You are free to do as you wish, within the bounds of your conscience and the law - do you deny that? Assuming you agree, are you free to kill another? Gun down your hypothetical Timmy? Perhaps you are willing to accept constraints, after all.
When is a unique individual created?
Forget religion, just answer this from science. You know the answer - sperm, egg, fertilization, dna & all that.
This whole question is about speaking up for that unique creation, which we may have facilitated to occur in an insanely stupid place (a test tube), and literally placed on ice.
So then, unlike state in the summary, the problem is about picking and choosing who lives and dies, WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT.
How can that possibly be difficult to understand?
Anyone care to count the useful (efficacious, "safe" for the recipient) therapies delivered from embryonic stem cells? It's actually easy - none.
Despite this, let's assume knock-it-out-of-park efficaciousness for embryonic stem cell research (just for the sake of this discussion)... what about that "killing babies" thing... ok or not?
I say "not"... as does the preponderance of human history.
The architecture needs to match the problem as well... which is not the case here.
Twitter is a modest msg routing problem, RoR sticks a DB into the flow of every msg, and DBs make really, really bad routers.
No surprise that it's run into problems this early.
Science has historically been the seeking of truth about the physical world, the keyword here being truth.
This story starts out with a false premise by referring to IPS cells as embryonic stem cells. Simply because the only pluripotent stem cells to date have been embryonic does not imply that all pluripotent cells are therefore embryonic. If IPS cells pan out, it may be that they're a source of pluripotent stem cells that everyone can like.
The pro-life crowd loves stem cell research and therapy... it's simply opposed to the killing of human life to obtain them. That opposition is simple, consistent, and defensible.
Anyway, that should throw the anti-abortion crowd for a loop: "Oh no, he's cut his skin. He's killing babies!" After all, the usual argument is that if something can develop into a human then it should be considered to be a human even before it develops into a human.
Besides, in the rush to justify "harvesting" those who have no ability to consent, the "kill the baby human" crowd is getting very, very careless. Anonocoward, what do you proposed as the demarcation point for someone to be considered a human being? 8 cells? 24 weeks? 32 weeks? Birth? A month after birth? Self-sufficiency? Propose something and defend it!
Snarky comments are no substitute for facts, and there is simply no substitute for clear, logical reasoning.
Slashdot Mirror
You are free to do as you wish, within the bounds of your conscience and the law - do you deny that? Assuming you agree, are you free to kill another? Gun down your hypothetical Timmy? Perhaps you are willing to accept constraints, after all.
When is a unique individual created? Forget religion, just answer this from science. You know the answer - sperm, egg, fertilization, dna & all that. This whole question is about speaking up for that unique creation, which we may have facilitated to occur in an insanely stupid place (a test tube), and literally placed on ice. So then, unlike state in the summary, the problem is about picking and choosing who lives and dies, WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT. How can that possibly be difficult to understand?
Anyone care to count the useful (efficacious, "safe" for the recipient) therapies delivered from embryonic stem cells? It's actually easy - none. Despite this, let's assume knock-it-out-of-park efficaciousness for embryonic stem cell research (just for the sake of this discussion) ... what about that "killing babies" thing ... ok or not?
I say "not" ... as does the preponderance of human history.
The architecture needs to match the problem as well ... which is not the case here.
Twitter is a modest msg routing problem, RoR sticks a DB into the flow of every msg, and DBs make really, really bad routers.
No surprise that it's run into problems this early.