STEM CELL RESEARCH AND ABORTION ARE RIGHT IN AMERICA.
Mr.Brewer said 08/31, 10:25 AM
Stem Cell and Abortion are right for America. Stem Cell research brings a large field of possibilities in the practice of medicine. Stem Cell research is no different from abortion. If a mother wants to use her use her zygote, for the use of medicine, why stop her? Stopping a mother from using something from her own body is infringing on her own privacy, just as the judge ruled in the case of abortion.
The laws do not make sense, we are allowed to kill a baby if it is unwanted, but we can not use that as great medical research? The laws are obviously flawed and need to be changed. The laws need to be changed so that this is the land of opportunity, the opportunity to have the best doctors in America working to achieve impossible goals. If the laws are not changed the best doctors in America will leave for foreign countries with opportunity, thus creating a brain drain of amazing genetic researchers taught in the United States.
The bottom line is we need to change our laws to create opportunity in America. So that we can be the forefront of genetic research. We need to change our laws so that Abortion and Stem Cell research do not contradict one another.
theyoungdem said 08/31, 04:35 PM
Firstly lets focus on your title: Stem cell research AND abortion are right in America. Your logic is that since abortion is legal then stem cell research should be legal. However should abortion truly be legal? I assume that you are pro-choice, which is why you support abortion and stem cell research. If you're pro-life...then I don't know why you would be even arguing this.
So tell me this, other having the risk of death from birth, why would a mother abort her child? Aborting itself is a form of murder. Human life starts right when the sperm and egg cell meet, that is the earliest stage of a human being. Also if you look at who normally recieves abortion are mostly young women such as teenagers, who have not recieved the maturity to make a decision of taking a life away. Especially a life that has no say in the matter.
Did you ever read the part of the constitution where it says "right to life", do you feel that does not apply to unborn children?
Besides even a pro-choice person should not resort to abortion, there are many birth control methods which does not have to include the killing of a child. You need to prove why abortion should be legal.
Mr.Brewer said 08/31, 07:06 PM
First of all the Judge in the case against abortion ruled, that not being able to perform abortion is infringing upon the mother's privacy, which is in the bill of rights "Mr. Constitution." That is why abortion is legal and will remain legal.
Secondly, people should not make laws on what they feel is morally right. People should use there own moral judgment and not infringe upon others moral integrity by creating certain laws against other people's morals. Meaning that if you do not want to abort, than by all means DON'T, but you do not have the right to say that another person CAN'T, because of what you believe in. Which is infringing up their privacy.
Thirdly, you are missing the point theyoungdem. The laws against Stem Cell research and Abortion contradict each other, but you don't obviously know what those laws state and why abortion is legal.
Lastly, my overall point is that I am pro-choice, but I would never abort my unborn baby, because understand other people's point of views, which in the end is what it will have to come down to.
theyoungdem said 09/01, 10:28 PM
I can't help but use what PitBull said in the comment's section. You say people should not make laws based on moral judgement? I else do you make laws? Your response should be interesting.
You state: "[B]ut you do not have the right to say that another person CAN'T, because of what you believe in"
If someone is being raped, I'm not allowed to say the rapist can't ****?
Also I'm not missing the point at all, and I didn't know there were laws against abortion, and how does the non-existing federal funding of stem cell contradict the murdering of unborn babies?
Every American doctor must take this fundamental oath, which says "First, do no harm". It threatens the very fabric of the entire medical field if doctors start using their own personal philosophies on life to decide who should or shouldn't be harmed. Whether or not you think abortion should be allowed, it cannot be disputed that a doctor is harming a living organism. Killing a human being doesn't serve any higher medical purpose and is therefore a violation of the oath.
Other than "mother's right to privacy" why else should abortion remain legal? You really don't have any strong supportive argument.
Mr.Brewer said 09/02, 10:52 PM
First of off, I am saying that you do not have the right to tell a mother what she can and can not do to her own body. Once again I say that infringes upon her privacy, and that is why it remains legal.
Secondly, Yes, you are missing the point! If you have done research on SCR, then you will know that the laws of abortion and SCR, do contradict one another. SCR is encouraged, but IN THE UNITED STATES WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO OBTAIN STEM CELLS FROM UNBORN FETUS! Now the point of the matter is, which again, YOU ARE MISSING! Is that we are allowed to abort a unborn baby, but not use that unborn baby as great research that may one day cure cancer. Now why is that? The laws contradict one another.
Now youngdems, we are not "Killing a human being." It is not a human being, it is a unborn fetus, it can not talk for itself, it can not breathe for itself, it can not think for itself, it is just CELLS that start branching off to make vital organs. Scientist just gather those cells for genetic research or stop a life changing mistake.
Yes it does serve a higher medical purpose, curing cancer. UNTIL YOU TELL ME HOW THE LAWS OF DO NOT CONTRADICT ONE ANOTHER YOU HAVE NO SUPPORTING ARGUMENT.
theyoungdem said 09/05, 01:34 PM
First of all the mother is simply the host, the baby inside the mother is not simply another limb of the mother. The mother can't feel the baby's pain when the baby is being aborted.
I have done research on SCR, also you are refering embryonic stem cell research, for the record, just in case you did not know, stem cells may be obtained from many places. And after 10 years of embryonic research and studies, there has been no treatments derived. While stem cells obtained from other places have proven to be useful treatments. So why is it you are so keen on using embryonic stem cells?
