DEBATEitOUT.comHave Your Voice Heard, 24/7.

I apologize, I believe it's 50-150 cells.

Contrary to Johnny's erroneous beliefs, life does begin at conception.

If you don't believe me, then google it.

I am not a religious leader nor do I belong to any organized religion.

Now about stem cell research. As I have stated many times before on this site and many other sites, Embryonic Stem Cell research has been conducted for a very long time in many other countries other than the USA and it has produced "0" results. If you do not believe me, then Google it!

However, Adult Stem Cell Research conducted here in the USA and many other countries as well has netted very good results and show even more promise for further research. I have a very good friend that owes his life to adult stem cell research and the stem cell therapy that is a result of that research.

So, if you are a responsible and intelligent person, then you need to go with the facts and fund adult stem cell research since tat type of research has netted the most results.

If you want to look at umbilical stem cell research, then google that also.

Doing a little internet research on your own rather than taking the words of some political pundits really nets some surprising results.

Anyway, that is just my not-so-humble opinion.

papadawg, you can't compare the United States to other countries. We have always been the leader in medical research with all our advances in medicine. Just because it didn't go well in other countries doesn't mean that it won't go well for the United States.

This summer, the first test on embryonic stem cells was conducted on paraplegics who have suffered a recent spinal cord injury. They said that based on mice experiments, these victims may be able to increase mobility. Within a few months of lifting off the ban, the United States is on the case.

Since you all are so intent on using Human Beings as guinea pigs, I suggest that you volunteer for the next set of experiments.

Murdering Human Beings in the name of scientific research is EXACTLY what the NAZI's did in Hitler's Germany during the 1930's.

Wether YOU really want to accept the fact that life begins at conception does not change the fact. Using Human embryo's for scientific research is nothing less that NAZI-style MURDER!

You may not like the facts, nor my opinions, but that does not change the facts. Just like the currant political administration, you most likely have told yourselves the lie so ofte that you now believe it is really the truth.

I do not hate you.

I just feel pity for you.

Yea, I don't know man. It's not a fact that birth begins at conception. No one can answer that question. All I know is that embryonic stem-cell research has the potential to cure certain illnesses and diseases, and I'd rather take that chance than labeling a few cells as a human being.

Actually, papadawg, I feel sorry for you. You possess the same mentality that has hindered the medical profession for years.

The phase III trial aforementioned by Jared cannot and should not be compared to the "research" performed by the Nazis. These acts of torture were characterized by unethical methods: 1) People were forced to become subjects in dangerous studies against their will; 2) Almost all subjects endured incredible suffering, mutilation, and pain; and 3) The experiments were deliberately designed to terminate in a fatal outcome for their victims.

Also, google is not the equivalent of a medical textbook.

Just stay away from all of this if you ask me.

I don't know. All of you people who think life begins with one cell deserve to be exiled out of America. That's ridiculous. I think I'd want to save the elderly and the sick over one single cell.

They say that 25% of Americans will have Cancer in the future. That's serious, and I'm not going to let innocent people die just because some people think a bunch of cells is a human being.

It doesn't matter anyway, because Obama wants funding, so it's done.

Absolutely more funding should be procured for stem cell research, both adult and embryonic.

Firstly, the adult stem cell research seems to get very good results, which is great and should continue.
Secondly, embryonic stem research cannot merely be closed because other countries haven't had solid results. By other countries without embryonic laws we're talking about Ireland, Mexico.. places where you wouldn't go for medical research EVER. So we can't discount this form of therapy until we prove with American medical technology that it is worthless.

Thirdly, theres a big misconception about the source of these embryonic stem cells. Alot of people will have you think they are literally from some girl who got pregnant and wants the kid gone; absolutely not true.
The embryos we're atlking about are leftovers from invitro fertilization efforts. example: Mary X goes into the clinic, she and John X have 20 egs fertilized with Johns sperm. 6 embryos are placed into Mary through invitro fert. 1 takes, 5 are rejected, Mary has a baby 9 months later… the 14 remaining embryos, the ones Mary doesn't want, they throw them out people… literally they sterilize the tubes and reuse the glassware when Shelly Y comes in for invitro.

These are the embryos used for research, the one's that were getting the drain anyway. Noone is troweling kids out of pregnant teenagers.

papadawg I must disagree about the holocaust experiments on this point. Having seen the med labs they used for the WW2 purgings… there was no research being done their, it literally was torture and amusement for the Nazi doctors. Another method for the Final Solution.

Also, the begninning of life needs definition. If you claim life begins immediately after conception why do we not consider baby's 9 months old at birth? Why when a woman 8 months pregnant is killed in a car crash or murdered is it not a double homicide? What rights and priveledges are these fetus's technically granted under the laws of the United States Government. We cannot just declare life as started as soon as egg and sperm meet. Declarations do not equal definitions. I believe the burden of proof is on the claiments that a fertilized egg at 7 days past conception, be it 150 cells or whatever is indeed a "human being".

so far the only argument that life begins at the moment of conception is a religious argument, which we all know has no merit when it comes to matters of science. If a bundle of 50 cells is a human then we must include them in census, no? The reason embryonic stem cell research is basically stagnant is because the country with more resources than all the other countries put together–I'm talking about the US here–has laws prohibiting such research becuase of religious belief, not because the techninque isn't sound.

