Science Chic check this out. Too cool

Science Chic wrote:

Correction. You are the one who dragged abortion into it. Wanting to know if people would support using fetal cells. Don't play your liberal deflection game with me.

I did not drag abortion into it, I asked for opinions on the use of embryonic stem cells (which usually come from discarded embryos in fertility treatments, not aborted fetal tissue) in research - what this doctor himself uses in his research. Yes, I asked because I had an idea of what your opinion would be, and I wanted to confront you with the contradictions and see how you justified your support of one but not the other. And you still haven't answered my question: if you don't support abortion and embryonic stem cell research, then why are you so hot to trot about this skin grafting technology? I can guarantee you this doctor didn't create this application successfully without his other work using embryonic stem cells, and his other active research still includes embryonic stem cells. You also haven't commented on my questions about the efficacy and potential side effects of this technology - so who's deflecting/selectively ignoring?

In my opinion pro abortion libs should all be registered in a data base and used for research instead of using animals and babies, like medical jury duty.

Yeah, on my bad, pessimistic days, I am of the opinion that those who support anti-evolution teachings, are AGW deniers, and cheer anti-science politicians should be registered so they are denied access to all the benefits research has garnered the medical and technological fields over the years. You want a heart bypass, cancer treatment, or the latest diabetes drug or antibiotic for your infection, forget it. You need an MRI or want a smart phone or the latest computer, go home. It's like all those people out there who want the services the government provides, but doesn't want to help pay for them, and their answer to fix the deficit is merely to cut government size without understanding the ramifications of what that means. You like the benefits science provides, but only if you get to pick and choose which little itty bitty parts to accept without realizing that it's all the same - if you're going to accept skin grafting technology, that's based on work with stem cells, then you better start accepting evolution (which we see every day with increasing antibiotic resistance, for example) and anthropogenic global warming because while the fields may differ, the methods to obtain that data do not. And evolution and climate change have over 100 years of data behind them; stem cells, not so much.

CG - no apologies for disagreeing! I respect your beliefs, you are consistent and non-hypocritical, and always willing to listen and engage! For that, I luv ya!

Baileyboy wrote:

Science Chic wrote: Good job on throwing "feminazi" in there - has nothing to do with this debate, but score for using it! :thumbsup:

.

Correction. You are the one who dragged abortion into it. Wanting to know if people would support using fetal cells. Don't play your liberal deflection game with me. In my opinion pro abortion libs should all be registered in a data base and used for research instead of using animals and babies, like medical jury duty.