. by issachar · · Score: 1
      Some sperms mixed with an egg on a tray is not life.

      Since you seem to be so sure of what life is NOT, how about telling us what life IS?

      that's not as easy as it sounds is it?

      And it's hard to say that something isn't "something else", if you can't define what that "something else" in the first place.

      It's a very tricky question. When does human life begin? We can be very sure that it doesn't start prior to conception, but everything after that is grey. Birth is stupid cut-off point. It's completely arbitrary and very easy to manipulate. So we know this:

      Conception But that's a little vague isn't it? That's why we should proceed slowly and cautiously with stem cell research. Because we don't have all the answers.

      --
      . --- If you're looking for free e-mail you won't find it here! http://www.noemailhere.com
    7. Re:Stem cells are good for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, it's not life unless God shoots his load (the soul) into the mix. It's all about that special juice of virility...

    8. Re:Stem cells are good for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the poster meant conscious life. Trees are alive and so is bacteria, but neither of them has consciousness, at least not to the level of a bird, a whale, a dog or a human. If you sneeze and some snot hangs on the wall, you run a DNA test on it, what does it tell you? It tells you that it's "life".

    9. Re:Stem cells are good for you. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No kidding....snot isn't life? Of course it isn't...it's just a product of the body. It won't grow into a person either.

      I actually don't care about whether or not something is conscious to call it life. You can knock someone unconcious easily enough...since they are no longer fitting your convienient definition of life I guess we can do pretty much whatever we want with them. What does it matter...they aren't "alive"...for now.

  7. Evil by ThousandStars · · Score: 2, Funny

    The nice part about evil, soulless facist governments is that they play by no rules, with no rules, with no consideration of the negative potential for science I agree that stem cells hold tremendous potential for good, but without pondering the Brave New World/Gattaca/(insert cliche book here) consequences, the future might turn out an ugly place. It is dangerous to wave flags and say we should follow in their footsteps. One cannot use the dark side of the force/The One Ring/etc. without becoming Darth Vader/Sauron/CowboyNeal.

    1. Re:Evil by jonbrewer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      the future might turn out an ugly place.

      I believe the present is an ugly place. Read a newspaper. Look at some pictures of dead Palestinians, and think how complacent the US is in their deaths.

      And as for "evil, soulless facist governments," are you implying that the US is any better? We only ban this research because of the religious right. Get religion out of government and we'd be doing this, no question.

    2. Re:Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Look at some pictures of dead Palestinians, and think how complacent the US is in their deaths.

      Of course, the Palestinians have absolutely NOTHING to do with their own deaths, right? They are just innocent bystanders under the jack-boot of the Jewish conspiracy, right?

      You might want to remember who invaded whom in 1967.

    3. Re:Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They play by different rules; they have their own rules I assure you. We're just as evil to them as they are to us. This is a way for china to seemingly get ahead of the US in certain aspects even if we are only limited by our moral convictions on the cloning issue.

    4. Re:Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>Look at some pictures of dead Palestinians

      Since we never see the other side of that coin here in the US, I'm not sure what your point is. The IDL is not targeting women and children like the Palestinian suicide bombers are.

      Neither side is innocent.

    5. Re:Evil by detect · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So let me get this right: Stem cells hold the potential for good but without pondering the cliche consequences, the future might become an ugly place? Ok.

      Which Governments actually do shows signs of fascism? What countries impose bans on scientific research and raise tariffs on imported goods all while preaching on Democracy and Free Trade?

      --
      // The fastest Alt-Tab in the West
    6. Re:Evil by RichardBurns · · Score: 1


      > and think how complacent the US is in their deaths.

      I think complacent is the wrong term. Israels ocupation of Palestine is almost entirely funded by you and me in other words the US taxpayers.

    7. Re:Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and who invaded whom in the late 1940's (hint: the state of Israel did not exist until after WWII - go rent "Exodus" somehow it doesn't come off as such a great pro-Israel story as it was originally intended)

    8. Re:Evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are absolutely correct, but past actions are no excuse for future actions. The fact of the matter is that Israel is retaliating for the deaths of innocents by killing innocents. Escalation helps noone, but only the Palestinians are taking the blame for the situation and that is wrong.

    9. Re:Evil by evilned · · Score: 2

      And how many of those dead people had anything to do with the 1967 invasion? There is plenty of blame to go around in the middle east, especially when the palestinians and the isralies are both acting like first rate fuckos. Both sides show exactly why religion and politics shouldnt mix.

      --

      "My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett

  8. I'd hate to be GWB. by IPFreely · · Score: 4, Interesting
    ... But then I hate GWB.

    The poor boy is now solidly stuck between his Oh So Rightous right wing religious supporters and the need to keep the United States up with the rest of the world in genetic research. It looks like science suffers at the hands of the Morality police.

    Hasn't this happened before?... (Galileo, Darwin, ...)

    --
    There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
    1. Re:I'd hate to be GWB. by NixterAg · · Score: 1
      "It looks like science suffers at the hands of the Morality police."


      Or maybe science suffers due to a lack of morality.


      "Hasn't this happened before?... (Galileo, Darwin, ...)"


      So I guess we should be thanking open-minded, understanding Chinese government for their enlightened views on humanity and science. If you want to argue what is best for society via science, that's one thing. If you simply want to look for any reason to demean religion (let's cut to the chase...Christanity) don't expect people to give you much credence.

    2. Re:I'd hate to be GWB. by Control+Group · · Score: 1

      A bit of Devil's Advocacy, here, but I think it's warranted.

      It's easy to toss off sentences like "It looks like science suffers at the hands of the Morality police" when you've decided that the thing being prevented isn't immoral. If China were to start harvesting organs from political prisoners, would you criticize US health care for not "keeping up" with Chinese health care?

      We all feel fine criticizing China and other countries housing sweatshops...why don't we say "It's US business suffering at the hands of the Morality police?"

      Is the difference because we respect scientific research, but don't respect Nike's desire for profits? This may be a perfectly valid personal opinion, but it makes a poor foundation for moral decision making.

      --

      Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
    3. Re:I'd hate to be GWB. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Look for any reason to demean religion" ... um... the guy has a point. Now shut the fuck up and go back to your bible, you little misguided retard.

    4. Re:I'd hate to be GWB. by IPFreely · · Score: 3, Interesting
      So I guess we should be thanking open-minded, understanding Chinese government for their enlightened views on humanity and science.

      I'd bet that Chinese scientest have about the same attitude as US or other scientest do about science: Learn more, Understand better.
      I'd also bet that the chinese people, scientest, and government each have different attitudes about the role of science (the same is true in the US and other places). I don't give the chinese government any credit other than being smart enough to not tromp all over the advancement of learning and understanding (something GWB and the "Morality Police" haven't been able to do).

      If you want to argue what is best for society via science, that's one thing. If you simply want to look for any reason to demean religion (let's cut to the chase...Christanity) don't expect people to give you much credence.

      Point. I do not demonize religion in general (though I did not clearify that), I demonize those individual people who use religion as an excuse to enforce their opinions on others, to supress people, to supress the truth, to glorify theirselves, and to gather personal power in the name of their religion (Plenty of history on that count in any religion).

      The "religious right" that currently influences much of the politics in the US embodies much of those qualities, and as far as I can tell embodies very little of the teachings of their namesake savior, Jesus Christ.

      Galileo suffered not because his opinions went against the teachings of the church, but because he challanged the authority of the church by claiming that his discoveries disproved a few items in the bible and therefore the bible as a whole must be considered suspect. It was a power struggle, not a religious one.
      Darwin suffered because Rightious people would not accept a less superior place in the order of life as described by evolution.

      --
      There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
    5. Re:I'd hate to be GWB. by NixterAg · · Score: 1

      "Galileo suffered not because his opinions went against the teachings of the church, but because he challanged the authority of the church by claiming that his discoveries disproved a few items in the bible and therefore the bible as a whole must be considered suspect. It was a power struggle, not a religious one."

      You are very much correct here, with one minor difference in my mind. It had much more to do with his findings challenging the authority of those in power than in challenging the authority of the Bible. It was a political power struggle.

    6. Re:I'd hate to be GWB. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah he's "very much correct here" except for the central motivation driving the witch hunt. That kind of "correct" and a friend in the parliament could get you a research chair at Beijing University.
      The obvious problem Mr. Freely has here is Religion. The problem people have with cloning is a theological/moral one and by couching his argument as anti religion he dodges dealing with the moral issues raised. (After all, it's -just- religion, right?) This is as much a question of research freedom as it is of US innovation (it isn't). The only limitation on stem cells in the US involves govt FUNDING. The research IS happening here, the innovation is happening here (and building cloned embryos to farm for cells is hardly innovative) people are just doing it with private funding. Freedom and Capitalism are hallmarks of our society and they are serving us very well in research. All IMO of course. BK425

    7. Re:I'd hate to be GWB. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pot.
      Kettle.
      Black.

      Am I being clear enough?

      Do a little research. Galileo was a practicing Christian. Einstein was a practicing Jew. etc. etc.

    8. Re:I'd hate to be GWB. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nice phrasing...

      I share your thoughts, but not your way with words....

      now if only I wasn't banned from moderating.....

    9. Re:I'd hate to be GWB. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the end, what gets done concerning health care or cloning or any other activity comes down to how much money is put on the issue. If health care wants organ growth (if they think it would be profitable) then they will buy enough congressmen to make it happen. If the morality police don't want it to happen, they'll buy enough congressmen to stop it. Money speaks louder than morality or religion or the good will of the people or "the right thing".

  9. With China's population already booming by CitznFish · · Score: 1

    Do they really need to make duplicates of eachother?

    --
    'mmmmmmmmm.... forbidden donut'
  10. The QOTD line at the moment says... by netsharc · · Score: 1

    The entire CHINESE WOMEN'S VOLLEYBALL TEAM all share ONE personality -- and have since BIRTH!!

    How interesting. :)

    --
    What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
    1. Re:The QOTD line at the moment says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because clones are cloned doesn't mean they will develop the same. They can and probably will have different personalities.

    2. Re:The QOTD line at the moment says... by mokyar · · Score: 0

      And I found it 'not so funny'. Disturbing... Unfortunate for /.

  11. Health care... by cperciva · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ok... so if you want to use someone else's organs, you hop on a plane to India... if you want to have pig organs grown for you, you hop on a plane to the UK... if you want to have stem cells cloned and grown into organs for you, you hop on a plane to China...

    Is it just me, or does it seem that medical treatment is moving in the direction of taking a very large number of plane flights?

  12. Vonnegut book? by EdA · · Score: 1

    Anyone remember the Vonnegut book (Cat's Cradle?) where the Chinese figured out how to shrink people...

    1. Re:Vonnegut book? by Teferi · · Score: 1

      It was Slapstick, I think.

      --
      -- Veni, vidi, dormivi
  13. Re:Stem Cell research commercial applications: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was just reading this book about that very subject.

  14. Embryo cloning, abortion? by xSterbenx · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I always thought that it was interesting how the United States can allow abortion (the killing of an unborn embryo) but not embryo cloning/harvesting (the killing of an unborn embryo), especially since embryo cloning can bring some good. While I remain pro-life myself, I could never quite understand this hypocrisy.

    I find it also interesting how the one main country with whom the United States has mixed in civil rights with trade agreements is the country that may end up further along in this line of research. Of course, one could say that Hitler had learned a lot through research as well. How far can we allow our morality to stretch to further the advancement of the human race?

    1. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Kushana · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The difference, of course, is the mother. The Roe v. Wade decision said nothing about the "rights" of the foetus, it was about the woman's right to control over her own body.

      Perhaps unfortunately, there exists no equivalent decision supporting the rights of scientific research, cloning, or medical advances.

      --

      Careers should combine three things: what you can do, what you want to do, and what you can get paid for.
    2. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by gwernol · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      I always thought that it was interesting how the United States can allow abortion (the killing of an unborn embryo) but not embryo cloning/harvesting (the killing of an unborn embryo), especially since embryo cloning can bring some good. While I remain pro-life myself, I could never quite understand this hypocrisy.

      Actually its the "pro-life" lobby that has been working hardest for the current US anti-stem cell research policy. In fact the pro-lifers would love to ban stem cell research entirely: a URL courtesy of Google here. Don't blame the US for the policies forced on us by a group you aligned yourself with.

      I find it also interesting how the one main country with whom the United States has mixed in civil rights with trade agreements is the country that may end up further along in this line of research. Of course, one could say that Hitler had learned a lot through research as well. How far can we allow our morality to stretch to further the advancement of the human race?

      I assume you mean to say your morality. Please don't presume to speak for anyone but yourself. There are plenty of people with different viewpoints than your own. These people are just as "moral" as you.

      --
      Sailing over the event horizon
    3. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Telastyn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      First off, I am decidedly pro-choice.

      Now: I believe the difference lies in intent. Cloning/harvesting is making a baby with no intent on making a person. Abortions (should) occur only when a couple has no intention of making a baby, but *oops*. US law states that embyroes in very early stages can be killed, as it cannot live outside of the mother (without assistance) and is thus 'part of the mother' and she has the right to do whatever things to herself she wants as long as she does not endanger herself, or anyone else. (the debate is wether she can further endanger someone who cannot live outside her)

      Personally I believe that abortion should be allowed, and is the worst, last option in birth control, but still far better than having a child that cannot be loved and supported as one should.

    4. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by xSterbenx · · Score: 1
      Please remind me, I don't believe I tried to blame anyone. I simply noted, without comment, the hipocrisy in allowed abortion but not stem-cell research. You should allow both or neither, regardless of where my own opinions lie.

      And when i said 'morality', I was referring to the morality of society in general. Surely such ideas exist. To give some examples, genocide? murder? human sacrifice? I guess in each own persons mind what they are doing is moral, but as a society we uphold a number of things as moral. Try and sacrifice a live virgin in your front yard and claim its moral. We'll see how society reacts.

    5. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and you are a dipshit muthafucka!

    6. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by gwernol · · Score: 2

      Please remind me, I don't believe I tried to blame anyone. I simply noted, without comment, the hipocrisy in allowed abortion but not stem-cell research. You should allow both or neither, regardless of where my own opinions lie.

      Sorry, perhaps blame was not the right choice of words. I was reacting to the term "hypocracy" that you used. When people throw that term around they are usually looking to find someone to blame; if you were not I apologise.

      And when i said 'morality', I was referring to the morality of society in general. Surely such ideas exist. To give some examples, genocide? murder? human sacrifice? I guess in each own persons mind what they are doing is moral, but as a society we uphold a number of things as moral. Try and sacrifice a live virgin in your front yard and claim its moral. We'll see how society reacts

      Just because most people would agree on some questions does not mean we have a common morality. The most obvious example is exactly what we are talking about: abortion. There are clearly many Americans who believe this is morally wrong, equally there are many Americans who do not believe this is morally wrong.

      And even the "easy" examples you cite are usually not nearly as clear cut as you might like to think. Is it always wrong to kill people? Clearly not (war, self-defense, provocation...). When you say "murder" you mean killing that contravenes current laws. But these laws (and therefore the distinction between murder and lawful killing) are changing all the time. Indeed they even differ from state to state. So there is much less of a common morality than you seem to imply.

      --
      Sailing over the event horizon
    7. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by HanzoSan · · Score: 2

      As if theres a diffrence? Women have an abortion to save themselves time and money, they dont want to give birth and they dont want to raise a baby, they could have birth and do adoption but they choose not to.

      Abortion is worse, because who gets helped from Abortion? No one but the woman who had the Abortion, this means Abortion is selfish.

      Stem Cell research could help any one of us. When you fall and break your spine, you'll change your mind about stem cell research, hell if a woman fell and broke her spine would it be ok for her to use the stem cells to fix her back?

      You have a right to your opinion, but i see it as hypocritical.

      --
      If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    8. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by ArticulateArne · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I assume you mean to say your morality. Please don't presume to speak for anyone but yourself. There are plenty of people with different viewpoints than your own. These people are just as "moral" as you.

      Indeed? How does one define morality? Are all viewpoints moral, or are some more moral than others? And if some are more moral, who gets to decide why they're more moral?

      The idea that everybody gets to pick their own morality is a common and attractive one in today's intellecutal milieu. Yet, it ultimately reduces the meaning of morality to absolutely nothing. There absolutely must be some common definition that people can work from in determining what is and is not moral. It's like trying to do math where everybody gets to pick their own values for different numbers - some people might come close to each other's results when solving a few problems, but the system will break down extremely quickly. Is morality defined by consensus? How much of a consensus is necessary? Are we able to declare immoral the behavior of any group that ever had a consensus?

      I'm curious where you're coming from here, and how you make your definition of morality stand.

    9. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Telastyn · · Score: 2

      Abortions should not be done by women save themselves time and money. It should save the would be child the problems and emotional problems of being raised in a broken home, without proper parentage.

      Adoption does not solve these problems. Or at least current adoption does not. In an ideal world where people adopted all the children put up for adoption, it might.

    10. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by HanzoSan · · Score: 2



      Shouldnt the scientist who created the cells in a lab "OWN" the cell and thus have the same rights as a mother?

      --
      If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    11. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Is it always wrong to kill people? Clearly not (war, self-defense, provocation...).


      The Christian bible (at least) has 10 laws. 1 of them says "tho shalt not kill". Any Christian who supports any of the following will not be saved by Our Lord And Saviour:


      - war
      - murder (for any reason, self-defence or not)
      - the death penalty
      - abortion

    12. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Do you know what is hypocritical? All those people who demand an end to abortion, but then turn their backs on the needs of single mothers and poor families.


      Do you know what else is hypocritical? Those people who demand an end to abortion, and then murder doctors and nurses en-mass to try to stop the practice.

    13. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Christian bible (at least) has 10 laws. 1 of them says "tho shalt not kill". Any Christian who supports any of the following will not be saved by Our Lord And Saviour:

      Okay, so what if you are faced with having to kill one person to save another? Does your "Lord and Saviour" condemn you to eternal damnation because you chose to save your wife's life by killing the man with a gun to her head? Does your "morality" allow for no compassion or extenuating circumstances? What a poor, inhumane, evil morality you subscribe to.

      And you know what's really funny? The bible doesn't even say "thou shalt not kill". That phrase was introduced in the King James translation. The original hebrew is more accurately translated as "you must not murder". So the fundamentalist tract you spout so easily isn't even the "word of God" if you have the misfortune to believe in such a thing.

    14. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The idea that everybody gets to pick their own morality is a common and attractive one in today's intellecutal milieu. You have obviously never studied any philosophy. Just so you know - you are confusing morality with ethics.

    15. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by ArticulateArne · · Score: 1

      I admittedly only have one semester of college philosophy. Please, enlighten me, and point out the nature and relevance of the distinction.