You say if a living being can't talk for itself, can't breath for itself, etc then it's not a human? What about the premature babies hooked up to machines since they are unable to breathe at first, what about people who recieved major mental damages and into a coma? They are not human? They can't think for themselves, they can't feed themselves, some can't even breathe for themselves, they are not human?
Also not all abortion is done at the early stage of "a bunch of cells", I can show you pictures of abortion where it is much more than just little cells.
*continued in comments section*
Comments
Add Your Comment
He said it right. I do not have to prove why it is legal, because it already is.
Mr.Brewer | 08/31/08
Report Offensive Comment
theyoungdem, brought up the consittution, however by american law, a fetus is not a citizen. Taxes are not paid on it, it recieves no benifits, it has no records, or anything of the sort. You cannot bring up the law and push all the other side of it, to the side.
erik[bipartisan dem] | 08/31/08
Report Offensive Comment
theyoungdem, also asks when it would be acceptable, possible is **** or incest case... those seem pretty important, why should a [in some cases] tennage girl have to go through all the pregnecy, and life changes that come with it simply because she was raped? Should she have to leave school? should her future look dimmer and dimmer all because someone decided to **** the poor girl. These are the difficult questions that have to be faced, and why abortion is still a choice for Young women out there. So I support it, yes I do. Do I like it? No I don't my religion makes it where I don't like the idea of it, but the sensable person in me makes it where I know it's not my choice and I shouldn't make it for someone else.
erik[bipartisan dem] | 08/31/08
Report Offensive Comment
In the end, it all comes down to whether or not an unborn baby is life. I dont think it is. Thats what "unborn" means. Birth is the beginning of life. If abortion is murder, then what do you call a miscarriage? And btw, unborn babies don't count in the population. If you're still inside another person, then you aren't a person.
philpee2 | 08/31/08
Report Offensive Comment
The whole basis for this debate (or, at least, Brewer's opening argument) is flawed, as BOTH abortion (sans late-term) and stem-cell research (SCR) ARE currently legal in the United States. Federal funding for SCR was capped, but allowed for the first time by an administration, in 2001. SCR is still both legal and encouraged through private and charitable funding. Youngdem, come on, now. Don't let Brewer off so easily.
USA Pit Bull 63 | 08/31/08
Report Offensive Comment
Well sorry for my ignorance, but that doesn't change my overall belief that THEY ARE RIGHT IN AMERICA.
Mr.Brewer | 09/01/08
Report Offensive Comment
Both of you are either so ignorant or so incapable of expressing your positions in understandable English, that neither of you should win this debate. I'd be embarrassed to be associated with either argument you've tried to advance. Both of you need a writing course and a logic course. Please don't further embarrass yourselves by attempting to respond to this. You have bigger fish to fry.
mrelish | 09/01/08
Report Offensive Comment
Mr. Brewer, your rhetoric is all over the place. In your first argument you first say that restricting what a woman can do with her own body infringes on her right of privacy. A few sentences later you liken abortion to killing a baby that is unwanted. and as has been pointed out, stem cell research is legal in America.
Skipper04 | 09/01/08
Report Offensive Comment
I don't care about your belief, Brewer. It's your support for the resolution that matters here, and your whole basis for the resolution is faulty. Nice job.
USA Pit Bull 63 | 09/01/08
Report Offensive Comment
I can't get past this line, either: "[P]eople should not make laws on what they feel is morally right." From where did all our other laws come? Coin flips?
USA Pit Bull 63 | 09/01/08
Report Offensive Comment
First of all I am right on Stem Cell research. We are allowed to perform Stem Cell research, but we are not allowed to obtain Stem Cells. Creating to contradictory laws against Stem Cell research and Abortion.
Mr.Brewer | 09/01/08
Report Offensive Comment
PITBULL, I am saying that people should not make laws off their own moral judgment.
Mr.Brewer | 09/01/08
Report Offensive Comment
So why and how did we get laws in the first place? And how do we decide whether or not the laws are just, if not by some subjective moral standard(s)?
USA Pit Bull 63 | 09/01/08
Report Offensive Comment
Even the prerequisite that laws be just is based on moral judgment.
USA Pit Bull 63 | 09/01/08
Report Offensive Comment
Finally, stem cells are allowed to be obtained, but not through federal funding; and also not through illicit means, such as intentionally fertilizing and destroying embryos for the sake of the studies. But they are still donated as bi-products from hospitals and other studies where similar samples were used.
USA Pit Bull 63 | 09/01/08
Report Offensive Comment
Well with all there is in this debate that relies on mostly truths, there are two constitutional questions that arise. I'm pretty sure "a mother's right to privacy" isn't in the constitution and would enjoyed someone showing me exactly where it would be. And at least "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is in an official document of the US, however I believe it's in the Declaration of Independance, rather than the Constitution
MorgMcA | 09/01/08
Report Offensive Comment
I actually realized SCR was legal right after my first argument was posted, but then I didn't want to jump right in and attack him in thought, since I wasn't entirely sure. I just signed on right now, and saw all these comments haha. BTW It's nice to see you again, I thought you and DonkeyDude both left
theyoungdem | 09/01/08
Report Offensive CommentPost A Comment
Please keep it clean. Bad words will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.
Only Axl Rose remains in the group, but since 1987 GnR has been rocking with fury
More than 50 years of cover stories about the 35th President
"You need to prove why abortion should be legal." Why would he need to prove why it is legal if it already is?
MkzGT | 08/31/08
Report Offensive Comment