Can we get results from adult stem cells? Absolutely, but we cannot ignore a whole realm of possibilities because of dogmatic thinking. You say a life begins at conception, prove it. As with everything the burden of proof is on the accuser. Show me exactly where a human life difinitevly begins and I will be the first on board to limit all embryonic stem cell research at that point and beyond. If you cannot, then please do not limit medical advancements because of something you "believe" to be fact!

Stem cell research could be an amazing discovery, but abortion is not necessary. Studies prove that the umbilical cord provide more stem cells than from a fetus. This fact was hidden from the public by left wingers who think the slaughter of potential human lives are ok. Did you know that Obama wants to legalize the slaughter of infants up to three weeks after birth.

Pusty, you just proved my point about pervasive misinformation. While it is possible that stem cells may be harvested from aborted embryos that doesn't mean that is their primary, even often source. Nearly all embryonic stem cells are either derived directly from IVF embyros that will be discarded, or from cloned lines of cells from IVF embryos that were going to be discarded. The notion that embryonic stem cells come from abortions–which leads people to link the two matters–is not remotely true. And no, Obama does not want to legalize the slaughter of 3 week old infants. Get real, will you… Provide some sort of argument rather than absurd baseless attacks. And also, do not try and "prove" yoru point by deflecting onto another issue. This debate is about embryonic stem cell research, not abortion!

Wait a minute, wait a minute… are you actually saying that you pusty, believe that the President of the United States wants to enact legislation to legalize killing babies up to 3 weeks after being born?!? Honestly, read your post again and tell me thats what you are attempting to "inform" us of… Read it aloud if you must. I'll wait here while you do.____So lemme ask again, did I know that President Obama wants to LEGALIZE the slaughter of INFANTS (babies who are alive and born from their mothers) up to three (3) weeks after their births. ____Like 3 weeks of feedings, and nap times, and diapers changes

Yes, but the poular belief is that stem cells are harvested from aborted embryos. I was contributing a fact about how umbilical cords can replace embryos and you get all testy. In fact I was not making a point at all, I was merely stating a fact that agreed with your statement.

And Obama did in fact vote for infanticide in 2002 in an Illinois senate debate. (See link)

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzRhZTgzNmRlZWE0MTA1YTM4NWMxN2UxMjA5YjBkZTE=&w=MA==

Try to do some research before you throw around terms like “absurd baseless attacks”.

Wait, I'll wet my pants in closed-mindedness? Oh boy… Please do not provide as proof or evidence something that is not only simply a collection of myths, but a collection written by dozens, if not more authors over a millennium old that has been translated innumerable times for profit, gain, and political measures.

If it makes me closed minded that I refuse to entertain any reference from the bible on abortion, so be it.

Yeah no he didn't. First of all it was a debate, it wasn't legislation. Second, he abstaned from voting. And third he has stated many times that his only issue with the Born Alive act is that it may cause precidential conflict with Roe v. Wade. He has said numerous times that if the Born Alive act had been worded in a manner more open to Roe v Wade he would have voted yes. He never voted for infanticide.

Absurd… baseless…. attacks….

Boy, those embryonic stem cells sure are a waste of time.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/0911...

Human embryonic stem cells were used to restore limb function in rats with spinal injuries. They even work on rats! And now we will begin human trials. Such a waste, right?

Think you may have the wrong debate their Pt, but in response no I am not providing it as evidence I am suggesting it as a possiblility.

Anyways, sure it was in a debate, but his idea remains the same. My link tells me that he’s covering something up, you, well I don’t know where you got your info from but, nevertheless we’re basically at a standstill with no real proof.

Also I am all for stem cell research, as previously stated the use of umbilical cords provide more stem cells than an embryo, why not take the umbilical cord is my simple question.

An embryo's heart starts beating after just 3 weeks of conception… and their brain and spinal cord start forming. So how can you say somthing that is living, developing, with a heart beating, is not a human being? It's just a bunch of cells is, in your words "absolutely ridiculous". Just remember, you came from just 10-15 cells too.

You came from just a few cells too. Are you saying that you are not human?

It's not Nazi style murder. The Nazis used fully developed human adults (and children) in their experiments. A 30 year old Jewish man being experimented on knows exactly what is going on, whereas a ball of 8 cells does not. In fact, it doesn't have a conscious. A group of 8 cells is not a human, it's just a group of 8 cells. Until it's major body systems develop, it's not much of anything. The one thing that sets humans apart form other animals is our brain. An embryo doesn't have a brain, the defining characteristic of a human being.

Embryos that we are interested in aren't being taken from the mothers. The embryos that we are looking into are leftover from IVF. They are going to be discarded anyway, so we figure that we should make good use of them. Like saving lives, and curing diseases. To me, its worth neutralizing a trash-can-destined embryo to save lives.

Yeah that is complety true dude. Your cracking me up.

i agree