    16. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by qubit64 · · Score: 1
      I myself am pro-choice but this isn't what I'm disputing... (That is something I'll never argue simply because it's not something I can change anyones mind on.) I'd just like to dispute your Hitler comment. Yes, I'm totally agreed he did a lot of horrendous stuff, including some of the research he had carried out. However, you shouldn't write off everything somebody did as being evil simply because some of the stuff he did was REALLY bad. I don't know enough history to point out anything he may have done that was a good idea, or helped people, or whatever, but I think your argument could be used to say something along the lines of "Hitler did XX so therefore we shouldn't do XX". This however doesn't hold up if you insert XX to be something good he may have done. (Again, I dont know that he did, IANAH(I am not a historian)) I think a better way of making the argument might be to say something along the lines of "Of course, one could say that (insert particular example of Hitler's unethical experiments here) was done by Germany, so we should research this too." It sounds very similar to your line, except that I'm talking about a specific example of something that Hitler did that we don't like (for some reasons) as opposed to just something Hitler did and so therefore we shouldn't do it because Hitler did it and we don't like Hitler. (for some reasons)

      Finally, I agree with your idea that we shouldn't just research something simply because someone else is researching the same thing and that we must weigh this against our ethics, I'm just saying that the way you made your argument should possibly be slightly altered. (Maybe I'm nitpicking, or misinterpretting your sentence)

      --
      "Save me jebus!" - Homer Simpson (btw, I'm probably talkin out of me arse)
    17. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by praedor · · Score: 2

      Who's morality? Mine says abortion is OK and that embryonic stem cell research is totally OK. I don't know what you mean by "How far can we allow our morality..."


      This is a reason that religion does absolutely NOT belong in government in any way shape or form. Science is science and marches to its own drum.

      --
      In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
    18. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not using Roe vs. Wade as your argument. Roe vs. Wade established that a Woman has control over her own body, not that the woman had control over the foetus. The only thing you can derive from Roe vs. Wade is that the scientist has the right to control his own test tube...

      .

    19. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by issachar · · Score: 2, Insightful
      These people are just as "moral" as you.

      BZZZT Wrong! Morality is not a relative issue. Something is either morally acceptable or it is not. There's no such thing as "Well that may be wrong for you, but it's not wrong for me". It doesn't suddenly become moral to beat your wife or your children just because someone thinks it's okay.

      For any moral question, there is a right answer, and a wrong answer. Establishing the right answer is more tricky, but the fact that people don't agree on it doesn't mean there are two answers.

      The world is either flat or round, it's not both. God either exists, or he does not. Foetus' are either human beings, or they are not.

      --
      . --- If you're looking for free e-mail you won't find it here! http://www.noemailhere.com
    20. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so when my morality says I can destroy your civilization with genocide is that fine, because it's my morality?

    21. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In what idiot's world is that post flamebait? It is informative and interesting. I can only assume some jerkoff got mod points and used 'em to try to put down opinions he doesn;t like. Moron.

    22. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Marticus · · Score: 1

      The world is spherical; God(s) hasn't(haven't) been shown to exist; A 4 minute old foetus is not a human, a 9 month old foetus is, in between is shades of grey.

      Absolutes don't always exist.

    23. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by gutigre · · Score: 1

      I always thought that it was interesting how the United States can allow abortion (the killing of an unborn embryo) but not embryo cloning/harvesting (the killing of an unborn embryo), especially since embryo cloning can bring some good. While I remain pro-life myself, I could never quite understand this hypocrisy.

      The left wing supports abortion as a women's issue, so abortion is legal.

      The right wing opposes abortion and embryo cloning as life issues. But it can't win all the battles, so while embryo cloning has been made illegal, abortion has not.

    24. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by cyberkahn · · Score: 1

      "thou shall not kill" is not translated very well in the KJV. The Hebrew word "ratsakh" means more specifically to murder.

    25. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by jnana · · Score: 1
      I know I am going to be modded down for this, but I can't resist.

      Exodus 21:7 sanctions slavery.

      Lev. 25:44 states that one may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations.

      Exodus 35:2 clearly states that one who works on the Sabbath should be put to death.

      Lev.15:19-24 states that one is allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness.

      Gee I love your moronic fucking religion. This is the bullshit that you would die and kill to defend, and that your like- and feeble-minded brothers have butchered untold numbers to promote.

      Fuck you!

    26. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by khuber · · Score: 1
      The Christian bible (at least) has 10 laws.

      That's not true. The commandments were numbered and grouped from 15 verses down to 10. The numbers don't exist in the Christian bible. It gets worse - there are commandments earlier in Exodus and replacements later. The replacements are different. And then there's yet another list in Leviticus.

      The "10 Commandments" are just one interpretation of the bible. And your complaint about violations of "thou shalt not kill" is just another interpretation. Some translations are "you shall not murder", with murder being considered distinct from killing (and often used to justify Christian participation in wars).

      Therefore I think your reference to "Any Christian" and "10 laws" are bogus, and your application of "thou shalt not kill" either extremely naive or knowingly ignorant. "Some Christians" maybe, but then your argument is gone.

      I don't want to seem like I'm defending Christianity or the bible since I'm an atheist, but, really, the theological issues are not nearly as simplistic as you make them out to be.

      -Kevin

    27. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For any moral question, there is a right answer, and a wrong answer. Establishing the right answer is more tricky, but the fact that people don't agree on it doesn't mean there are two answers.

      What? I don't know if it's moral for you to marry 4 wives, but at least for some people in the world, it's pretty moral and normal. And for some religions, even having a wife isn't moral, not to mention FOUR.

    28. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Malcontent · · Score: 2

      I say let the human race decide as a collective what is moral and what is not. I would rather have that then to have a small tribe of jews who lived 2000 years ago decide.

      That's just me though. I know many people disagree.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    29. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Malcontent · · Score: 2

      True or false?

      Columbus discovered america.
      Jesus Christ is the son of god.
      A gallon of gasoline costs $1.10

      The truth is much slipperier then you think.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    30. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by HanzoSan · · Score: 3, Insightful



      Please, most children are raised in a broken home, thats the stupidest excuse i've ever heard.

      I was raised without a father around, Am I going to wish i were aborted? hell no! And i dont think anyone else raised in a "broken" home wishes they were aborted either unless they have some serious mental problems.

      If you are in a foster home, or a broken home, it does not mean you'll grow up to be a bad person.

      Please stop talking about emotional problems and proper parantage as if its somehow normal in this day and age to have that knowing that almost half the kids growinng up or who have grown up these days grew up in a broken home. Alot of kids were abused mentally, sexually, etc, and have had it worse than me, and this was by their real parents, honestly this is beyond your control, but even if i grew up like that, i still wouldnt wish i was aborted.

      Its not right for you to judge for some other lifeform if it should live or die, its up to that life form to decide for itself, that is my opinion.

      --
      If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    31. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Pac · · Score: 2

      Perfectly fine, if you have guns enough big enough to back up your words. See what happened to the Native Americans before and during the 19th century to see what I mean. And that is just a particular instance. You can take a look at the history of the Armenians in Turkey, the Kurds in Turkey, Iraq and Iran, the Aztecz and the Incas under the Spanish rule.

      Morality arguments are always just a step from being a refuge for the coward to justify actions that can not be justified by reason.

    32. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by Telastyn · · Score: 2

      And it is my opinion that people should be able to judge if they are going to mentally, sexually, or physically abuse their children and not have them. I also believe sexually active heterosexuals should know if they could support a child, and not have one if they cannot, or will not within 9 months. But I am naive...

      It is for the parents to judge. This is my opinion.

      And I'm not saying that children raised in broken homes will be bad people, because that's certainly not true, but in general I think most people will agree that it is better to have two adults raising a child they love and providing for it than just one.

      Most families in America are strugling to provide for themselves and their child(ren) even with two incomes...

    33. Re:Embryo cloning, abortion? by dajalas · · Score: 1

      Morality is what the people with the guns think is correct. (To paraphrase Mao.)

  15. Not surprising... by Wells2k · · Score: 1

    ...seeing as a good portion of the Government Funded stem-cell research in the United States has been halted.

    I know of quite a few programs that are occurring without the funding of the government due to the restrictions that have been placed on that kind of funding, for instance some of the research that goes on here.

  16. Oddly appropriate Fortune on this page (+5 Spooky) by Pii · · Score: 2, Interesting
    When I went to look at the comments for this page, the fortune quote at the bottom read:
    The entire CHINESE WOMEN'S VOLLEYBALL TEAM all share ONE personality -- and have since BIRTH!!
    Spooky!
    --
    For those that would die defending it, Freedom
    has a sweet taste that the protected will never know.
  17. Closing the barn door by lobsterGun · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    While the American Congress debares the legality cloning the Chineese forge boldly onward.

    Need a new liver? Need a new kidney? How about a heart? Go to China cause you won't be able to get them in America.

    ...and you better bring cash cause I don't think they're going to take credit cards.

    1. Re:Closing the barn door by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      i was just joking about this with my friend. i'm 18, and was thinking when i'm 60 and over in china getting my heart redone/replaced, i'll just go ahead and have them do my lungs, kidneys, and a smaller stomach so i get fuller more quickly and don't get fat (like stapling your stomach, which is done today), and while i'm open, give me some night vision eyeballs, and ultrasonic sonar (out of a bat), i'll learn how to use it as I go.

      maybe a zaphod beeblebrox 3rd arm? you think i'm joking, but I doubt it'll be 20 years before this is commercially avalible.

      on a related note, comming back through customs, would they have to removed your heart, as it's a "contraband" item, and thus not allowed to be in your possession? ;-)

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
  18. Obligatory Knee-Jerk "Funny" mod bypass by Stultsinator · · Score: 1

    "They're just now announcing this? We've known they were doing this a LONG time ago! They all look alike!"

    Yah, it's not very funny. Post intelligently.

  19. Re:Oddly appropriate Fortune on this page (+5 Spoo by Eagle7 · · Score: 1

    Ya, I got it too... you beat me to the post. Most spooky indeed.

    --
    _sig_ is away
  20. Inevitable by legLess · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Briefly (I'm at work) this is exactly why the U.S. shouldn't ban this research. It's bloody inevitable. Our government is caving to a few screaming fundamentalists over one of the most important medical advances in history.

    Who's going to pursue this more ethically? The Chinese, who've been alleged to use prisons as organ factories, or us?

    --
    This isn't as much "normalization" as it is "don't take so many drugs when you're designing tables."
    1. Re:Inevitable by TheCaptain · · Score: 1

      Umm...the U.S. didn't ban stem cell research.....

    2. Re:Inevitable by Kphrak · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Hitler supposedly did a lot of experiments on prisoners. I didn't hear of anyone seriously saying,
      "It's bloody inevitable! They'll create a superhuman! We must do it too, because otherwise they'll do it first. After all, we're more ethical, so we must do what they're doing."
      Isn't that the arrogant attitude that most leftists detest about the US? Since we're more ethical, we can do the unethical because it's more right when we do it.


      Has it ever occured to you that it may not be right at all?


      I'm pro-life, and do not think that stem-cell research is murder, the way abortion is. But an attitude of "they might succeed in something unethical, so let's do it before they can" is a trip to a very slippery slope.


      --

      There's no sig like this sig anywhere near this sig, so this must be the sig.
    3. Re:Inevitable by debrain · · Score: 2

      Quite right. We shall cling to our non-capitalist luddite principles on a subject, and be overtaken by someone who does not.

      This in no way reflects my views on capitalism, ludditism, ethics of human cloning, pro-life, or anything else. All I wish to say is: If your morality prevents innovation, and it lies in a gray area (pay attention to gray areas throughout history - mathematics could be considered one of those in the middle ages), those who do invent it will have an "advantage". (ie. the Ottomans.)

      -B

    4. Re:Inevitable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I'm pro-life, and do not think that stem-cell research is murder, the way abortion is.

      Well, that's damned hypocritical... If the matter of killing a baby is what bothers you, what if a woman wanted to have an abortion and was less than 2 weeks pregnant? (unlikely, true, but let's call it a morning-after abortion) Or if it's the sex that bothers you, what if couples were paid to have sex and create embryos for stem cell research? No insult intended -- I am genuinely curious as to how your mind is working here...

    5. Re:Inevitable by stubear · · Score: 2

      Don't worry, Superman has stepped in...er, wheeled in, to save the day. He's testifying before congress about the use of genetic research for medical cures - specifically, no duh, spinal injuries.

    6. Re:Inevitable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps take a little longer view:

      Look how well it worked out for the Ottoman Empire, and who's doing the math now.

    7. Re:Inevitable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For fuck's sake, this isn't anything like the experiments that the Nazi's did or the far, far worse ones the Japanese did in WWII to *real* *living* *sentiate* human beings.

      We are talking about an embryo that *has not yet even begun to differentiate its cells*. Unless you regard life as beginning at conception I can't see how this can be regarded as a human being; indeed I understand most of the early cells in fetal development form the placenta.

      The Nazi and Japanese experiments are rightly regarded as appalling crimes aganst humanity. The Chinese are doing no more than most medical researchers in the West want to do and regard as perfectly ethical, but are being held back from by small but noisy and influential bunches of religious cranks.

    8. Re:Inevitable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      America follows its economic interest above all. It was only previously ambiguous whether the stem cell restrictions were or were not in America's best economic interests. Therefore I predict at least a review and revision, or perhaps even a repeal of current stem cell restrictions.

  21. I hate to break this... by zmalone · · Score: 1

    I hate to break this to some of you, but China presently has a negative birthrate, they are dealing with their problems, although, they are doing it in a manner which is unacceptable to many religions/people. Where are all these "booming population" remarks coming from? Admitedly, there are a lot of people there right now, but if they are correcting the problem, should we criticize them?

    1. Re:I hate to break this... by nomadic · · Score: 1

      They still have a positive birthrate, but they've managed to cut it down slightly over the past few years.

    2. Re:I hate to break this... by NixterAg · · Score: 1
      "but if they are correcting the problem"


      The Nazis tried to correct something they felt was a "problem".


      "they are doing it in a manner which is unacceptable to many religions/people"
      "should we criticize them?"


      The ends do not justify the means.

    3. Re:I hate to break this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, check out the World Health Organization and Red Cross sites... they both speculate that the birth rate is slumped to a small negative number.

      China has a very populous neighbor who they are not exactly happy with and have gone to war with several times since WWII (if only in a minor, skirmishing kind of way); India. India now has more people than china, and in a conventional conflict this can be a telling thing. More people means more bodies on the line and in the factories building weapons.

      I seriously doubt China is looking to clone people to build their population... they have trouble enough controlling their own politically, let alone feeding them. However, the Star Wars theme does come to mind...

    4. Re:I hate to break this... by nomadic · · Score: 2

      The numbers can be a bit confused.

      I was incorrect, the birth rate is a negative number, but the lowering death rate means the population is growing.

      As for the Indian thing, I don't think wars are decided by how many men you can put in the field anymore. China has the largest population in the world (they still edge out India), but they're surrounded by less-populated countries who are more than a match for them in a fight (Japan, Taiwan, Russia, etc)

  22. China's Next Move by DigitalHiatus · · Score: 1

    A communist country making such advances is somewhat of a scary thing in my mind. I find it hard to believe that they are doing this research for mere scientific and humanitarian reasons.

    The possiblity that they are solely in this for making of an ultimate race is what is fueling their motivation for this. Imagine them creating a race of cloned soldiers.

    --
    Once a Geek.....Always a Geek.
    1. Re:China's Next Move by Drachemorder · · Score: 1
      "Imagine them creating a race of cloned soldiers."

      We don't have to imagine that. George Lucas already did it for us.

    2. Re:China's Next Move by Master+Bait · · Score: 2
      The godless Red Menace will produce a genetically superior million-man army of cloned soldiers, selected for their size and prowess, intent upon landing upon our shores, intent on crushing our American Way.

      Believe It or Not!

      --
      "Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
      --Tom Schulman
    3. Re:China's Next Move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First of all, it's important to note that cloning doesn't make -sense- for an army. The chinese already have one- Like the Russians in WWII, they have a decisive advantage in a foot soldier's war. However, I don't think they have significant territorial ambitions. Plus, a war like WWI or WWII were anomalies in history- probably due to a confluence of factors.
      The second thing to note about cloning is that(in theory) it gives the offspring the exact genetic makeup as the clonee, so to speak. This is a profound disadvantage for several reasons.
      First of all, we are all susceptible in varying degrees to different diseases. Note northern europeans' susceptibility to malaria- a trait not shared by Africans, who are then susceptible to sickle cell anemia.
      Genetic diversity is a great advantage for humanity in no human can have complete immunity to every disease, b/c diseases are evolving all the time. Go to any hosptial and you'll see the constant microevolution of bacteria(S. aureus infections, &c.) A huge army of clones has the distinct disadvantage of being very susceptible to one particular disease, whatever that might be. An opposing force could easily neutralize them with a hyper-strain of that bacteria or virus or whatnot.
      I think there are moral questions about cloning. But we should separate the science-fiction dreams from the real possibility. Like with most things- there's a tradeoff for all 'engineering' decisions, whether they be biological or otherwise. Humans can't stop cell death nor can they build humanoid robots and place our brains in them. The counterarguments are infinite.

  23. This could be good news. by thud2000 · · Score: 1

    It's a golden opportunity for American scientists. Instead of wrestling with complicated moral dilemmas, we can now sit back and watch and see if God smites the Chinese. If He does, we can just say, "See? We told ya cloning was evil." If there is no smiting, then we can assume it's safe to jump on the bandwagon. Thanks, Communist China!

    1. Re:This could be good news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is exactly what the US is hoping. Our politicians can't approve of stem cell research without a big backlash but if it comes down to China getting ahead of us they can start to support it.

  24. Uh, yeah by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1

    China also injects the skulls of unlicensed newborns as they come out of the womb to kill them, in order to control population.

    I don't look to China for my ethics.

    --
    Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    1. Re:Uh, yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      exactly, just because one country jumps off the morality bridge. We should do it to?

    2. Re:Uh, yeah by grytpype · · Score: 2

      Source?

      --

      - Have a picture

    3. Re:Uh, yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, do you have a better way of population control? Better this than starving grown people to death (I am not kidding). Look at India, their population will surpass China's in no time. Just imagine what will happen if China don't have birth control. Will US be willing to support an extra couple of billion people for China (that is, your average family feed an extra 20 people).

    4. Re:Uh, yeah by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

      How about this: "Once I found a woman who was 9 months pregnant, but did not have a birth-allowed certificate. According to the policy, she was forced to undergo an induced abortion. In the operating room, I saw the child's lips were moving and how its arms and legs were also moving. The doctor injected poison into its skull and the child died and it was thrown into the trash can. Afterwards the husband was holding his wife and crying loudly and saying, what kind of man am I? What kind of husband am I? I can't even protect my wife and child. Do you have any sort of humanity?"

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    5. Re:Uh, yeah by swilcox · · Score: 1

      Source...
      You could have found the source as well if you simplied tried (ie google)

    6. Re:Uh, yeah by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

      So, do you have a better way of population control?

      Yes, Capitalism and Democracy. As a population becomes more economically stable, the birth rate naturally decreases. In fact, I've seen some studies that show population will stop increasing around 2050 or 2100.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    7. Re:Uh, yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well don't look up north. We here in Canada suck babies out of women's wombs up until 3 months after they've been created! And it's not even to control population: it's done for convenience sake!

  25. Now how did that get there... by IPFreely · · Score: 2
    The quote at the bottom of the page:

    The entire CHINESE WOMEN'S VOLLEYBALL TEAM all share ONE personality -- and have since BIRTH!!

    Seems a little too relevant...

    --
    There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
  26. Diplomatic Slap in the Face by insane8 · · Score: 1

    It seems like they are doing this just to spite the US. Good for them!! The US policy on this type of reasearch has been way to tight. Politicians make these silly laws because of there ignorance in the area. I hope a chineese company makes a way to cure people of back injuries .. then you will see the US change it's laws very quickly ..

