Adult and cord blood stem cells are already proven to be useful in creating cures. Embryonic stem cells...not so much. This article is more propaganda than news. You can tell because of the opening paragraph and because there is never any clear deliniation of the differences between the types/sources of stem cells, so the reader is left to assume (incorrectly) that it is embryonic stem cells that are providing the "miracle". The media continually prey on people's lack of understanding of the specific sources of stem cells and which ones are providing results. Do a quick search for stem cell success and you'll find all of the results are from cord blood or adult stem cells. The media will continue to manipulate the stories until the readers educate themselves in the science involved and call these so called "journalists" out. It is articles like this that provide the reasoning for improved science education for the masses.
Who knows what happened to all the babies' souls that had supposedly been in limbo up until that point. It makes absolutely no sense to me how people can believe in religion when things like this are fairly common.
As the pope is quoted in the article, the idea of limbo was only a hypothesis. The clarification by the Vatican is basically saying "we don't know what happens to unbaptized babies that die but we have faith in the mercy of God and trust in his mercy where these babies are concerned."
The pope isn't a magical being who can just eliminate with the stroke of a pen a metaphysical location as your comment suggests you believe. He can only attempt to understand and communicate his understanding of the mysterious workings of God to his followers.
And not a lot of information on who made up the small sample. Pretty much like every other "newsworthy" study that the media gloms onto. Makes a good headline but a quick read into what facts they decide to share and it is obvious that the results are inconclusive at best.
But it sure brings out the arm chair theologians! I didn't know so many geeks were so deeply involved in the study of comparative religion. The level of intellectual theological discourse is mind boggling.:]
Slashdot Mirror
The GeekDad blog from Wired usually has some great sources. In fact they have a holiday buying guide here: http://www.wired.com/geekdad/tag/holiday-gift-guide/ [wired.com].
Adult and cord blood stem cells are already proven to be useful in creating cures. Embryonic stem cells...not so much. This article is more propaganda than news. You can tell because of the opening paragraph and because there is never any clear deliniation of the differences between the types/sources of stem cells, so the reader is left to assume (incorrectly) that it is embryonic stem cells that are providing the "miracle". The media continually prey on people's lack of understanding of the specific sources of stem cells and which ones are providing results. Do a quick search for stem cell success and you'll find all of the results are from cord blood or adult stem cells. The media will continue to manipulate the stories until the readers educate themselves in the science involved and call these so called "journalists" out. It is articles like this that provide the reasoning for improved science education for the masses.
Who knows what happened to all the babies' souls that had supposedly been in limbo up until that point. It makes absolutely no sense to me how people can believe in religion when things like this are fairly common.
As the pope is quoted in the article, the idea of limbo was only a hypothesis. The clarification by the Vatican is basically saying "we don't know what happens to unbaptized babies that die but we have faith in the mercy of God and trust in his mercy where these babies are concerned."
The pope isn't a magical being who can just eliminate with the stroke of a pen a metaphysical location as your comment suggests you believe. He can only attempt to understand and communicate his understanding of the mysterious workings of God to his followers.
And not a lot of information on who made up the small sample. Pretty much like every other "newsworthy" study that the media gloms onto. Makes a good headline but a quick read into what facts they decide to share and it is obvious that the results are inconclusive at best.
But it sure brings out the arm chair theologians! I didn't know so many geeks were so deeply involved in the study of comparative religion. The level of intellectual theological discourse is mind boggling. :]
Remember that you too must die.
I don't think it is that ironic unless the cheeks your family members are kissing aren't on each other's faces.
The depth of your scholarly analysis of this deep-seated and complicated cultural issue has convinced me.