  27. Re:Stem Cell research commercial applications: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try this one

  28. population?? by Hooya · · Score: 2
    don't they have enough people already? do they really need to start cloning humans? (i know, i know, it's just for stem cells.)

    On one hand, they employ 'neighborhood-watch' for couples who might want a second child. those couples are then 'socially' pressured into getting an abortion. but on the other hand the gummint wants to clone humans... I guess they're going to require someone to have a license to produce humans... (much like a manufacturing license). But then the country is so good at piracy -- you know where that's going to end up. 'pirated copies' -- literally -- will be found on every chinease street corner. what's new?

  29. Attack of the Clones! by Pop+n'+Fresh · · Score: 1

    Cue the Imperial March, I think the United States is about to pay the price for its lack of vision.

    --
    *This page intentionally left pointless*
  30. Time to put aside ancient religous fears by Roached · · Score: 1

    It would seem that some countries have put aside their ancient fairytale religious superstitions and are moving science forward. Not that there shouldn't be regulations on this type of science (an FDA-like organization), but the outright bans we have proves that separation of church and state does not exist. We're going to end up way behind in biological and medical sciences if we continue this line of thinking.

    1. Re:Time to put aside ancient religous fears by betis70 · · Score: 1

      If that is what it takes to "stay ahead" in biological and medical science, I'd prefer to live in the Dark Ages.

      Cloning opens up all kinds of ethical issues that have next to nothing to do with "religious superstitions". Is the clone a person? Does the clone have rights? If they have rights can you use them for organ harvesting? What if your clone kills someone and they find his DNA at the scene, how do they determine it was him and not you? What forensic evidence will hold up in a court of law?

      The whole "Re-Pet" and 6th Day aspect of this is pretty mind-boggling.

      --
      I forget...are we at war with Eurasia or East Asia?
  31. Quick quote by Red+Weasel · · Score: 1

    "Xiangzhong "Jerry" Yang, a Chinese-born cloning scientist now at the University of Connecticut at Storrs, says he has been aware of the advances being made in China for a long time.

    "These are credible people," he says. "I've encouraged them to publish in peer-reviewed journals so that they receive credit and the world knows about their accomplishments." "

    Just the fact that Scientists need to be encouraged to say what they are up to is kind of distressing. I can't help wondering why a chinese scientist would ever want to remain quiet about his work. Oh wait...

    --
    ..which just shows that the human brain is ill-adapted for thinking and was probably designed for cooling the blood-T P
  32. Mutant rabbit-people by ZahrGnosis · · Score: 1
    Another team based at Shanghai No. 2 Medical University claims to have derived stem cells from hybrid embryos composed of human cells and rabbit eggs.

    That just can't go anywhere good.
    1. Re:Mutant rabbit-people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it can.

      :)

      (obwarning - the links are to http://home.att.ne.jp/gold/kenta/ -- Kenta Wolf, a Japanese artist who draws very beautiful playboy bunnys. May or may not be clean, I'm at work and can't clickthrough.)

    2. Re:Mutant rabbit-people by LPetrazickis · · Score: 1

      Yes, it can. It will result in more rights for our fellow lifeforms.;)

      --
      Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
    3. Re:Mutant rabbit-people by Tazzy531 · · Score: 2

      Sorry to tell you, but this has been and is currently a widely used Western Science technique. Read Here or Here

      --


      _______________________________
      "I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
    4. Re:Mutant rabbit-people by ZahrGnosis · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected. :-) Bring on the mutant rabbit people!

  33. Hitler comparisons, spare us please by coltrane99 · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    The reason is: the majority of the people in the US want to allow abortion because it makes life so much better for women. Once there are clear benefits from stem cell research (dramatically lengthened lifespans, elimination of all manner of debilitating diseases), the people of the US will be riled up enough about the influence of the religious nuts to overrule them on this issue too.

    Sucks to lose, huh?

    1. Re:Hitler comparisons, spare us please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bullshit. the reason is that the Supreme Court decided that Abortion was legal in Roe vs. Wade. Without that court decision, it is extremely unlikely that abortion would have been made legal the way it is now. This is because most people don't care about it enough to do anything. Status quo rules.

      Without Roe vs. Wade, abortions would be illegal unless where specifically allowed by exceptions provided for in the law. (Life of mother in very definate peril). The way it is now, abortion is legal except where laws have been passed restricting it, and those laws must conform to Roe vs. Wade.

  34. I hope not! by burtonator · · Score: 2, Funny

    If China gets to far ahead they will swarm us with...

    Just think... billions of Chinese!!! ah!

  35. This is news... but not new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I believe that, if you dig into some of the KGB stuff from the early 80's, the russians were (as a military experiment) working on human body modification through genomic experimentation and gene mutation/cloning. Alot of the documents are obviously still hidden away, but there was a site I visited last year that was a clearing house for recently declassified documents from the Moscow bureau.

    While nothing specifically mentioned the cloning, analyists who had been looking for hints on space weapons, stealth bomber/fighters, and missing prisoners came to the conclusion that some of the rumors about human cloning in remote siberian research stations were not without backing evidence. This was due to a small trickle of the worst dissidents, those who had good health records and whom were fit and free from known genetic diseas in their families, were disappearing.

    These stations still remain closed to the world and heavily guarded, and there are only rumors. Rumors like men being bred from birth with extra ribs and denser/thicker muscles and bones. Men who had enhanced senses of smell or night time eyesight.

    A few of the people who went "missing" from soviet prisons for serious crimes were noted as re-appearing years later in soviet Marine Infantry brigades (spetznat) with clouded service records, but it is difficult to imagine Russia in the 80's having the technical knowhow or where with all to be able to "mutate" or modify already grown adults. I toss that one out though as an x-files kind of rumor that sure could scare the kids up around Mermansk.

    Like I said, alot of rumors... but it makes you think. You gotta wonder what the CIA paid for too... there is alot of black budget money that doesn't get tracked beyond the agency front door... they managed to produce the Blackbird that way, and U2/TR1 as well as who knows what. I wonder if the gov't has dabbled in genetic mutation or embryonic modification/cloning...

    Oh well, in direct comment to the article and posters here, let me go on the record that I think this is not a bad thing. China is not looking to increase their population (which they have difficulty controlling or feeding as is now)... they are doing research to A) Best the US and Europe at their own game, and B) come up with medical breakthrough that meet condition A and benefit their own society as well... maybe even boost their economy with something original that only they can produce, that being working genetic medicines they for once control under patent.

    1. Re:This is news... but not new by lukesl · · Score: 1

      China is not looking to increase their population (which they have difficulty controlling or feeding as is now)... they are doing research to A) Best the US and Europe at their own game, and B) come up with medical breakthrough that meet condition A and benefit their own society as well... maybe even boost their economy with something original that only they can produce, that being working genetic medicines they for once control under patent

      Or alternatively, maybe there are no red or yellow menaces at work, simply scientists who happen to be Chinese, doing the same work as scientists who happen to be American, European, etc.

    2. Re:This is news... but not new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      A few of the people who went "missing" from soviet prisons for serious crimes were noted as re-appearing years later in soviet Marine Infantry brigades (spetznat) with clouded service records, but it is difficult to imagine Russia in the 80's having the technical knowhow or where with all to be able to "mutate" or modify already grown adults. I toss that one out though as an x-files kind of rumor that sure could scare the kids up around Mermansk.
      I wouldn't count on it... People always underestimate the Russians - they're an intelligent people. If the Russian government had decided on the day DNA was discovered that they'd pour resources into doing this, then they could've been at that level by the mid 80s.
      Btw, Russia was further ahead in rocket-engine techology in the 1960s than the Usa is now.
  36. It's simple by epepke · · Score: 1

    The people in power want to ban abortion outright, but they can't because of a Supreme Court decision. So, they ban everything having to do with embryos on the grounds that, if they allow people to do it, women will get abortions to provide the material. Thus, if they can't ban abortions, they can at least give the impression of wanting to ban abortions in principle.

    I didn't say it made sense. It's just how these people think. It isn't hypocrisy; it's opportunism.

  37. People, people, lots of people by Pac · · Score: 2

    That looks like exactly what the People's Republic needs, more republican people!

    It also helps that one can clone the important Party officials and make even truer the tradicional Chinese fascination for long term planning (not the 3-month Wall Street long term standard, mind you, the Chinese long term is measured in centuries). In the future, one will plan and have a clone to implement the plan.

    I hope they remember to learn how to clone the rice, the pork and the fish, to feed all the surplus people they will be making.

    1. Re:People, people, lots of people by ProfMoriarty · · Score: 1
      Another problem is ...

      We ALL know what happens when the family tree doesn't branch ...

      --
      Karma? Karma? I don't need no stinkin' karma.
  38. Not according to the CIA World Factbook: by Byteme · · Score: 2
    1. Re:Not according to the CIA World Factbook: by thedbp · · Score: 1

      Ah, yes, the CIA, truly a paragon of thruthfulness, accountability, and honest facts.

      Feh.

    2. Re:Not according to the CIA World Factbook: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gonna rattle off some 25 year old stuff about COINTELPRO for us?

      Come on, we know you can.

    3. Re:Not according to the CIA World Factbook: by thedbp · · Score: 1

      How about just some more recent dealings in East Timor and a side jaunt into cocaine distribution?

  39. Re:Oddly appropriate Fortune on this page (+5 Spoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    slashdot got hacked!
    DUH!

  40. I love living in GA by SuperCal · · Score: 1

    I love living in Redneck town. A friend of mine who was looking over my shoulder at this article, commented "Dang... their clonein' um now? Just what the world needs... More Chinese."

    --
    Business News and Resources: www.usasource.net
    1. Re:I love living in GA by thedbp · · Score: 1

      I hear that. I look around at all the brain-dead breeders living out their shallow, cathode-driven lives in their webs of obsolete religious dogma and personal shortcomings and just think to myself how cloning is the polar opposite of where science should be going.

      We should be doing research on how to completely eliminate people from reality. I mean REMOVE ENTIRELY - their memories, interactions, everything. And it should be a small device that fits on my keychain and can be pointed at huge crowds of people at, i dunno, a britney spears concert or something.

      "And in other news, it seems like 60,000 people vanished from the Baltimore Area last night, but no one could recall anyone they knew actually BEING there."

  41. whew! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *finally* we'll be able to fix china's drastic underpopulation problem.

  42. I guess we'll finally see... by kwishot · · Score: 1

    Which theories are right... psychology or sociology.

    The age-old "nature vs nurture" debate. If the Chinese continue with this, we'll truly be able to see how much the external environment affects ones personality, etc.
    Seeing as we've never had a "control set" before, a lot of things in those fields are pretty much assumed or inferred.

    The other side of this whole thing, though, is of course the moral side. When will we go "too far" and start generating clones for blood, organs, etc, and leaving the rest for waste? Can anyone else picture the human fields in "The Matrix"? Humans do make great power plants....lets just hope we don't exploit ourselves to extinction!

    -kwishot

  43. Next man on the moon? by rufusdufus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The next man on the moon will be chinese too. They have a plan for manned mission in the near future.
    Our science fiction always assumes that space colonization and the "future" will be dominated by western ideals, but as things are trending now, the future looks brighter for asia.

    1. Re:Next man on the moon? by NixterAg · · Score: 1
      "Our science fiction always assumes that space colonization and the "future" will be dominated by western ideals, but as things are trending now, the future looks brighter for asia."


      Funny, I've read a similar statement in regards to a certain Asian country in the early 60s.

    2. Re:Next man on the moon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which one is that? The fact of the matter is that China is right now developing a space program with the intent of competing with the USA for domination in space. Whether they succeed or not is a good question, but to assume they will fail because some other country failed is plain stupid.

  44. So What by Microsift · · Score: 1

    Cobra's Supreme commander is a clone of Hitler, Napoleon, Caesar, and some other leaders all rolled up in to one!

    --
    My other sig is extremely clever...
    1. Re:So What by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you know anything? He's dead. Zartan killed him with an arrow...

      Later, Firefly used his (Serpentor's) body to mask his (Firefly's) own escape...

      Quzah.

  45. I guess they'll dominate the Olympics! by jocknerd · · Score: 0

    China will be able to produce super-humans with their cloning. They can have two of everybody so they always have a fresh competitor. Its not fair I tell you.

  46. asia is the way to go... by supernova87a · · Score: 3, Insightful

    many people have predicted (and it's becoming apparent) that Asia will lead the way in such biotechnology areas. People in Asia are not quite as brainwashed or blinded by Christian religious dogma, and probably don't mind conducting research that can improve the quality of human life.

    While the politicians here debate, and try to cater to every consituency, by holding research back, the rest of the world will be able to run with the ball...

    1. Re:asia is the way to go... by mathi · · Score: 1

      Sheep have been cloned in the west, why would this not be possible with humans? So we are not that far behind with that technology. And I am sure the same kind of experiments have been done on human cells (and DNA). But to create the cells to grow organs we don't need to create clones of ourselves. See this article. The argument the Christians use is that if you don't know whether its human life or not, don't take any chances.

  47. You can buy from me #@ +3 ; Creative #@ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The distribution rights to :

    The Attack of the JonKatzs

  48. Does this strike anyone else as ironic? by tongue · · Score: 1

    It would seem like the most populated country in the world--where its actually against the law to have more than one (or is it two?) child(ren), would be the LAST place that someone would try to clone people. Granted, there are many more applications for stemcell research beyond mere cloning of people, but still... something about that just seems strange.

    1. Re:Does this strike anyone else as ironic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It shouldn't. The human cloning they are talking about is not intended to produce more people, but to help fix existing people. China, you see, is not hindered by backwards thinking religious zealots, so they can look into ways of improving the health of their people that are considered "immoral" by western religious fanatics.

    2. Re:Does this strike anyone else as ironic? by tftp · · Score: 1

      Take into account that China is ruled by old people, and those old people don't mind financing a promising scientific research.

    3. Re:Does this strike anyone else as ironic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The German NAZIs weren't impeded by 'backwards thinking' either. They rolled right along with what was for the time 'leading edge' medical research on interred jews and prisoners. They were very advanced technically, but very retarded morally. Hell, the whole success of the NAZI system came about because they were the first major party to embrace the ideas of modern mass communications and propaganda. Very modern.

  49. "Immoral Science" by coltrane99 · · Score: 1, Flamebait
    Where are all these people when things like weaponized anthrax are being researched by our government?

    No, it's only when research might legitimize abortion that it's ImmoralTM.

    It would be funny, if it weren't so very important. Personally I want the doubled lifespan that fully realized stem-cell research may give us. Get your foot off the brake there, Mr. God-Fearin' Man!

    1. Re:"Immoral Science" by SEE · · Score: 1
      Hmm. Isn't trying to develop a defense against weaponized anthrax rather difficult if you don't research it? Kinda like making bulletproof vests without ever testing them by shooting them . . .

    2. Re:"Immoral Science" by coltrane99 · · Score: 1

      No, we don't need to do research on what the perfect 'binder' chemicals are to mix with spores to produce an optimally lethal anthrax mixture. There is no evidence anyone in the world except ourselves has done this research. We advanced the state of the art to such a degree that the research itself produced the threat. The profile the FBI is using for the post-9/11 anthrax letters is of a USA bio-weapons program scientist.

  50. an educated question... by Hadlock · · Score: 2

    from the article...

    Unlike most adult cells, whose functions are preprogrammed, embryonic stem cells can adapt themselves to a variety of specialist roles, filling in as heart or nerve cells.

    so, let's assume i'm born, from an embryonic cell (cloned), and my heart goes bad. the doctor forgets to stick the embryo in the magic soultion that turns the "turn me into a heart organ" switch, and puts the cell directly into me.

    does the embryo turn into a blasocyst and a developing baby/tumor? or would this "know" what to do? i know there's a specific solution that must be prepared to turn on all the genes to clone an animal, but would the body naturally tell this embryo what to do?

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
    1. Re:an educated question... by mathi · · Score: 1

      If you survive, it will grow into a baby. Like when a fertilised cell ends up outside the womb. The chemicals needed to tell the cell to grow into a heart haven't been in your body for many years. But to turn a stem-cell into a heart is very complex, because a heart needs all kinds of tissues: muscle, vein, nerve, binding tissue and some I forgot. They are as far as to make a piece of vein (and liver in future) from adult cells from the body.

    2. Re:an educated question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They wouldnt implant a whole embryo into you, just the stem cells. Theyve done this already in paralyzed rats and made them able to walk.

  51. Human Organs by james_shoemaker · · Score: 5, Funny

    So in the future when you look at the packaging your replacement organs come in it will say...

    "Made in China"

  52. It just makes more by insane8 · · Score: 1

    More e-mail addresses to ban for spam..

  53. Of course they are ahead.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    with mandatory abortion over one child in many cases regardless of whether or not the parents wanted that child, China certainly has *plenty* of 'material' to work with.

    No human rights triumph here-this is China simply finding use for a large supply of what they already deemed 'unwanted' and murdered.

    1. Re:Of course they are ahead.... by praedor · · Score: 2

      Easy to cast stones from over here isn't it? WE don't have to live shoulder to shoulder, packed like sardines into limited space as they must in China. WE don't (yet) suffer the same overpopulation problems China does NOW.


      I fully support the intention of their population control measures, if not necessarily the way they are carried out. Perhaps economic inducements to smaller families would be better (here AND there). Instead of payrolling big families with tax deductions and crap like that, make people actually pay the real cost of their overproduction of kids.

      --
      In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
    2. Re:Of course they are ahead.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Easy to cast stones from over here isn't it? WE don't have to live shoulder to shoulder, packed like sardines into limited space as they must in China. WE don't (yet) suffer the same overpopulation problems China does NOW.

      This is blatantly false. Most chinese live in rural areas.

  54. China. Cloning. 'Nuff said. by cryptochrome · · Score: 2

    I suppose it was inevitable that while the majority of the world wrangles over the ethics of this technology, it would be developed anyway by a government with a total lack of them. While I am not opposed to cloning technologies on philosophical grounds, as a practical matter I trust the chinese government about as far as I can throw them.

    --

    ---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?

  55. What else would you expect from godless heathens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cloned chinks. That's an oxymoron. They are like insects in a hive. Bzzz bzzzz.

  56. Bad joke... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't mind that they're cloning, they all look the same to me.

  57. Picture this in court.... by kwishot · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This would be a step backwards in court cases that rely on DNA evidence.

    With people being truly identical in every which way (not including haircuts and stuff like that) including DNA, it would be nearly impossible to prove innocence or guilt of one of the clones in a court case that currently relies on such technologies.

    Think about it...
    "Your client was on the security camera and it was his blood on the floor"

    "No, your honor, it was his identical clone with the same DNA - my client was nowhere near the place of the incident"

    -kwishot

    1. Re:Picture this in court.... by WinPimp2K · · Score: 1

      So, they would have to go back to fingerprints. Even identical twins (naturally occuring "clones") do not have the same fingerprints.

      --

      You either believe in rational thought or you don't
  58. Mixed reactions by tiltowait · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Column A
    This is yet another reason why China scares me. Anyone upset over the American jingoism since 9/11 and during the Olympics should be blown away by the scope of Chinese nationalism, to say nothing of their singularly ass backwards system of medicine, politics, human rights, spam filtering, etc..

    Column B
    Kudos for this country for pushing the scientific frontiers of medical benefits to mankind. This forward-thinking is yet another sign of the benefits of not being caught up in corrupt fundamenalist political wackos. But since China's rich cultural heritage spanks the USA in longevity by about, oh, a factor of ten, it shouldn't be surprising where they're headed - it's only a matter of time before this technically advanced economic powerhouse dominates the globe.

  59. Re:China. Cloning. 'Nuff said. by C.+Mattix · · Score: 2

    Is it me or did Fraxis hit the nail right on the head when they put "Chairman Chang" as the leader of the "Human Hive" in Alpha Centauri.

    Is it sick that I can still pretty much boil down much of the socio-political landscape in terms of a computer game? ..... Don't answer that.

  60. The problems with cloning ... by ProfMoriarty · · Score: 1
    original
    clone
    clone
    clown
    Hilary Rosen
    Jack Valenti

    We have a little degradation problem here ...

    --
    Karma? Karma? I don't need no stinkin' karma.
  61. Many More Maos day celebration to follow. by RealityCrutch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course they are ahead of us. We are a democracy and any substantial protest brings us to a screeching halt. (Think: nuclear power)

    And as a totalitarian state, not particularly worried about ethics, foreign opinion, or foetuses, they have a very large source of research material.

    But I expected better from many of you. They aren't doing this to increase their population. They aren't even doing this for stem cell research per se. They have plenty of stem cells from their very aggressive population control program. No, what they want is money. They want to clone embryos to sell to us squeamish westerners. They have to develop the technique of cloning them, so they can clone the stem cell lines we hypocritically approve of, then sell them back to us. What a wacky world we live in!

    1. Re:Many More Maos day celebration to follow. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only that--while the Chinese are advancing in this research, the steady reinforcement of our intellectual property laws combined with our lecturing of China on IP theft issues will paint us into a very tight corner.

      Like, when the dipshits in DC finally realize how far we've fallen behind, it'll be extremely difficult legally, morally, and non-hypocritically for us to justify stealing future Chinese IP to play catch-up.

    2. Re:Many More Maos day celebration to follow. by lukesl · · Score: 1

      But I expected better from many of you. They aren't doing this to increase their population. They aren't even doing this for stem cell research per se. They have plenty of stem cells from their very aggressive population control program. No, what they want is money. They want to clone embryos to sell to us squeamish westerners.

      Statements like this disturb me a little. Why is it that we automatically assume that researchers in China have such unholy motives? Maybe they think it's interesting science with great potential to improve people's lives, the same as most of us in the West.

    3. Re:Many More Maos day celebration to follow. by RealityCrutch · · Score: 1

      I don't think they have unholy motives. It just seems to me that the cloning of stem cell lines is a western workaround to a western ethical/political argument. The PRC doesn't have this particular research handicap, so it makes little sense that they are doing it for pure research reasons.

  62. Talk about mixed messages by Nygard · · Score: 2

    So in a nation where parents can only have 1 child, they are cloning humans...

    Yeah, that makes sense.

    --
    "Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." --Elbert Hubbard (1856-1915)
    1. Re:Talk about mixed messages by ziriyab · · Score: 5, Insightful
      They're not cloning embryos to make more humans. Read the article.

      The biggest problem with /. is that some very smart people who know a lot about one specific field, think they're qualified to comment (and +mod) on things they know nothing about.

    2. Re:Talk about mixed messages by Nygard · · Score: 2

      I did read the article. I chose to make a politically pointed, satirical remark. (For your education, satire often uses exaggeration and rhetorical devices to make a point.) This obviously exceeded your capacity.

      As far as I can see, the biggest problem with /. is the utter lack of a sense of humor among people like yourself. The second biggest would be a complete lack of courtesy.

      For that matter, what qualifications do you have to judge any of the following?
      a) My intelligence
      b) My fields of expertise
      c) Fields in which I lack expertise
      d) Your own moral and editorial superiority

      --
      "Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." --Elbert Hubbard (1856-1915)
  63. it's amazing what you can accomplish by b-side.org · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    when you aren't bogged down by morals..

    --
    Indie rock lives! b-side!
  64. Olympics.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Are clones prohibited from the Olympic games?

    1. Re:Olympics.. by LPetrazickis · · Score: 1

      > Are clones prohibited from the Olympic games?

      I hope not considering that I would seriously consider reproducing that way.;)

      --
      Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
  65. Why are capitalists so anti communist by HanzoSan · · Score: 2



    As if the USA is a democracy? First we arent a democracy we are a republic.

    Second communism allows far greater freedom than capitalism IF the government is not corrupt.

    Since 99 percent of all governments are corrupt including ours, a corrupt communist government is one the people cannot control. Our government is controlled by the top 10% of rich Capitalists not us, so how are we in any diffrent of a situation than the Chinese?

    SSSCA, The Patriot Act, DMCA, These laws arent democractic at all, we didnt vote to have these laws in place, if we were allowed to vote the majority would vote against these laws, hey but some rich guys in suits and some representatives who are actually representing the rich guys in suits, they make the law.

    A corrupt government is a corrupt government, Communism isnt bad on paper, its bad only because humans make it bad, and our government is bad only because we allow it to be.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:Why are capitalists so anti communist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Why are capitalists so anti communist"

      Are you that stupid ?
      Capitalism allows individual to own things, allows him to accumulate wealth as long as he does that within limits of the law.
      Communism does not recognize such thing as "private property".
      Communism does not allow people to earn as much as market is willing to pay them but decides how much everyone is worth.

      Do you see the difference ?
      Do you see basically opposite points of view or do you need more clues here ?

    2. Re:Why are capitalists so anti communist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in the perfect communism there is no money and everybody has everything he needs.

      in the perfect capitalism there are some bosses and the others are their slaves.

  66. Facism has nothing to do with Communism by HanzoSan · · Score: 2, Interesting



    Because the USA is filled with Facism as well, perhaps we arent as bad as Germany, Russia, China, but we arent as good as some other places in Europe, or NZ either.

    As far as freedom goes, Communism does have its benifits, one of them is science benifits greatly from it because scientists have complete freedom.

    The only problem China faces is the fact that they have too many people and not enough jobs for them all, their government is out of order, right now we are entering the information age, resources and man power will matter less, information will matter more, and in this situation, the bigger population shall have more producers of information.

    China and Communism benifits from this greatly, however because of their stupidity they are restricting information through censorship, if they ever allow their people to actually access the information then we'd be left in the dust.

    Then again we have problems like that here (Copyright is a form of Censorship)

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:Facism has nothing to do with Communism by mqduck · · Score: 1

      Well put, HanzoSan.

      I would like to also add that fascism and socialism are considered opposites. As I earlier noted, socialists have always called for democracy, while fascists have opposed democracry in rhetoric and in practice. Furster, they considered democracy to be another word for communism.

      --
      Property is theft.
    2. Re:Facism has nothing to do with Communism by ponxx · · Score: 1, Interesting
      > Because the USA is filled with Facism as well, perhaps we arent as bad as Germany [...]

      I think you will find most Germans would take offense at being called fascist today... I have lived there for a while, and it is a hell of a lot "less" fascist today than most other countries, including the US. Most of the stuff the Republican party (and parts of the Democrats) come out with would be labelled "extreme-right"/"neo-nazi" if a German party dared voice such views.

      These things are slightly more acceptable in England or France, but again, no-where near like the US. (partially of course because the US can get away with it and is not as dependent on cooperation with other countries as European nations are)

      ponxx

    3. Re:Facism has nothing to do with Communism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you fucking nuts ?
      Just how scientifically advanced is former Soviet Union after 70 years of communism?
      Nothing, nothing came even close to capitalism as far as promoting new discoveries and actually making them available.
      Please, show me a single fucking former or current communistic country that is even close to the western world as far as technical and scientific achievements are concerned.

      "people to actually access the information then we'd be left in the dust."

      I used to live in communistic country.
      Nothing makes people more lazy and completely devoid of any drive to work as communism does.
      Left in fucking dust ?
      I spend hours waiting in line to buy fucking toilet paper and you are talking about "advanced" society ?
      Again, you have no idea what are you talking about- you are fucking rich kid with completely fucked up perspective on how things work in this world.

      Ah and one more thing, next time think before you post.

    4. Re:Facism has nothing to do with Communism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might want to try your rap about 'Communism benefits scientists' on some Geneticists from the USSR. Specifically the ones who weren't Stalinist enough and so got a free vacation to the labor camps.

      Research subject: Lysenko.

    5. Re:Facism has nothing to do with Communism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the stuff the Republican party (and parts of the Democrats) come out with would be labelled "extreme-right"/"neo-nazi" if a German party dared voice such views.


      I think what you really mean is that the caricature of the Republican party that you enjoy trotting out would be considered as such.

      The reality of the situation is, of course, very different.

    6. Re:Facism has nothing to do with Communism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Captitalism and fascism can be considered opposites.
      NSDAP - do you know that name ?
      Do you know what it stands for ?

    7. Re:Facism has nothing to do with Communism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is wrong with you ?

      Please, give me a single , a fucking single example of nazism or facism present in Republican party in US ?

      Do you even fucking know what nazism is ?
      No, it is not calling for closed borders and less immigration.

    8. Re:Facism has nothing to do with Communism by CharlezManning · · Score: 1
      Not completely true.

      Exhibit A: Look at that CIA/Spy exhibit somewhere on the www. See the cool passive cavity resonator transmitter the USSR planted in the US embassy that the USA could not figure out

      Exhibit B: Read USSR academic papers from the 1970s. World leaders in many kinds of materials research etc.

      Sure they didn't make commercial products worth jack, nor did they develop a Disney culture, but that does not mean their science was bad.

    9. Re:Facism has nothing to do with Communism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      funny, i didn't think caricatures had the power to quickly erode hundreds of years of constitutional guarantees (like the 4th amendment), but the republican controlled (i.e., christian right-wing controlled fanatical) government has.

    10. Re:Facism has nothing to do with Communism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The OED says that Fascism (note the correct spelling, monkey boy) is "(loosely) a person of right-wing authoritarian views."

      John Ashcraft, anyone? If you don't think that fundamentalist bastard wouldn't like to repeal all civil rights, in the name of Theological, oops i mean National, security, think again.

    11. Re:Facism has nothing to do with Communism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascism was a political movement founded by Benito Mussolini. It has come to mean any form of hierarchical government which seeks to gain power through violence, oppression, and propaganda. I will make no links whatsoever to any current Presidents of the United States.

  67. Maybe by Pac · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Maybe, at the time when a constitutional decision about abortion was needed, the right-wing religious and morality zealots, the same funny nutty guys who think their religion should be used to brainwash every children disguised as Science, the same terrorists who bomb legal abortion clinics, the same lunatics that blame September 11 on "lesbians and queers", maybe at that time these people couldn't organize in time to prevent the Courts to give this kind of freedom to American women.

    Maybe when a decision about cloning/harvesting was needed, those same maniacs that feel they have the right to impose their misguided views upon everybody had enough power to obtain such a decision from a simpathetic right wing Presidency.

  68. Oh geez, so lets talk about how capitalism began by HanzoSan · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    It takes hundreds of years for a Government to form, Many Capitalists governments fell apart, the USA was horrible back when it was founded, there was no real freedom, witches being stoned for not being proper religion, minories were enslaved for not being the proper color, etc etc

    If you look at all of American history and not the last 100 years, you'll see that the USA was at one time as bad if not worse than China, as bad as Russia at one point, It takes hundreds of years and generations for a government to mature.People learn from their mistakes.

    China may actually be a successful communist nation, if they manage to do it right.

    Theres nothing wrong with socialism either, theres many european countries which are socialist countries which are doing better than the USA such as NZ.I admit theres alot less people in places like NZ, but theres less people in the USA than in China.

    Capitalism is not the answer to everything, its one possible solution out of many other possible solutions.

    Capitalism can work, Communism can work, Socialism can work, each one of them have their flaws and limitations.

    Capitalism currently in the USA is decreasing our freedom and giving freedom to big business.

    Communism in China is decreasing the freedom of the Chinese, these problems arent problems with the style of government, but the people actually in office who make the laws.

    Corruption exsists in capitalism and in communism and currently we arent controlling our own government, chinese arent controlling their government, so both Capitalism and Communism have problems and no we do not have a Democracy and never really had one to begin with.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
  69. Interesting for the ethics not science. by Frodo.20 · · Score: 1

    This article is interesting not for any radicle scientific breakthrough (the work has been neither peer reviewed or verified) but for the comment it makes on Chinas current ethical regulations and human rights.

    Many people on this forum seem to think that this research is "bad" because America may somehow be left behind in the great cloning race. However private researchers have never been inhibited in America and it is ridiculous to believe that american science with all of its resources will be radically threatened by what is still a developing nation. American science (and buisness) is more likely to be threatened by European science which is allowing both public and private interests to go ahead with human therapeutic cloning.

    What is more worrying is that the slight advantage China may have is due to their lack of ethical regulation and disregard of human rights. While different cultures have different ethical standards the fact that these women were not fully consulted on the fate of their eggs and that human animal hybrids have been created is a real concern.

    We cannot hold back other countries technical progress and we should not abandon our own ethical regulations in order to become more competitive. However we should encourage other countries to hold high standards for ethical research and human rights.

    1. Re:Interesting for the ethics not science. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      But why would the rest of the world feel any need to listen to America?


      The USA is, increasingly, on its own when it comes to issues of ethics. For example, the USA is one of the few countries in the world that still uses capital punishment (others in this esteemed group are, of course, China, Sudan, Afghanistan, etc). The USA has also not signed the worldwide treaty on the banning of land mines, which kill plenty innocent people all over the world every year.


      Unfortunately when it comes to human rights, the USA is far from being in a position to dictate to other countries what they should and shouldn't be doing.

    2. Re:Interesting for the ethics not science. by Tazzy531 · · Score: 2
      Your statement:
      What is more worrying is that the slight advantage China may have is due to their lack of ethical regulation and disregard of human rights. While different cultures have different ethical standards the fact that these women were not fully consulted on the fate of their eggs and that human animal hybrids have been created is a real concern.
      From the Article:
      But regulations are far less restrictive in China. Lu, who directs a large fertility clinic, simply asked some of the dozens of women who walked through her door each day to donate their leftover eggs. She claims that now five per cent of her cloned embryos develop to blastocysts.


      So, I'm not sure where you are getting that the women were not fully consulted and also the part about human animal hybrids. Sounds like FUD to me... The article specifically said that the women were asked if they would like to donate the leftover eggs.

      Secondly, the "animal hybrid" that you mention is rather inaccurate. US Scientists have been using all types of mammals eggs to test human DNA. In addition, there are a number of Human-Animal testing that are currently taking place. Read here So it's not unusual for this to occur in the scientific field.

      Lastly, I agree with your last statement in that "we cannot hold back other countries technical progress." The main thing is that the East Asian culture has bred a totally different belief system that is not centralized on Christianity and/or a single god. There is very little stigmata towards donating unused eggs to research (It would otherwise be thrown out anyways) The belief is that it would probably benefit the society and science more through donating than from trashing the unused eggs.

      Other Human-Animal Articles
      http://cronkite.pp.asu.edu/med/Pages/clonself.html
      http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/monkey 010111.html
      http://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DailyNews/r abbit000918.html
      --


      _______________________________
      "I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
  70. Stem Cell research is not being hindered. by Picass0 · · Score: 3, Informative

    There is nothing that bans the cultivation of stem cells for medical research in the United States.

    The only policy that President Bush has established concerning stem cells said that an existing set of stem cell strains (aprox. 60) would recieve federal funding. That's not the same as outlawing or limiting future stem cell research.

    Other stem cell strains may be created, but not at federal expense. Medical Companies would need to use private financing to start future strains.

    1. Re:Stem Cell research is not being hindered. by Tazzy531 · · Score: 2

      I think your view on this is rather narrow. The problem isn't that the US government is not going to fund your stem cell research. The fact is, they are NOT going to fund anything done at your lab if there is stem cell research going on in it. This would be a MAJOR loss to a lab to lose federal funding on all of its research.

      Universities would lose a great portion of their grants if they were to even consider stem cell research. Major companies still rely on federal funding. It is only the smaller ones or the ones located in other countries that's going to succeed.

      The problem with this is this. Let's just say China does research and finds a cure for cancer (per se). Now 1) would the FDA approve this treatment? 2) Would you be willing to try a treatment that was not FDA approved? 3) Would the US respect the patent on this treatment (if there was one) or if Bush and his people are in power, will they just ignore the patent laws? (Look what they were considering to do with Cipro - allowing another company to produce a generic version at a cheaper price. And Cipro was produced in the US and is protected by US laws)

      --


      _______________________________
      "I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
    2. Re:Stem Cell research is not being hindered. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since the ban on federally funded stem cell research is primarily driven by conservative christians, I suspect any cures for cancer that are found in other parts of the world using said research would be adopted almost immediately. Those guys aren't known for being consistent when it is their own asses that are on the line.

  71. Why clone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do they need to clone organs when they have a thriving trade in organs harvested from prisoners?

  72. Abortion is legal in the USA, whats the diffrence. by HanzoSan · · Score: 2



    We have legalized abortion yet we respect human life all of the sudden? Come on. Be serious.

    If Abortion is legal, Stem Cell research should also be legal. Its the same thing, the only diffrence is you are actually making use of the embryols for a purpose which can actually save lives.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
  73. Western ethic != Human ethic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People here assume that Chinese people should have the same ethnic as western people. Not so. Shouldn't you be mature enough to know that the place you live is not the center of the world, and not all civilization come from Greece, and most part of the world don't believe in God? So why is cloning unethical while watching pron is fine?

  74. Cloning Morals? BAH! by idResponse · · Score: 1

    And the race is on...

    And this is how far the United States gets in the race for having issues with morality and letting their christian religion bully them into thinking the way they do about everything.

    If the US expects to get ahead, they really gotta pull their heads out of their asses and elect someone decent for president.

    --
    [)(]subliminal labs[)(]
    1. Re:Cloning Morals? BAH! by Tazzy531 · · Score: 2

      Not trying to be flamebait, but the fact is that a majority of the country did not vote for our president. Makes you wonder doesn't it?

      --


      _______________________________
      "I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
  75. Like the chinese really need this... by slashbrent · · Score: 2, Funny

    Doesn't China kind of have a little over-population problem as it is?

    Like to the tune of 1.2 BILLION people!

    ;-)

    --

    Moderators need an additional choice: "Karma Whore" for people who cut-and-paste articles as their comments!
  76. Anyone remember Kurt Russell in Soldier? by marko123 · · Score: 1

    Looks like it's not too far away before GI's find themselves outclassed and outacted (but fortunately not outsmarted or outsmoked ) by genetically modified soldiers.

    --
    http://pcblues.com - Digits and Wood
  77. Last Super Power on Earth ? by RembrandtX · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Its sad to think that I will probally be the last generation in my family to have known the USA as a technological superpower.

    With increasing restrictions on scientific study, assanine patent law, and scientific monopolies - it seems everyone is out for either the buck or the moral highground. [or a political office.]

    Hobbes would be proud, since he was the first to preach that to inturrupt the 'process' of god was a sin. Apparantly cloning (as well as violent video games and open source software) falls into this catagory.

    Am i using a sweeping generality , you betchya`. Is it far from the truth ? not really as far as I would like it to be.

    While i must say .. im registered as a Republician, and fairly conservative about stuff in general. I'm ironically a futurist. I think we should be more green, use cleaner technology, and improve our life/life style. But keeping the cost to future generations in account.

    Apparantly the way the govt slid the last 8 years, was to pander to the highest voting majority, go back to our 16th centruy religious roots, and avoid change.

    change apparantly is evil. and will destroy our 'family' values. Whatever values they have 'saved' in 15 years when people are mutating horribly due to all the petrolium toxins in the air/water/soil won't matter .. its TODAY that counts.

    As the US becomes more and more self centered and less a 'world' player .. we are going to isolate ourselves from new technology .. new ideas. [fun experiment, ask your average religious right how much the yen is at .. or the euro .. and see if they know.]

    Anyone see what japan did ? Japanese as a culture are rather xenophobic. [Just watch a 6 foot tall black man walk down a street in Yokohama .. and you will understand what i mean.] When a society isolates itself socially, it stagnates. They may have been a super-power economy once, but the bubble burst - and with that loss of economy, the last 40 years of growing pains are showing.

    Incest between mother and son is common due to bonds formed from 'exam' stress. Rape and molestation is practicaly a way of life for young girls. And 12 year old prostitutes in the Tokyo/yokahama area are not only common, but ALMOST accepted. Theft and crime, once unthinkable (outside organized gangs) are becoming common place.

    Again, im being general here .. some to make a point, some to save time.

    I just wonder, how much of 'protecting our values' Japan did 10-15 years ago. Are we repeating the same social mistakes? By refusing to let our scientists to explore? When our future is being decided by people who are holding onto beliefs that were founded 2000 years ago, when the world (to them) comprised of about 1/3 of europe - is that system equiped to handle the way the world is now ?

    would you choose to program your new graphics application in C++ ? or COBOL ?

    --

    --Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
    1. Re:Last Super Power on Earth ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      While i must say .. im registered as a Republician, and fairly conservative about stuff in general. I'm ironically a futurist. I think we should be more green, use cleaner technology, and improve our life/life style. But keeping the cost to future generations in account.


      Being "conservative" didn't always mean pandering to buisness interests above people. At one time, it meant being "conservative" with policies that affected the country. The cost to future generations of not improving our reliance on technology is the real number you have to take into consideration. There will always be people shouting about "lost jobs" or "God's will" when things change, and history has shown that those people have been wrong, over and over again.

    2. Re:Last Super Power on Earth ? by 10am-bedtime · · Score: 1
      the truth is: old cultures know how to stay alive. young cultures are too busy reveling in their newness. in old cultures, war and lesser intolerances are a deep sadness. in young cultures, war and lesser intolerances are a joy and inspiration. when the king no longer speaks the language of the people, war is the result. in old cultures, kings know better than to make this mistake.

      the immortal stone monkey was a king, and he smashed heaven w/ his cudgel. it was many leagues that he needed to walk w/ the pilgrim before he found the right fruit. look at all the lands, both prosperous and vile, he walked through. it was not enough to boil him a thousand times.

      thi

    3. Re:Last Super Power on Earth ? by nemesisj · · Score: 1

      "fun experiment, ask your average religious right how much the yen is at .. or the euro .. and see if they know"

      Hahahaha. Don't you mean "your average American"? Oh wait, don't you mean "your average person?" I've traveled to over 25 different countries in my life and I've never met a normal person who knows what the current exchange rate is for some other country that they do not have direct dealings with.

      Your statement implying that only religious right people are ignorant of the world is retarded.

    4. Re:Last Super Power on Earth ? by RembrandtX · · Score: 2

      actually .. both have been publicized heavily in the papers over here in the U.S. recently. The euro when europe switched .. the Yen just recently with the Steel embargos on Japan.

      I wouldn't have chosen those two examples if not for the publicity. [maybe I would have questioned the sales tax rate for the states that surround the one they live in .. or maybe even any other non U.S. country that won an olympic medal in the event of the questionee's choice.]

      I was,however, insinuating that religious right people ignore news that does not pertain to their (often) narrow view of the world. [generally the state they live in .. possibly how the government is letting those damn hippies ruin the country's 'family values'.] particularly over here in America, where medical doctors have been murdered becuase they performed an abortion sometime in their life. Or where large groups of religious people have manged to win frivilious law suits, or sway opinion vs the 'public' norm.

      example: here in maryland, one of the towns near D.C. refused to allow 'santa clause' to appear in their traditional thanksgiving parade. This was publicized as a 'town tradition' (grain of salt) The town banned 'santa' not becuase of the NYC bombing, not because of safty issues. But because a small (less than 20) group of religious people said it was insulting because they didn't believe in celebrating christmas.

      If that doesnt give me evidance that people who spout religious dogma can't influence society more than the 'average' american joe - well .. i would be surprized.

      A somewhat techno-geek example would be allowing a MSCE to replace all the Apples in public school learning labs with windows machines (at tax-payer expense) because 'they dont know how to maintain a MAC' rather than learning how to work the existing system.

      --

      --Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
    5. Re:Last Super Power on Earth ? by nemesisj · · Score: 1

      See, the really interesting thing about your viewpoint is that you want what you consider "the 'public' norm" to be accepted and the other viewpoint to be rejected. You preach tolerance, but you're intolerant of their personal beliefs, which they hold just as much as you hold yours.

      I agree with you, the murdering of abortion performing doctors is ridiculous, but so would most conservatives.

      I'd also be willing to bet you only read sources of news that are admittedly run almost entirely by liberals (i.e. USA Today, Time, Newsweek, pretty much any major news outlet in the US) and you probably never read something like National Review. That's fine with me, but it seems like this is a classic case of the pot calling the kettle black.

    6. Re:Last Super Power on Earth ? by RembrandtX · · Score: 1

      chuckle .. i don't care much for the mass media ..
      the wallstreet journal, and the local morning paper is all i really read for U.S. papers.
      more of a time factor than anything .. I have read the National Review . [I still read it , as well as what London and Tokyo(english) papers I can get my hands on when i visit the library .. but back to that time thing :( ]

      plus stuff online .. which saddly .. must be taken with just as much as a grain of salt as anything in print now adays.

      I generally don't read pulp mags either.

      I agree with you that most news outlets are very liberal .. which rubs me the wrong way sometimes. Journalism is supposed to be objective, not passion filled. It hard to get the facts when you are only give the ones that put the correct 'spin' on a story. Which means that the 'average' guy/gal probally wont have the time/resources to find out what the truth really is. Especially if it doesn't affect them.

      (case .. the current US "recession" .. when the media .. lacking anything better to talk about .. start saying that the economy is going to get worse, what does the general public do ? buy a new car ? or put $$ in the bank ? If the econmy is going to get worse .. and people stop spending $ is it going to get better any time soon ?)

      Yes ..I'm not a big fan of organized religion. However .. I'm not exactly saying 'Stone the God Fear-ers' here .. as far as i'm concened .. religion is a personal thing .. your conversations between you and your God/Goddess/Golden Statue/etc. Its for spititual enrichment of your soul. key words..

      *your soul* not mine, not the guy down the street, not President Bush's nor that bacteria in a petri dish's soul .. but yours.

      I'm more than willing to say that people deserve this right .. its what our country was founded on.. its the door-to-door-save-your-soul-peer-in-your-windows-t o-see-if-your-sinning folks that tork me off.

      most major religions say we have a choice in our actions, catholosism says that their God *gave* us that choice. to go full circle .. if their God gave us that choice .. who is the current gov't to take it away with 'religious overtones' ?
      [why did seperation of church & state happen in the first place?]

      im stating that political decisions for an entire country .. should be made with the *country* in mind.

      Broad sweeping general decisions, like *cloning is bad because it kills potential fetus* are very dangerous. [as im sure you agree] Are they acting in the nation's best interest ? like a true democratic gov't would ? Doubtful .. even Rome had corruption, and they had less stuff to distract them .. aside from Gaul .. that was a big one.

      It just scares the living pants of me whenever decisions like this are made because honestly .. there really is no 'majoity' in the U.S.A anymore . the only thing that comes close is the potential for 51% of the population to me female. [I have no idea what the national average is] but to try to get 51% of any other subset is almost impossible. Not to say that decisions should be based on 1/2 of the country .. but thats just an example.

      What I think i object more to than anything .. is basing a scientific decision, on a platform like religion. There isn't a religious group in the U.S.A (including Roman Catholics) that holds the majority of the country. Some groups (obviouly) of american citizens's religions have no issues with this .. Some american's .. *gasp* don't even believe in a higher power.

      What I wan't to know .. and what I object to .. is why are we making decisions that could stifle our progress as a race (human .. not colour) in this country, based on criteria that isn't a part of everyone's life.

      [yes yes . .i know .. if we don't consider beyond basic needs, then we have no society .. and i know im making this a lot simpler than it really is .. but im not writing a thesis here :P just chatting about my views :P]

      Lol ..don't mistake any of my rambling for getting my bristles up. I can get passionate about topics like this (and jump around in a topic like a monkey on speed) but really, discussing matters , in forums like /. really just lets me pin down my ever evolving values.

      who knows .. maybe tomorrow i'll think its a good decision. You can't form your opinions with out looking at opposing views.

      --

      --Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
  78. RE: "mutate" or modify already grown adults. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Somatic gene therapy uses a virus to deliver modified
    genes into a recipients cells. This could be used to
    create more efficient muscles or denser bones in adults,
    but extra ribs would have to be achieved surgically.

    Not that I actually believe (much) of the above Urban Legend.

  79. remember Neuromancer and Chiba city! by 11oh8 · · Score: 1

    Neuromancer predicted this pretty well: Gibson stated that the cutting edge of biotech will happen in places that don't have all the beurocratic hinderances of our society... where ethics (or lack thereof) allow for risky experimentation.

  80. We Are Not Succumbing to the Few by thedbp · · Score: 1

    Please keep in mind that the right-wing government that we have now is very firmly entrenched themselves in radically fundamentalist thinking. George Sr. regularly donated funds to the likes of Pat Robertson, Falwell, etc., supporting folks like Rev. Donald Wildman, helped out groups like the Eagle Forum (who belived that mathematics was dangerous to children because they teach a child that there are no absolutes, and once a child learns there are no absolutes, sooner or later, they turn to crime and drugs!).

    The American gov't is NOT succumbing to the radical beliefs of a few citizens. it is forwarding its OWN radically fundamental belief system. A lot of the nutjobs running the country right now SINCERELY BELIEVE that we are in the end times. A few of the more outspoken members of the aforementioned groups who have ties in gov't have stated that it is their calling on Earth to HELP BRING ABOUT THE END TIMES TO SPEEDILY BRING JESUS BACK TO EARTH.

    We are not dealing with a few radical citizens. We are dealing with a highly organized, highly motivated, and insanely rich regime who honestly belive that they are the chosen few.

    1. Re:We Are Not Succumbing to the Few by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well said.

      However you forgot the new $260 million "sex" "education" campaign which will *only* teach abstinance.

      Yet more reason why (as an Australian) I'm scared shitless of how the US will react to the rise of China. Historically civilisations confronted with major changes beyond their control (Athenian Greece, Islam at the end of its early glory days, China in the 19th century, much of the islamic world now) have retreated to a fundamentalist restatement of their core belief systems. I'm worried the US will end up as some sort of Christian Iran, but one with several times the population and economic resources and with enough nukes to wipe out China several times over.

      You've got a bunch in power whose scripture says that an apocalyptic war is (a) inevitable and (b) desirable (c) survivable by them.

      Be afraid, be very afraid...

    2. Re:We Are Not Succumbing to the Few by thedbp · · Score: 1

      That's probably not far from the truth :( I feel bad because you just KNOW the US would "ask" Australia to allow us to set up massive military posts and missle silos throughout the interior of the continent to deal with such an "uprising."

      Personally, I'm just tired of it. The entire always-war-usually-about-religeon thing. They can all blow me. If they can't keep it to themselves they all just need to shut up and stay out of each other's way, cuz they only people they're harming are the ones they purport to save. bastiches.

  81. For the last time, we dont have a democracy! by HanzoSan · · Score: 1, Flamebait



    The president of the republic of the united states of america decided on his own that stem cell research should be limited.

    This man was / is a christian and has a very biased point of view, but he desided for the you, you didnt vote.

    In fact you didnt even vote him into office, gore won the popular vote, the Democracy ruled in favor of Gore, the Republic however ruled in favor of Bush.

    We have a republic, the representatives in congress decide the laws not you, while you do vote to see who represents you, you do not control the government, the laws, or what these people do, these people are controlled by the Enrons of America.

    Listen, unless you are CEO of a billion dollar company, you have no control, the top 10% control the USA and really hows that much diffrent than a communist government where 10 percent controls everyone there, or any other type of government.

    A true Democracy which we have never really had, would mean each one of us would have the right to vote on every law, the DMCA would have had to get voted in by us and honestly theres no way that could have happened. Because we are a republic, all that has to be done to control our country is bribe the right people.

    China or any country could easily control our government, its simple, Sonys of the world, Toshibas and Matsushitas who happen to influence certain political figures could easily hyjack our government if there were enough big powerful Asian Companies.

    you see our government is like an open market,its controlled by Capitalism, anyone who has alot of $$ also has alot of control, and that is the flaw of Capitalism.

    $$ = Power, not votes, not respect by peers, not intellignece, not wisdom,.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:For the last time, we dont have a democracy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lie #1
      "The president of the republic of the united states of america decided on his own that stem cell research should be limited."

      He decided how FEDERAL MONEY should be spend.
      Private research can do whatever they want.

      Lie #2
      "This man was / is a christian and has a very biased point of view, but he desided for the you, you didnt vote."

      I voted for him in the general election knowing well his position on abortion and related issues.
      It is not like he changed his views overnight.
      Everyone who voted for him knew very well what he was all about.

      Lie #3
      "In fact you didnt even vote him into office, gore won the popular vote, the Democracy ruled in favor of Gore, the Republic however ruled in favor of Bush."

      This is the law of this country. It has been like that for the last 200 years.
      Democracy ruled in favor of Bush for each state democratically elected who should be out next president.

      Lie #4
      "Listen, unless you are CEO of a billion dollar company, you have no control, the top 10% control the USA and really hows that much diffrent than a communist government where 10 percent controls everyone there, or any other type of government."

      US people have plenty of freedom. They managed to
      abolish slavery, introduce various civil and consumer protection laws.
      I can only say that you have never seen communistic regime in action.

      Fact.
      "you see our government is like an open market,its controlled by Capitalism, anyone who has alot of $$ also has alot of control, and that is the flaw of Capitalism"

      Of course, but solution is NOT socialism which puts even more power into hands of politicians but less government where there is no need to bribe politicians for they have very little power to do anything.

    2. Re:For the last time, we dont have a democracy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      will you please log in when you write stuff like this? AC's rarely get moderated up, and this is insightful stuff.

  82. Any History Students Here? by Schlemphfer · · Score: 1

    From the Slashdot Summary:

    Chinese scientists are claiming a great leap forward in human cloning.

    Surely, I can't be the only person who gets nervous when the word "Chinese" appears in the same sentence as the phrase, "great leap forward."

    --
    I'm generally "Interesting," "Insightful," and even "Funny" here. What the hell happens to me at parties?
    1. Re:Any History Students Here? by nickynicky9doors · · Score: 2

      insightful and funny but, sorry, they won't let me moderate. ;)

      --

      heuristic algorithm seeks stochastic relationship
  83. Who gives a s***! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are better at child killing than we are--their mandatory 1 child law!

  84. The law has spoken by HanzoSan · · Score: 2


    Abortion is legal, which means sperms with eggs are legally not alive even if they are actually alive.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:The law has spoken by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope.

      It's just been decided that some forms of killing are okay.

  85. food for thought by FrenZon · · Score: 2, Funny

    I know this is extremely bad taste, but ..

    Now you're really going to have to worry about what you've got in your dim sims.

  86. Two pro-communist comments comments modded up +3 by aCapitalist · · Score: 0

    How fucking slashdot typical. Silly leftists

  87. more people?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great, all we need is for a communist country to learn to clone humans. We're done for.

    If my ether wasn't full, I'd tip toe accross and get me some wire for, you know.

    That's not even the issue here. It's demographics, it's computers, it's my whole existance in one tinfoil ball.

  88. The only thing we can be sure of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...is that the one country that beats us in anything technical won't be in Africa.

    Don't deny it. You know it's true.

  89. Re:Oh geez, so lets talk about how capitalism bega by puiwah · · Score: 1

    If by "NZ" you mean New Zealand (and I'm not aware of any other country sharing this abbreviation), then as a kiwi I must take umbrage: my home country is neither a European country - far from it - nor a socialist one. Furthermore it's arguable whether New Zealand or any other developed nation is "doing better" than the USA (in NZ's case I could argue either way) unless you focus your attention on particular statistics or attributes. P

  90. Real capitalism by HanzoSan · · Score: 2


    Would mean we'd all be consultants, and start our own businesses, small ones of course.. Big business is actually bad for the economy because it decreases competition, innovation and people get paid less

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:Real capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In another post you just wrote that if it weren't for lack of freedom communism societies would leave us in the dust as far as science and economy is concerned.
      Now you are claiming that big business is bad for economy.
      Do you realize that communism is definition of ultimately biggest business possible.
      Everything own by the single entity and everyone is working in a single chain of command.
      You have single set of salaries determined by some fuck up there for entire country etc ...

      To summarize, you don't have a fucking clue what are you talking about.

    2. Re:Real capitalism by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Big business is ok if there are a lot of them, and if they are competing against each other (not co-operating against the little guy). Unfortunately, what we have these days is a few HUGE businesses, buying each other up, and making deals with each other to the detriment of small businesses, employees, customers. And buying the government.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  91. China doesn't care how many people it kills ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    China doesn't care how many people it kills to meet a goal and has plenty of history to show it.

    Dissidents being killed (Tinamen massacre to stop democracy).
    People killed for their religous beliefs (Tibet, Falun Gong, Christians...).
    Babies killed/women forced sterilizations and abortions (to force birth control).
    Prisoners killed to provide organs for transplants.

    And now they don't care how many babies they kill in support this research.

    I'll take living in the US with all its problems, thank you very much.

  92. Re:Oh geez, so lets talk about how capitalism bega by HanzoSan · · Score: 2

    NZ is not capitalist either, you can go to college for free, hell you even get allowances from the government.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
  93. Re:Oh geez, so lets talk about how capitalism bega by mqduck · · Score: 1

    NZ is not capitalist either, you can go to college for free, hell you even get allowances from the government.

    Free education from the state does NOT a socialist nation make. Socialism is about where the means of production is, in the hands of rich indivuals, or the nation as a whole.

    --
    Property is theft.
  94. Re:Mixed, shaken not stirred by nickynicky9doors · · Score: 2

    I rarely bother to react to reactionary statements, but what with the distemper attendant upon a bout of the flu, bitchslapping an idiot has a perverse appeal.

    Column A is vacuous and needn't be commented upon further.

    Column B is idiotic. China's 'rich cultural heritage' is rife with xenophobic internecine warfare. The present regime is but the latest set of warlords. I've worked with and for Chinese families of substantial wealth, they were urbane, informed and loath to live in China. The Chinese mythos has long held the 'middle kingdom' will 'soon' rule the earth. It's quite funny to hear a chinese person self-deprecatingly state the inevitable rise to world dominance of the Chinese people. It's like they really don't want to rule the earth but destiny *is* destiny. China can barely feed it's people. The Three Gorges Dam is a grandiose scheme to implement a hydroelectric panacea. China historically came 'online', if you will, by development of a series of canal works, but the Three Gorges Dam is thought to be fundamentally flawed and might well silt up in plus/minus thirty years. Long stretches of China's rivers are dead. Environmentally China is a sludge pressure cooker overheating. China had damn well better scramble to advance every and any frontier of learning because in all likelihood when the shit (night soil) hits the fan over the next decade or two were all going to be splattered and forced to help clean up the mess.

    cheers
    --

    heuristic algorithm seeks stochastic relationship
  95. Re:Oh geez, so lets talk about how capitalism bega by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are just uninformed fuck.
    You have never seen what real socialism can do to peoples lives.
    Don't make me laugh.

  96. The asians are going to surpass us again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is insanity... We need to research this kind of medical science. This science will lead to some of the greatest medical miracles we've ever created, and we Amercians aren't going to have any part in reaping the rewards of it. Communist China is going to be able to grow organs and we won't be able to because we have some religous zealots as politicians who are holding back major progress in medical science because they think that a collection of cells which hasn't even formed a rudimentary brain yet is a human life. Next thing you know they're going to make mastrubation illegal... all those poor deaad viable sperm!

    America has been making stupid ass mistakes for years. Instead of making more energy efficient cars, we make bigger gas guzzlers. Then who do we need to go to for technology when we need cars which are more fuel efficient? Japan.

    Intel is like the only technology company we have which can compete with what Japan puts out. And I'll bet they're not going to be around forever.

    Japan embrade "fuzzy logic" as our scientists laughed at it, and now they've made all kinds of advances in AI that have enabled them to make walking robots, washing machines that change the wash cycle based on how dirty the clothes are and what kind of dirt is on them, and even robotic pets that have sophisticated behavior and actually learn to walk themselves.

    Well now here comes China. We here in the west have had pretty competitive medical science before now, but China is going to make leaps and bounds and they're going to become the next Japan with the advancs they make in medical science.

    Our governmnet is sure to have the same sort of sactions they have on Cuba... They'll try to make it illegal to buy generated organs from China, but you know as well as I do that that won't stop someone who needs a heart transplat. Hell it won't stop me. If I need a heart transplant then communist china here I come. Sure, I'd rather not support communism, but if our leaders are so short sighted that I have to choose death or communism, guess which one I'll choose when the time comes.

    1. Re:The asians are going to surpass us again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Up until December I worked for one of the major biomedical electronics companies. About a year ago they moved the Engineering library, which means they set out on a quest to cull all the junk books from the library.

      You wouldn't believe how many 'Fuzzy Logic' books they had to get rid of. I also got a good hardbound copy of Taguchi's two volume book on his 'method.'

      Fuzzy Logic panned out to be fad psuedo-engineering. Everybody figured that out after awhile. If the Japanese succeeded with it, it must have something to do with some other deficiency in their way of engineering, because it's largely been characterized a bunch of hooey in the United States. Maybe there's some cultural difference.

    2. Re:The asians are going to surpass us again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats' a load of shit. Our brains work on "fuzzy logic". Many games use a combination of fuzzy logic and state machines for their AI... such as "The Sims", which determines the bahavior of each individual based on 20 diffrent variables each contributing to the final decision for what the character should do.

      And yes, it is a cultural thing which caused Americans to ignore Fuzzy Logic for so long... we finally did start to embrace it, but if what you say is true, then we're just making the same mistake over again. What next, are we going to declare string theory stupid and go back to the seprate quantum mechanics and special realitivty models because nobody wants to believe the universe is really made up of 10 or more dimensions?

      Sad.

    3. Re:The asians are going to surpass us again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow, a bunch of hooey? i didn't think people (who don't think sex with their farm animals can be a beautiful thing) said that anymore. I stand corrected. Or do I not?

  97. Probably turns out like the last one... by lelitsch · · Score: 1

    China really doesn't have a good track record on "great leaps forward". megastories.com

  98. Maybe this is why... by cassandy · · Score: 1

    You were wondering why abortion would be legal but stem-cell research and emybro cloning wouldn't be?

    Here's why

    Abortion is the elimination of a human embryo which was accidently created, or was never meant to be created

    Embyro and stem cell research requires creating human embryos which will all be elimated, but were explicitly created for this purpose

    Big difference here.

    Scientists who do stem cell research create fertilized human embyros (at which point some people consider life to have started), wait until they divide a few times, then extract the stem cell, which kill the embryos. No matter what, these embryos will be destroyed.

    That is the big difference between abortion and stem cell/embryo research

    --
    Have you thought about what you're looking at today?
  99. Re:Oh geez, so lets talk about how capitalism bega by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought it was about 'the dictatorship of the proletariat' and other such things.

    Or is that still just part of the 'transition toward socialism' or whatnot?

    ----------
    Face it, people, an independent non-Communist historian has now had access to the secret archives in the Kremlin, and he's written a biography of Stalin. All the crimes of the Communists are being written up. You can NOT any longer claim the lies the ComIntern spread.

  100. Re:Two pro-communist comments comments modded up + by skwirl42 · · Score: 1
    I see your nick is aCapitalist. Then I assume you think Microsoft should be destroyed, since it represents the end of capitalism.

    In any case, we kill animals, right? And very few people are saying we should change that. Aren't we also animals? Especially if we're capitalists. Capitalism is the animal ideal, true competition and freedom from regulation (whether from state or monopolies). Therefore, capitalists should be all for killing humans, if it promotes competition and progress.

    Of course, if you're a Christian, you have no right to call yourself a capilist as well. This is due to the fact that Christ preached communism. If you disagree, go read the New Testament more carefully.

  101. Morality???? by dosun88888 · · Score: 1

    It's not a moral issue, it's a definition issue. At what point does a person exist? When it's still a separate sperm and egg? When it's one of possibly many fertilized eggs that begin to grow? If this is the case, then masturbation would be murder a million times over, and the fetuses themselves would be guilty of murder when they deprive other fertilized eggs from developing even to fetus-hood.

    Why not just answer that question once and for all, and be done with it?

    Morality is the word given to behaviors that are logically flawed due to lack of fully understanding what you're really even wanting to behave like. It's one of those subjective things that people keep around solely to use to sling mud at each other.

    ~D

  102. Awesome! by forii · · Score: 1
    Cool! It's also the source for the video where I can identify the Beast of Revelation. (I bet it's that sneaky guy down at the corner market, personally).


    Since we're dealing with such reputable sources, here's another book that might be of interest.

  103. You meant Japan? China's a different matter! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I assume you mean Japan.

    The problem with the Japanese/Asian model is that the very discipline and ability to centrally marshall resources in a specific direction that makes them so powerful *when they're catching up* (ie they have a visible target) seems to fall apart when they reach technological parity. At that stage a whole lot of other skills are needed, notably a sense of individuality and ability to stick out from the crowd, which go right against this model. The transition that is needed then is not so much economic as *social*.

    So Japan, after a miraculous come-back from World War 2 and breakneck growth until c. 1989, has wasted the last decade working out where to go now that they've achieved parity to the West.

    The old idea that Japan would just zoom off into the distance is dead; with a population less than half that of the USA or the EU the economy will never be large enough to challenge either.

    China is another matter, by sheer weight of numbers. Its population is c. 3 times that of the USA or EU, and it is going through a typical authoritarian state-capitalist Asian economic boom, like Japan in the '50's or South Korea in the '60's. *ALL CHINA HAS TO DO IS REACH 1/3 OF THE GDP/CAPITA OF THE USA OR EU AND IT HAS AN ECONOMY JUST AS POWERFUL*. If, as I'd expect, the Asian model works to take them up to GDP/capita similar to the US or EU within the next few decades, their economy will be *three times larger*! It doesn't matter if they stall then; if all they do is maintain parity they'll still be the biggest economy in the world unless a miracle happens in India or Latin America forms a trade block and gets its act together.

    Don't forget China

    (a) for most of the last 2000 years has been the most advanced civilisation on the planet

    (b) following from that they have their own sense of "manifest destiny" which rivals that of the US; they want to get back to being the Middle Kingdom again

    (c) they've learnt some very hard lessons from being ripped apart by the Western powers and Japan in the 19th Century not to get too navel-gazing in the future

    (d) the population mightn't like their current rulers, but if they believe the alternative is the terminal chaos that devastated China from the mid-19th Century to the mid-'70's they'll stay in line as long as the money keeps rolling.

    (e) Chinese society has always taken a *very* much longer view of time than the West [note Zhao En-Lai's famous comment when asked about the impact of the French Revolution; he said that it was too early to tell!!!]

    (f) unlike Japan, China does not have to live down a militarist past and hence can be more confident and independent in its foreign policy

    This was going to be the century of Japan. It will instead be the century of China. Shanghai will take over from New York as the world's de facto capital. The next footsteps on the moon will be those of Chinese.

    America; make the most of your last couple of decades of world dominance.

  104. Relinquishment is dumb! by WillWare · · Score: 2
    Who's going to pursue this more ethically?

    Amen to that!

    Whenever we relinquish a technology because we feel we're ethically "above that sort of thing", we run the risk that the technology will be picked up by people with WAY less moral scruples. Relinquishment pushes technology into the hands of the unethical, the very thing we'd hope to avoid by relinquishing in the first place.

    There's then this tricky problem: how do we keep a strong technical lead in an ethically problematical area of technology? Historically we've done it with black ops. Maybe that's what would work here. Then again, there have recently been advances that may make Bush's unfortunate decision moot: it is now possible to extract a stem cell from an adult human that is fully capable of differentiating into any cell type.

    So now, maybe we can have our cake and eat it too. If the Chinese make huge gains using fetal stem cells, but we can do all the same stuff with stem cells from adults, then their putative technological lead becomes a tempest in a teapot.

    --
    WWJD for a Klondike Bar?
  105. What a grotesque way of putting it... by sgage · · Score: 1

    "Harvesting"

    Yeah, just like a fucking corn field. Not only grotesque, but disgusting.

  106. You could end the debate in only 10 words . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been saying for over 5 years now that you could end the debate in Congress over stem cell and human cloning research in only 10 words:
    When clones are outlawed, only Saddam Husein will have clones.
    If those words were uttered in congress, debate would end, papers would be slipped into breifcases, and after a quiet moment the words "Next subject for debate" would be uttered.

  107. Stem Cell Research by Napiers+Bones · · Score: 1

    Interesting the China and Great Britain are now pursuing stem-cell research although it may have little effect on the bovine mentality of our legislators.

    The last time this kind of ethical brouhaha occurred was with encryption, when RSA had patents and Zimmerman was in trouble regarding exporting PGP.

    I was trying in the early eighties to export hardware to China for Oil Accounting, but was prevented from doing so. What a joke! Our partners walked across the Hong Kong border an purchased grey market equipment!

    Now we have the ethical wringing of hands in the Beltway over stem cell research...louder only than the wringing of hands over Enron profits and subsequent guilt.

    Many Americans suffering from Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and so forth could do with some honest, regulated, stem-cell research to help alleviate their suffering.

    Meanwhile, lip service to the primitives in this country takes precedence over common sense. So, maybe China will produce the breakthrough and people suffering from Parkinsons will have implants there AND see the Great Wall!

    Unfortunately the Great Wall here is in our legislators' minds, those of the great paedophilic Catholic church and the pre-Darwinians in such places as Tennessee and Kansas.

    Go China!

  108. Great leap forward? by ErikZ · · Score: 1


    I can't be the only one here that cringes every time "Great leap forward" and "China" are mentioned together.

    --
    Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    1. Re:Great leap forward? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 'Great Leap Forward' was when Mao tried to convince all the peasants that they should implement 'backyard steel mills.' Basically the Party decided to decentralize steel production. It was an economic disaster.

      There were other 'leaps' made during that period of Chinese history, too. Very few of them were forward leaps.

  109. Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    I read the full article about human cloning in "The Wall Street Journal". The article is indeed shocking because the Chinese people have approached the issue of cloning in the usual fashion: total lack of ethics. The Chinese have not expressed any concern whatsoever for the moral implications of cloning.

    By contrast, look at our American society in the West. We have debated the issue of cloning. We have expressed grave concern over its moral implications. Heck, even the Japanese have publically debated the issue of cloning and expressed grave concerns.

    This Chinese behavior with regards to cloning is consistent with previous Chinese behavior. For example, immediately after the American nation froze or withdrew investments from mainland China just after the Tienanmen incident in 1989, the Chinese from Taiwan and Hong Kong immediately seized this market opportunity and poured billions of dollars of investment into mainland China. As another example, the Chinese on Taiwan use their constitution to declare that Tibet is part of mainland China while the Chinese People's Liberation Army torture and kill Tibetan nuns.

    I really wish that people in the West would wake up. We should stop thinking that, somehow, the Chinese people are like us in the West. They are not. They are very different from us. We foolishly extol the Chinese values that we shallowly see among Chinese immigrants in the West.

    We should look deeper. The Chinese are over-represented in our engineering and business schools at our elite universities. Yet, the Chinese are under-represented at meetings of Amnesty International at those very same universities. Why?

    This observation is consistent with the story about cloning in China. The Chinese will use this cloning technology to achieve whatever unethical goals that they can envision. The Chinese have no ethics. The Chinese can understand engineering (in this case, genetic engineering), but they refuse to understand the basic tenets behind Amnesty International.

    What follows is some observations, backed by verifiable sources, about the Chinese.

    1. Most Chinese in Hong Kong support the return of Hong Kong to mainland China. A CNN/Time survey showed, in fact, that 60% of the Chinese in Hong Kong support the return of Hong Kong to mainland China. (reference: "Poll: Hong Kong residents optimistic" ) While East Timorese fought and died for independence from the oppressive Indonesian government, the Chinese in Hong Kong cheered the mainland Chinese government.

    2. The constitution of the Chinese living in Taiwan supports the integration of both Tibet and Mongolia into mainland China. While Tibetans suffer and die at the hands of the Chinese People's Liberation Army, the Chinese in Taiwan support integrating Tibet into "One China".

    3. The Chinese son of the chairman of a powerful conglomerate in Taiwan has joined with the son of Jiang Zemin, the butcher of Tibet, to build an advanced silicon-wafer factory in Shanghai. (reference: "Sons of prominent Chinese team up on chip venture")

    4. Senior Chinese military officials retired from the Taiwanese military have gone to mainland China and given military secrets about the American F-16 fighter jet to the Beijing government. (reference: "Military secrets on sale to China")

    5. Most Chinese, including those living in the United States of America, support the territorial ambitions of mainland China. Most Chinese support integrating Tibet into mainland China. Most Chinese support integrating the Spratleys into mainland China. Most Chinese support integrating the Senkaku islands into mainland China.

    6. Most Chinese support Beijing's attempt to use torture and murder to crush the Falun Gong. Indeed, the Beijing government has funded anti-Falun-Gong meetings within the United States itself. These meetings within the United States are attended by the very same Chinese who fight with tooth and nail to stay permanently in the United States of America.

    7. The Chinese from "poor, little, scared" Taiwan have invested more than $50 billion into more than 50,000 businesses in mainland China. How did this phenomenon happen? Immediately, after the Tienanman Square incident back in June 4, 1989, the American government and businesses curtailed investments in mainland China. The Taiwanese (and the other Chinese in Hong Kong) seized this window of opportunity and accelerated investments into mainland China. The rate of investments from Taiwan into China has skyrocketed to the present levels; investments continue to grow at double-digit rates. (In 1999, the "Wall Street Journal" reported that of all the Chinese arrested and convicted of stealing American military technology to give to Beijing, the majority of these Chinese came from Taiwan.)

    8. These observations are not an exaggeration of any kind. At your university, attend your local meeting of Amnesty International. The engineering and business schools will have plenty of Chinese people, but there will be virtually _NO_ Chinese faces in a meeting of Amnesty International. Chinese (and other Orientals) are over-represented in engineering and business schools, but they are under-represented in meetings of Amnesty International. Why?

    So few Americans really know anything about Chinese society. We Americans are kind-hearted and naive. We simply assume that the Chinese are "just like us" and that the Chinese are simply (financially) poorer versions of ourselves. In reality, the Chinese are not like us. They are poor, but they are _NOT_ like us.

    1. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by Genjuro+Kibagami · · Score: 1
      Who are you to impose a global ethical standard on anyone? Ethics is a totally subjective ideal and there is no act that can alone be considered wrong or right, even in the post S11 environment of today.

      1. Most Chinese in Hong Kong support the return of Hong Kong to mainland China. A CNN/Time survey showed, in fact, that 60% of the Chinese in Hong Kong support the return of Hong Kong to mainland China. (reference: "Poll: Hong Kong residents optimistic [cnn.com]" ) While East Timorese fought and died for independence from the oppressive Indonesian government, the Chinese in Hong Kong cheered the mainland Chinese government.

      Hong Kong was leased to the British at the free will of mainland China, People in Hong Kong are Chinese. The Chinese government had stated prior to it's resumption of ownership of Hong Kong that they had no intention of interfering with the winning economics of the prosperous island, so why wouldn't the residents be happy?

      East Timor was forcefully invaded and brutally repressed for 30 years after the Dutch withdrew from the island and granted it independence in order to maintain regional stability.

      Apples and Oranges.

      2. The constitution of the Chinese living in Taiwan supports the integration of both Tibet and Mongolia into mainland China. While Tibetans suffer and die at the hands of the Chinese People's Liberation Army, the Chinese in Taiwan support integrating Tibet into "One China".

      The Taiwanese are in a very delicate political situation, posturing from them draws posturing from the mainland and it is irresponsible and provocative of war not to pet the kitty whilst it's claws are out and threatening. Do you know the real opinion of the residents of Taiwan in relation to the issue of Tibet? Have you been there? have you asked them?

      3. The Chinese son of the chairman of a powerful conglomerate in Taiwan has joined with the son of Jiang Zemin, the butcher of Tibet, to build an advanced silicon-wafer factory in Shanghai. (reference: "Sons of prominent Chinese team up on chip venture [taipeitimes.com]")

      Wasn't Mao the reigning chairman at the time of the invasion of Tibet, how did Jiang Zemin earn the title of Butcher of Tibet? as for the advanced silicon-wafer factory in Shanghai, so what? More ridiculous hypocritical prattle from the Americans about how their local industries will be irrepairably damaged by free trade? Free Trade was something that developed countries with the US at the forefront were supposed to be pushing strongly, and Dubya Bush sticks a 40% tarrif on imported steel products, unilaterally defying the vaunted WTO, to protect the sacred cows in the rust belt, currying favour for the Republican party just ahead of the congressional elections.

      I really really hate hypocrisy

      4. Senior Chinese military officials retired from the Taiwanese military have gone to mainland China and given military secrets about the American F-16 fighter jet to the Beijing government. (reference: "Military secrets on sale to China [taipeitimes.com]")

      What military secrets about the F-16 fighter jet? The piece of technology in question is over 10 years old, do you honestly think that they didn't already know everything relevant about it? What's left to know? Dimensions? Top speed? Armament Capability? All of this information is public domain from the manufacturer and various general knowledge sources

      5. Most Chinese, including those living in the United States of America, support the territorial ambitions of mainland China. Most Chinese support integrating Tibet into mainland China. Most Chinese support integrating the Spratleys into mainland China. Most Chinese support integrating the Senkaku islands into mainland China.

      Have you studied the issues behind why the Senkaku Islands should / should not be integrated into the Mainland? You've taken a position and not explained why, I'm not going to criticise your position because I don't understand the individual issues you're referring to well enough, except perhaps for Tibet, Which you've already gone over and I've already talked about re point 1.

      6. Most Chinese support Beijing's attempt to use torture and murder to crush the Falun Gong. Indeed, the Beijing government has funded anti-Falun-Gong meetings within the United States itself. These meetings within the United States are attended by the very same Chinese who fight with tooth and nail to stay permanently in the United States of America.

      And that is a prime example of hypocrisy to take such a stance against a spiritual movement in such an accepting country as America.

      Didn't know many Branch Davidians? Never heard of WACO?

      Let the nation state without sin cast the first stone, hint, it won't be the US.

      And on the same subject, do you even know why the mainland government is attempting to repress Falun Gong, or have you merely accepted the spoonfed mainstream press info that they're doing it because they're mean and nasty?

      I'm not saying that Falun Gong is the root of all evil, but you don't say anything in your statement that could be construed as a rebuke to the Mainland government's stance on the issue.

      7. The Chinese from "poor, little, scared" Taiwan have invested more than $50 billion into more than 50,000 businesses in mainland China. How did this phenomenon happen? Immediately, after the Tienanman Square incident back in June 4, 1989, the American government and businesses curtailed investments in mainland China. The Taiwanese (and the other Chinese in Hong Kong) seized this window of opportunity and accelerated investments into mainland China. The rate of investments from Taiwan into China has skyrocketed to the present levels; investments continue to grow at double-digit rates. (In 1999, the "Wall Street Journal" reported that of all the Chinese arrested and convicted of stealing American military technology to give to Beijing, the majority of these Chinese came from Taiwan.)

      That is merely an example of intelligent people exploiting the not so clever actions of a group of self hating foreigners. The outcome of the withdrawal of foreign investment should have been obvious. Not to say that it shouldn't have been done, but what did you expect? He with the least scruples wins.

      8. These observations are not an exaggeration of any kind. At your university, attend your local meeting of Amnesty International. The engineering and business schools will have plenty of Chinese people, but there will be virtually _NO_ Chinese faces in a meeting of Amnesty International. Chinese (and other Orientals) are over-represented in engineering and business schools, but they are under-represented in meetings of Amnesty International. Why?

      Amnesty international is the yardstick of your global ethical scale? Go look for Americans at a Shanghai Buddhist temple and tell me how many you find, then compare that number with the number of Chinese people in your local Amnesty International chapter, then cram it up your ass and stop spouting mindless mainstream spoonfed crap.

      Cheers.

    2. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "there is no act that can alone be considered wrong or right"

      Okay, I refuse to read the rest of a post that begins like this. That's all we need is a world full of people who think nothing can be considered wrong or right.

    3. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. Most Chinese feel that there is no absolute right or wrong. So, naturally, most Chinese see nothing wrong with either torturing Tibetans or harvesting organs from prisoners who are still alive. Most Chinese see nothing wrong with plunging headlong into human cloning without considering any moral implications.

      Of course, most Chinese disdain organizations like Amnesty International.

    4. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by SEE · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Who are you to impose a global ethical standard on anyone? Ethics is a totally subjective ideal and there is no act that can alone be considered wrong or right,

      Who are you to object to his imposing a global ethical standard on anyone? If ethics are a totally subjective ideal, then how can his act of imposition be considered wrong or right?

    5. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by jnana · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Who are you to impose a global ethical standard on anyone? Ethics is a totally subjective ideal and there is no act that can alone be considered wrong or right, even in the post S11 environment of today.

      Your position is untenable. Do you really want to cling to ethics as subjective? It means that it is okay if a country decides to raise 98% of its people so that they can be slaves to the remaining two percent (literally slaves), perhaps they even get killed and eaten at age 35, when they have outlived their usefulness but still taste pretty good and serve as a good food resource for the 2%?

      Your bullshit argument basically amounts to saying that we weren't justified in doing anything about Hitler, because ethics is a subjective thing, and we can't impose our subjective values on somebody else or interfere with their own culturally valid ways of life. And should governments not impose laws that regulate conduct, since everybody has their own subjective interpretation of ethics?

    6. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, quite a load crap from someone whose ancestors not long ago enslaved other races and treated them in the most unethical and inhumane way possible. Your arguments choose to focus on the worse of the Chinese society, which manifests itself in every society, and more abstractly human nature.

      The Chinese society at this stage is more concentrated on survival than anything else. You could say it's not as mature as the Western society in certain areas such as human rights, the environment etc. Every society has to progress initially from the survival stage to a more rounded one. I love it when some pompous western guy criticizes China in terms of human rights and the environment while sitting comfortably in his sofa. Why do you guys care? Are you somehow more ethical than, say, the Chinese? I have big news for you buddy, and the answer is no. You care because you can afford to. When your own survival is no longer at stake, and I mean this literally in terms of food, shelter, healthcare etc, your mind begins to concentrate on other things. With the current China, I'll tell you what would really be unethical- for the government to not try everything possible to make her country competitive so she can feed its billion plus people. Of course, sitting comfortably in your living room mouthing down a steak, you tend to see pass that, and concentrate on the finer ethics in life.

      Get off your high horse buddy. The Western society is no more ethical than the Chinese, nor the other way around. Every society evolves naturally to best ensure its own survival and interest. What works for the west at the moment doesn't for China. It has a lot less to do with ethics, and more with survival. Get it?

    7. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by sydneyfong · · Score: 1

      If ethics are a totally subjective ideal, then how can his act of imposition be considered wrong or right?

      According to your argument, his act of imposition cannot be considered wrong, BUT his imposition of his standards to others does not stand, and his argument against the Chinese does not stand either, because he should not have imposed his ethics on the Chinese in the first place.

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    8. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Chinese simply do not believe in a universal concept of right and wrong. Witness their disdain for Amnesty International. This organization is founded on the thesis that a universal concept of human rights exists.

      What is bizarre is the following. The Chinese support the brutal occupation of Tibet and insist that we Americans have no right to use our standard of right and wrong to condemn the brutality committed by Chinese against the Tibetans. Yet, these very same Chinese fight with tooth and nail to enter the United States of America (USA), a nation created on the belief that there is a universal concept of right and wrong.

      What a morally bankrupt society is China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong.

    9. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is really bizarre is this coming from someone whose' ancestors have mass enslaved people and treat them less than animals not so long ago.

      Stop talking out of your arse my friend. Asian values may be different from western, but ultimately no better or worse.

    10. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brutally occupy the Tibet?

      I wonder how they got hold of Afghanistan...

      Based on a belief of universal concept of right and wrong?? Or is it "based on a belief that they set the rules of right and wrong"? After all, if no single group sets the standards, nothing is universal.

    11. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by maxpublic · · Score: 3

      By contrast, look at our American society in the West. We have debated the issue of cloning. We have expressed grave concern over its moral implications.

      Actually, "the West" hasn't "expressed grave concerns" over the moral implications of cloning. You say this as if we, a unified body of First World nations, think cloning is eeeeeeevil.

      Fact is, there's a great deal of disagreement on the subject - no unity whatsoever. And as the strongest objections seem to be made by religious fanatics with no scientific background in the biological sciences, I can see why the Chinese might find much of the debate specious and rooted in Western-style religious fundamentalism.

      Hell, I'm an American and that's the way I see it. Yet another bunch of clueless idiots who've seen one to many 'evil clones kill people' horror flicks and think that this is somehow going to happen in real life....

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    12. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by Genjuro+Kibagami · · Score: 1
      Your bullshit argument basically amounts to saying that we weren't justified in doing anything about Hitler, because ethics is a subjective thing, and we can't impose our subjective values on somebody else or interfere with their own culturally valid ways of life. And should governments not impose laws that regulate conduct, since everybody has their own subjective interpretation of ethics?

      No it doesn't. Hitler had an overt policy of extermination of people based on racial prejudice and massively expansionist goals far past the limits of even the former greater German Empire, he was perfectly willing to interfere with the rights of other states and impose his own subjective morallity on the residents thereof, he got a taste of his own medicine.

      I'd humbly put the suggestion that you don't have a clue what you're talking about and that 98% / 2% statistic was, like 98% of statistics, this one inclusive, pulled out of your ass. You offer no supporting collaborative evidence of your accusations, you just throw them around like a little boy in search of something to hate / stand up against because by god your way of life shall not be challenged by this fscking yellow peril.

      As for governments imposing laws that regulate conduct, only in so far as necessary for the functioning of society. That really doesn't go much further than murder, and theft, and the many variations thereof. Governments as they are are so malignant and pathetic my humble opinion is that we'd be millions of times better off without them.

      So in response, it requires no clinging, ethics *is* subjective, purely. Even with your direct-from-fresh-ass statistics it's still up to the population in question to decide whether what is being done to them is ok, and if it's not, revolt.

    13. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by jnana · · Score: 1
      No it doesn't. Hitler had an overt policy of extermination of people based on racial prejudice and massively expansionist goals far past the limits of even the former greater German Empire...

      Hitler's policies are irrelevant to the topic under discussion. It was an example of something that you can't say is wrong and can't be justified in taking action against if you assume a subjectivist point of view--only one example among many.

      Regarding your comment about my "statistic": you should learn to read, because you didn't get any statistic from reading my words. It was a thought experiment. I in no way said or even implied that it was supposed to represent reality in any way, and I don't know how you could so misconstrue my point.

      Let me spell it out for you even more clearly:

      1. To the extent that 'anything goes', life becomes a might makes right affair, without the right.
      2. If there is nothing more than subjectivist ethics (which is something of an oxymoron; aesthetics is probably are better term), then you cannot say that Hitler did anything wrong. All you can say is that you don't like Hitler's or Mao's policies, etc. But they are just as right or wrong as you, me, or Gandhi, since 'right' and 'wrong' have become utterly vacuous.
      3. In the end, all you can say in the way of justification for any action is "I did what I did because I wanted to". It isn't a solid foundation upon which to build or sustain civilizations.

      From a very high level, I do believe that there is no such thing as right and wrong, apart from conventions as to what is right and wrong. But there are some fundamental axioms and principles of reasoning that we probably all agree on (which will of necessity be a restricted subset of the axioms and principles of any actual culture or worldview). This can constitute a "functionally objective" ethics that all can agree to, and all the stuff that falls outside that space bounded by the agreed upon axioms, principles of reasoning, and everything derivable from them, is cultural and "functionally conventional".

      It is all conventional, ultimately, but that doesn't mean that we don't all agree on some conventions and that this common ground can function as an objective basis for ethics.

      I would submit that there is no culture on the planet in which the average person (or the government officially) condones organ harvesting (of prisoners, many of whose 'crimes' are trivial, even by people of that culture). And I would argue that you cannot find a culture whose conventional ethics is so different that organ harvesting is okay--certainly not the Chinese.

      Having sexual relations with your mother is and has been considered wrong in all known cultures. It is culturally invariant. Why it is so does not matter. That it is so is sufficient for us to regard it as "functionally objective", loosely speaking, objective wrong.

    14. Re:Lack of Ethics in Chinese Society by jnana · · Score: 1
      you just throw them around like a little boy in search of something to hate / stand up against because by god your way of life shall not be challenged by this fscking yellow peril.

      By the way, I said nothing about the yellow peril. If you're curious how I came to my feelings about the PRC and it's policies and treatment of human beings, it is by knowing many, many people in Tibet who have been tortured in prison for many years, women who have been raped for years in prison. Your position is essentially that there is no right or wrong, and if they don't like it they should revolt. It is unbelievably cowardly to say everybody has their own beliefs about ethics, and if people don't like such treatment is up to them to revolt--as if violence (the problem) is the ultimate arbiter for every question of right and wrong.

      You probably believe the Chinese propaganda that there is no concept of human rights in asia and that we have no right to try to impose western ideas on china. This is complete bullshit though. Speaking from personal experience among tibetans and chinese, I can tell you that they certainly have very deeply held notions about inalienable human rights, whether they know the western ways of describing these notions or not. The chinese government keeps its more brutal policies from the public precisely because the people intuitively recognize that people are being violated in some universal way when they are tortured in a prison for 28 years because they organized demonstrations when they were 18 years old. Or when people are shot in front of their families (for similar politically motivated reasons) and their families are forced to pay for the bullets.

  110. Proof please... by 2Bits · · Score: 2

    The Chinese, who've been alleged to use prisons as organ factories, or us?

    And where is your proof to support that statement? Or is this just he-says-she-says-thingy?

  111. This sounds... disturbing. by Confessed+Geek · · Score: 1

    Its one thing to salvage what is redeamable from a aborted fetus. Sad, but better than it being a total waste. But there is just something wrong with the creation of human life just for the purpose of harvesting them...

    Figure out how to clone the CELLS, or grow them en-mass, but I think I just found my squeemish point in making babies just to get the cells.

    Of course i havn't read the real reference, just the oft-misleading blurb so maybe i'm wasting my breath...

  112. Here is Proof of the Morally Bankrupt Chinese. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Allow me to help a Chinese like yourself. Check the proof at Amnesty International or CNN . In fact, read "Kill and cull: China rejects doctor's testimony".

    By the way, most Chinese consider Amnesty International to be a CIA-run operation. The Chinese simply cannot believe that just plain folks like us -- housewives, doctors, engineers, artists, etc. -- would give their time to volunteer in Amnesty International. The Chinese simply cannot believe this fact because in their own Chinese society, most people are morally bankrupt.

  113. Of Course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course they're ahead. It's known that they take organs from prisoners and sell them on the black market. It makes since that they have more stem cells available from the dead bodies.

  114. They can't have more than one child... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But they are trying to clone human ?
    Seems very odd to me.

  115. Why are the chinese such fucking pussies? by OhYeah! · · Score: 1

    This always amazes me - leaders would never get away with this shit in a non-asian country, even if they started killing people til they ran out of bullets. People wouldn't care if they died fighting.

    *What the fuck is wrong with the Chinese?* Put a group of them together and they are the worst kind of useless followers. It doesn't matter how smart you are if you don't have any balls. Millenium of central control has bred any deviance out of that entire people.

  116. Americans should not envy the Chinese. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Frankly, I do not want Americans to envy the Chinese. Even if the Chinese GDP exceeds the American GDP, the Chinese will still flee to the United States. Look at Taiwan. Look at Singapore. When these Chinese reach our shores, they do exactly what they have always done. They will praise their morally bankrupt Chinese culture and will become livid when we Americans criticize it; meanwhile, these Chinese will fight with tooth and nail to stay in the United States.

    Just look at these Chinese from Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong. These Chinese from Hong Kong refused to support an independent Republic of Hong Kong and, indeed, praised the unification of China and Hong Kong; meanwhile, these same Chinese fight with tooth and nail to stay in the United States.

    As a society, we are better than anything that the Chinese can become. The Chinese are morally bankrupt. Check the proof at Amnesty International or CNN . In fact, read "Kill and cull: China rejects doctor's testimony".

    By the way, most Chinese consider Amnesty International to be a CIA-run operation. The Chinese simply cannot believe that just plain folks like us -- housewives, doctors, engineers, artists, etc. -- would give their time to volunteer in Amnesty International. The Chinese simply cannot believe this fact because in their own Chinese society, most people are morally bankrupt.

    1. Re:Americans should not envy the Chinese. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Er, I would have thought that Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore would be three of the greatest development successes since WW2. I don't see people clearing out of them en mass.

      WTF are you doing conflating the policies of the mainland government with these countries and making it a slur against (as far as I can see) all people of Chinese ethnicity?

    2. Re:Americans should not envy the Chinese. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Chinese from Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore fight with tooth and nail to stay in the United States of America (USA). There are hordes of them in engineering and business schools and in engineering companies in the USA.

      They support the policies of Beijing, which affronts Western values, yet demand to be allowed to stay in the USA, which was created by those same Western values. I challenge you to disprove me. Just ask them. They fully support integrating Hong Kong into mainland China. They fully support the occupation of Tibet. Yet, they demand to be allowed to stay in the USA.

    3. Re:Americans should not envy the Chinese. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am from Hong Kong, I LIVE in Hong Kong, and we are NOT fighting tooth and nail to stay in USA. The only people fighting tooth and nail to stay in the US are those people who for some reason sees the USA as some utopia. No, only those who doesn't have a tiny bit of sense of belonging fight tooth and nail to stay in USA. Only those influenced by the Western world fight tooth and nail to stay in USA. They are the same type of people who point their flames to their own country. They are those who oppose everything the Chinese government does.

  117. Re:Two pro-communist comments comments modded up + by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're in your seventh year of college and you STILL haven't graduated with your bachelors degree?

    Going to too many rallies on the mall, huh?

  118. Sometimes Handwringing is Necessary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The trouble is that the Chinese never expressed any moral reservations about human cloning. There was no debate. They plunged headlong into cloning human beings. By contrast, in the United States of America, we debated (at length) the issue of cloning human beings. Religious and political figures weighed into the issue with their opinions. There was and still is much handwringing. I very much admire a society where morality and conscience take such prominence in every action that we do. That, in a few sentences, is the difference between us Westerners and the Chinese. Sure. Some Westerners may support human cloning, but they pursue it after weighing the serious moral issues.

    I have little doubt that hordes of Chinese will write messages into this message board, supporting human cloning. After all, most Chinese support the policies of Beijing (i. e. the same Beijing that have tortured thousands of Tibetans). These very same Chinese will fight with tooth and nail to flee to or stay in the United States of America.

    These Chinese are a detriment to American society and, in general, Western society (including Japan).

    Just look at these Chinese from Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong. These Chinese from Hong Kong refused to support an independent Republic of Hong Kong and, indeed, praised the unification of China and Hong Kong; meanwhile, these same Chinese fight with tooth and nail to stay in the United States.

    As a society, we are better than anything that the Chinese can become. The Chinese are morally bankrupt. Check the proof at Amnesty International or CNN . In fact, read "Kill and cull: China rejects doctor's testimony".

    By the way, most Chinese consider Amnesty International to be a CIA-run operation. The Chinese simply cannot believe that just plain folks like us -- housewives, doctors, engineers, artists, etc. -- would give their time to volunteer in Amnesty International. The Chinese simply cannot believe this fact because in their own Chinese society, most people are morally bankrupt.

  119. Bingo. Chinese Ethics is at Issue. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The trouble is that the Chinese never expressed any moral reservations about human cloning. There was no debate. They plunged headlong into cloning human beings. By contrast, in the United States of America, we debated (at length) the issue of cloning human beings. Religious and political figures weighed into the issue with their opinions. There was and still is much handwringing in the United States. I very much admire a society where morality and conscience take such prominence in every action that we do. That, in a few sentences, is the difference between us Westerners and the Chinese. Sure. Some Westerners may support human cloning, but they pursue it after weighing the serious moral issues.

    I have little doubt that hordes of Chinese will write messages into this message board, supporting human cloning. After all, most Chinese support the policies of Beijing (i. e. the same Beijing that have tortured thousands of Tibetans). These very same Chinese will fight with tooth and nail to flee to or stay in the United States of America.

    These Chinese are a detriment to American society and, in general, Western society (including Japan).

    Just look at these Chinese from Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong. These Chinese from Hong Kong refused to support an independent Republic of Hong Kong and, indeed, praised the unification of China and Hong Kong; meanwhile, these same Chinese fight with tooth and nail to stay in the United States.

    As a society, we are better than anything that the Chinese can become. The Chinese are morally bankrupt. Check the proof at Amnesty International or CNN . In fact, read "Kill and cull: China rejects doctor's testimony".

    By the way, most Chinese consider Amnesty International to be a CIA-run operation. The Chinese simply cannot believe that just plain folks like us -- housewives, doctors, engineers, artists, etc. -- would give their time to volunteer in Amnesty International. The Chinese simply cannot believe this fact because in their own Chinese society, most people are morally bankrupt.

  120. Re:Oh geez, so lets talk about how capitalism bega by mqduck · · Score: 1

    There is no "transition toward socialism," other than the process we're going through right now all over the world. Otherwise, socialism is just implemented.

    As you may know, Marxists view modern society as the conflict between capitalists and prolitarians (workers), complications like peasantry aside. Capitalism is said to be the dictatorship of the capitalists few and the suppression of the prolitarian many, while socialism is said to be the dictatorship of the prolitariat many and the suppression of the capitalist few. The theory follows that the capitalists will no longer be able to exist as a class, and so will become part of the prolitarians.

    --
    Property is theft.
  121. Re:Two pro-communist comments comments modded up + by skwirl42 · · Score: 1
    Clever... I've seen more mature repartee from burnt out IT specialists...

    As for "rallies on the mall", I'll admit ignorance, since I don't know what the hell you're talking about.

  122. Dinner for two by volpe · · Score: 2

    I'll take "jingoism" and "nationalism" from Column A, and "heritage" from Column B.

    Oh, and bring me my fortune cookies first so I can see how much the check is going to be.

  123. means, ends by coltrane99 · · Score: 1

    I'm talking about what is politically possible in the US due to majority opinion. You are talking about the narrow means by which those ends were achieved. In other words, your argument is non-responsive to mine. When it is politically impossible for the ~20% hardcore religious minority to stop stem cell research, some means will be used to override their influence and allow the research to proceed. It is unimportant what that means is.

  124. Cloning wrong? by dh003i · · Score: 2

    Cloning? Wrong? Immoral? Unethical? Nonsense.

    Show me one logical reason why "cloning" is wrong?

    The sanctity of life? That's just bullshit we made up.

    Playing god? More bullshit we made up. There is no god.

    Growing a person to harvest him for organs? Well, we do have abortions, and if there's nothing wrong with abortion, there can't be anything wrong with that. As long as it isn't conscious, there's no big deal.

    Cloning Hitler, Jesus, Socrates, Imhotep, or other dead persons? Well, their dead and have no say in the matter anymore. As for the concern of cloning someone who "was" evil, its ludacrous to think that doing so will result in the same person. Hitler wasn't a product of his genes. If Hitler had been born today, he probably would have wound up in a mental institute; or perhaps been a great artists; or who knows. But he wouldn't have been the holocaust-creating Nazi that we associate with the name. As for those people who believe that cloning such a person would result in the same end result, that's nonsense: every person makes their own decisions and choices. Hitler chose to become who he was; it wasn't forced on him by some quasi-religious concept of predestinaton.

    Lets get over the irrational fear of human cloning. Its only the product of religious bullshit. Proof of point, in China, where the people aren't brainwashed by religion, they find nothing wrong with it; same in Britain.

    1. Re:Cloning wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I actually agree with you, but you are wrong on your last points. Chinese people are unbelievably religious and superstitious. Just because religion is officially taboo, it doesn't mean that practically every chinese isn't as religious today as they were 50 years ago.

      It's a bit like the one-child policy. Despite the fact that the government actually forces abortions (even late-term) on 2nd children (unless you have enough cash to bribe the local officials) and officially recognizes the need for a 1-child policy, the people still cling to the same beliefs about children that they have for millennia. And if that first child is a daughter, they will be having a second one on the sly. Similarly with religion, you can't change the way people are--superstitious and religious (whence the origin of religion in the first place)--even if you tell the rest of the world that you are a state without religion.

    2. Re:Cloning wrong? by jnd3 · · Score: 1

      The sanctity of life? That's just bullshit we made up.

      Great, can you come over to my lab, then? There are some interesting...experiments...I'd like to try out. While we're at it, let's all stop giving food and aid to poorer people and countries. Their lives don't mean anything. And you know what, I'm tired of wearing contacts. I think I'll find someone with 20/20 vision and steal their eyes. After all, his/her life is worthless.

      Even if the sanctity of life IS something we just invented, can't you see that it's absolutely necessary for a functional society? Or are you too blinded by your great god of scientific progress?

      Playing god? More bullshit we made up. There is no god.

      Really? I've seen hundreds of claims like this, all backed up with little to no evidence. Gods are what people worship -- for some people it's money, for others it's progress, still others it's science. To whatever a person gives the greatest worth -- that's their god.

      Growing a person to harvest him for organs? Well, we do have abortions, and if there's nothing wrong with abortion, there can't be anything wrong with that. As long as it isn't conscious, there's no big deal.

      Excellent! So if I bop someone on the head and knock 'em out, I can kill them without a second thought. They're not conscious, right? You are correct, though, in saying that growing a person for organs is not morally different than abortion. For those of us who think that abortion is murder, however...

  125. Hmmm... by Max+Threshold · · Score: 1
    "Chinese scientists are claiming a great leap forward in human cloning - the creation of dozens of cloned embryos advanced enough to harvest embryonic stem cells."

    They're great with teriyaki sauce, too.

    "Try sample, sir?"

  126. A few thoughts.. by TrebleJunkie · · Score: 1

    1. Over a billion chinese, and you're going to recognize a clone or two?

    2. You'd think they'd clone rice or toilet paper, instead.

    --

    Ed R.Zahurak

    You know, oblivion keeps looking better every day.

  127. Re:Oh geez, so lets talk about how capitalism bega by kyhwana · · Score: 1

    If you mean university by saying college, then no. It's not free.
    If by college you mean secondary school (year 9-14?), then yes, it's supposed to be free. (But usually ends up costing your parents money anyway)

    --
    My email addy? should be easy enough.
  128. Re:You meant Japan? China's a different matter! by NixterAg · · Score: 1

    Isn't the Soviet Union in Asia?

  129. Troll alert by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could you kindly stop cutting and pasting the same racist diatribe (last 5 pg) when you post? This is the third message I've come across with the same text in it.

    thanks

  130. fa! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wonder if they'll bioengineer ultra-nationalistic Chinese that love chairman Mao and the color red. Don't laugh.

  131. Re:Oh geez, so lets talk about how capitalism bega by SEE · · Score: 2
    New Zealand? On the pro-capitalist 2002 Index of Economic Freedom, by the Heritage Foundation/Wall Street Journal countries are ranked like so:

    1. Hong Kong
    2. Singapore
    3. New Zealand
    4. Tie: Estonia, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and the United States.
    9. Tie: Australia, Chile, and the United Kingdom
    12. Tie: Denmark and Sweeden
    14. Finland
    15. Tie: Bahrain and Canada

    NZ is, according to capitalists, more capitalist than the U.S.

  132. they need cloning over there by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 2

    after all, they are short on population and need all the people they can get..

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  133. Chinese Cloning? Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We've already "cloned" Chinese ideas and culture around the world...! If you are going to clone...CLONE CHINESE...! The more Chinese...the better...!

  134. Re:Mixed, shaken not stirred by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your comments are right on. Having lived in China for almost a year, I can tell you that the Chinese are the most racist people that have ever lived. The genuinely believe that they are superior human beings, and they are not losing that attitude any time soon.

  135. Chinese Racism (Re:Mixed, shaken not stirred) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can easily see how racist the Chinese are. Just look at the concept of Lunar New Year. Much of Asia (with the exception of Japan) celebrates lunar New Year. Most Asians call Lunar New Year "Lunar New Year". Only the Chinese call it "Chinese New Year" -- as if the Chinese own the new year.

    As another example, consider the Chinese in Taiwan. The government of Taiwan has a bureau called the Overseas Chinese Affairs Commission. Its function is to identify people whom it considers "ethnic Chinese" and to convince them to support China over their nation (e. g. United States of America) of birth.

    In fact, the goverment of Beijing has a similar bureau. It actually sends Chinese nationals to the United States of America (USA) to identify "ethnic Chinese" and to convince them to support mainland China, to attend anti-Falun-Gong meetings in the USA, etc.

    Why is the USA putting up with this racist crap?

  136. Nazism is Popular Among Chinese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Chinese (from mainland China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong) have long admired Hitler and his Nazi ideals. Indeed, they support the Nazi idea of eugenics to breed a superior human being. Consider the following.

    1. According to "DPP's Hitler ad creates stir", Chinese use Hitler to inspire young people in Taiwan.
    2. "Fascination with Nazis is shameful for Taiwan" reports on the popularity of Nazism among Chinese in Taiwan.
    3. "Offending restaurant decor given the axe" notes that some Chinese use victims of the Jewish holocaust to entice other Chinese to eat at their restaurant. As the Chinese diners at the restaurant finish their dinners, they calmly enjoy watching the scenes of suffering/dying Jewish people.
    4. "'Hitler' heater ads draw fire from all quarters" reports how Chinese use a picture of Hitler to sell a heater in Taiwan.

    The truth about Chinese society is really shocking. The Chinese will use human cloning to achieve whatever unethical goals that they can contrive.

  137. Re:You meant Japan? China's a different matter! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some of it was (it doesn't exit anymore). The "powerhouse" of the USSR, however, was Russia, which is in quite definitely in Eastern Europe (Europe, by definition, ends at the Ural Mountains, which form the eastern border of Russia).

    Up until the start of the 20th century, Russia was one of the more important *European* nations.

  138. There is no such thing as proof! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Unless one goes on site and witnesses something with his own eyes, it's absolutely pointless to believe anything related to foreign diplomacy.

    Alleging Chinese or US for allowing some publicly negative activities doesn't mean anything to us ordinary people.

    Why this doubt against news? Well, US and China are both very large countries and people who live in either of these are socially aware (ie. afraid about their public image) so much that it inevitably affects to how news are told, tones of voice and refusal to mention certain things altogether.

    I'm not saying to stop reading news, I'm saying that even if there's photographs and "fact" printed in black in white or live tv feed, it doesn't mean that from then on you know. Beacuse you don't.

  139. Please don't feed the trolls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thankyou

  140. warning Goatse.cx link by da5idnetlimit.com · · Score: 1

    just long enough not to show in the link checker...

    nice, but I sort of disapprove of it...

    Gaping asses should be ketp under scrict control.

    --
    It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
  141. sing it with me now by discogravy · · Score: 2

    I like Chinese.
    I like Chinese.
    There's nine hundred million of them in the world today.
    You'd better learn to like them; that's what I say.

  142. Socialist = Conservitive? by Lord_Of_The_Beer · · Score: 1

    I think you had better pay a visit to either Northern Europe or Canada some time Ace.

    Germany, Holland have strong socialist leaning goverments.

    Canada while no where near say Holland, is considerably more relaxed the the USA.

    --
    D.A.K.D.A.E.---- Deny all Knowledge, Destroy All Evidence
    1. Re:Socialist = Conservitive? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2

      Western European "socialism" is a long, long way from government control of the economy. It's more a set of policies on the part of the government to control the less humane tendencies of capitalism -- "capitalism with a human face," one might call it, if one were in an ironic mood.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:Socialist = Conservitive? by Lord_Of_The_Beer · · Score: 1

      Ah you read the globe & mail. True it is a long way from say Stalinism, but it is really along way from Capitalism also. Concepts like Unemployment insurance, Goverement Medicare and the like have a lot to do with distribution by bais of need (Marxism), And nothing all all to do with Distribution by Wealth (Capitalism)

      --
      D.A.K.D.A.E.---- Deny all Knowledge, Destroy All Evidence
  143. Does this mean... by PSW · · Score: 1

    more superhuman Chinese athletes in the future? There's enough of them already!

  144. You hate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh yea, you profess secular morality inorder to hate GWB.

    Whattaguy.

  145. Re:You meant Japan? China's a different matter! by NixterAg · · Score: 1
    Hmmm...thanks for the geography lesson because it is obvious I needed it. I have a nagging feeling that the only reason the USSR was considered a European nation as opposed to an Asian nation (where most of its land mass resided) was because it was full of white people.


    I do know that it doesn't exist anymore.

  146. OT: Re:warning Goatse.cx link by Gordonjcp · · Score: 2

    Don't you think it would be pretty straightforward to grep any link for "goatse.cx", then flag the whole thing as a possible goatsex link?

    I'm sure I could hack up a bit of code to demonstrate this, if anyone was interested. I wonder how much trouble goatsex trolls go to, trying to find out ways to obfuscate their goatse.cx links? Still, it keeps them out of trouble. Imagine if they turned their talents to something sinister...

  147. No Equivalence Whatsoever Between USA and China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Chinese (from mainland China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong) have long admired Hitler and his Nazi ideals. Indeed, they support the Nazi idea of eugenics to breed a superior human being. Consider the following.

    1. According to "DPP's Hitler ad creates stir", Chinese use Hitler to inspire young people in Taiwan.
    2. "Fascination with Nazis is shameful for Taiwan" reports on the popularity of Nazism among Chinese in Taiwan.
    3. "Offending restaurant decor given the axe" notes that some Chinese use victims of the Jewish holocaust to entice other Chinese to eat at their restaurant. As the Chinese diners at the restaurant finish their dinners, they calmly enjoy watching the scenes of suffering/dying Jewish people.
    4. "'Hitler' heater ads draw fire from all quarters" reports how Chinese use a picture of Hitler to sell a heater in Taiwan.

    The truth about Chinese society is really shocking. The Chinese will use human cloning to achieve whatever unethical goals that they can contrive.

    1. Re:No Equivalence Whatsoever Between USA and China by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trollin' trollin trollin...

      Don't you ever stop energizer bunny?

  148. Moral Cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "In this case the democracy has thus far decided (although not clearly in one direction or the other) that the moral cost of stem cell research is not worth the scientific gain. "
    What is this moral cost? How is this cost measured and in what units?

  149. China's Wrong Direction by whatch+durrin · · Score: 1
    The Chinese government is pursuing embryonic cloning and research because:

    1. Money. China, if it creates new stem cell lines, would be eyed by major research companies and the pharmaceutical industry as holding the potential for millions of dollars in revenue.

    2. No opposition. In a country where an individual and the individual's family are severely punished for having more than one child, and the government jails its people for religious expression, who is going to oppose this. In China, the government can effectively say "Throw all inhibitions to the wind. No one will oppose us."

    That being said, though, China is headed in the wrong direction. Embryonic stem cell research, while showing "potential," has produced no results.

    In fact, Chinese medical officials, in another case of jumping the gun, injected stem cells into a suffering Parkinson's patient. The results were horrific. Because we don't yet know how to control stem cells, they grew wildly and developed into one of the most primitive and terrifying cancers, a "teratoma." When finally autopsied -- the cure killed the poor soul -- they found at the brain site of the injection a tumor full of hair, bone and skin.

    On the other hand, research conducted in the US has shown much more promise as a result of adult stem cells .

    Adult stem cells were shown to be able to turn into every single tissue in the body. This would eliminate the need for therapeutic cloning and ESCR, as adult stem cells could be taken from the afflicted person and turned into needed tissues without concern for rejection.

    --
    ***
    Radio Shack. You've got questions...we've got blank stares(TM).
  150. Wrong. Most Chinese Support Chinese Government. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's be blunt. We can blame many things on the Chinese government, but blaming "no opposition" (to cloning human beings) on the Chinese government is a bald-faced lie. There are plenty of Chinese in the United States of America (USA). They support what the Chinese government is doing.

    Hard to believe? Not really. Take the issue of Tibet. Many kind-hearted but naive Americans believe that Chinese people refuse to oppose the Chinese government in its brutal occupation of Tibet because the Chinese government has threatened its people into silence.

    Wrong. The Chinese support the Chinese government on a broad range of issues, including cloning human beings and brutally occupying Tibet. In fact, the Chinese in Taiwan have used their constitution to formally declare that Tibet is part of China.

    Many of you are students at American universities. Look at your engineering classes. Just look at all those Chinese in your classes. Now, go to a local meeting of Amnesty International at your university. You will see almost no Chinese in such a meeting. It will have plenty of people from many walks of life and many countries, but there will be almost no Chinese.

    Most Chinese just do not have our sense of right and wrong. They totally lack our sense of ethics. They view organizations like Amnesty International with disdain. They fully support plunging into human cloning without any regard to its moral implications.

    We, however, are different. We are Americans. We are Canadians. We are Japanese. In short, we are Westerners. For several months, the issue of human cloning was intensely debated and discussed in the USA. Ethics weighed heavily in our discussions. I am proud that we as Americans have considered these issues before making any decision on cloning -- regardless of whether the final decision is to pursue or to ban human cloning.

    The same cannot be said for the Chinese. We in the West must wake up. The Chinese are not like us. We know so little about the Chinese beyond our shallow observations of Chinese immigrants in the West. They are not (financially) poorer versions of ourselves. They are very different from us. They insist on being different and reject our sense of ethics, which is the foundation of our society.

    What is bizarre is the following. These Chinese reject our sense of ethics but fight with tooth and nail to stay permanently in our country, the USA, which was built on those ethics. Hypocrite, anyone?

  151. The chinese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they're hardcore realists. They don't care much for ideals, ethics and right and wrong - they're concerned with the end, not the means.
    You think this is a troll, but please learn about them. You will find that I am correct.

  152. Re:The Racist chinese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you say anything critical about the Chinese, then the editors of Slashdot consider your comments to be racist trolling. If you say anything critical about the Americans, then the editors consider your comments to be either insightful or trolling, depending on the situation.

    The Chinese have convinced a lot of people to buy into their game. The word "Chinese" can have 1 of 3 connotations: cultural sense, nationality, or ethnicity. When you say anything critical about Chinese society, the Chinese (here, I'm referring to cultural Chinese) immediately claim that you are talking about Chinese in a racial sense. Their chopsticks become all bent out of shape, and they accuse you of being a racist.

    Chinese are shocked at the notion that Americans of Asian ancestry consider the United States of America (USA) to be their home, not the land from which their grandparents fled. To be perfectly frank, the Chinese are some of the most racist amoral people whom I have ever had the misfortune of knowing. The advent of the Internet has been a boon to people who want to quickly retrieve information (about the Chinese) from reputable sources. Before I started reading SlashDot, I never realized that Nazi ideals and Nazi war criminals are actually admired by a significant percentage of the Chinese in Taiwan. I now know this fact -- thanks to some of the URLs (to reputable sources) that people have posted to SlashDot.

  153. hear hear! by thorgil · · Score: 1

    ...se topic!

    I agree...

    --
    Warning: This sig contains a small bug. ==> *
  154. An education in socio-economic systems by Mithrandir21 · · Score: 1

    First off...Communism is is economic system, not a political one, and therefore cannot be directly compared to democracy, as democracy is a political system. But going even further than that, the nature of Communism would in no way restict the freedoms of peoples, only increase. Read the Communist manifesto if you doubt me. Lastly, since China oppresses personal liberty and freedom, they cannot, in all conscience, be called a "Communist State." "Capitalism is the fantastic belief that the nastiest men, for the nastiest reasons, will for the benefit of us all." - Keynes.