Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 41

Thread: ESCR Opponency

  1. #1

    ESCR Opponency

    All related articles I find I'll post here
    Stem cell research: ‘service to human values’
    By Lenore Christopher


    ARCHDIOCESE — The United States Bishops’ recent backing for a national program to promote the use of stem cells from umbilical-cord blood is consistent with the church’s "vigorous support for medical research," said Father Michael A. Seger, James J. Gardner Chair of Moral Theology at The Athenaeum of Ohio in Cincinnati.

    "Stem cell research is very important," he said, the results from which can be very beneficial. The key, however, is that "all research must be at the service of human values."

    Stem cell research presents no problem in general for the church, he explained. It is only the use of embryonic stem cells that is objectionable, because "it kills the cell, which is an abortion."


    The same is true of the church’s stand on in vitro fertilization (IVF), Father Seger said, because it is "morally unacceptable" to use fertilized cells, a number of which will be discarded in the process. "It is not only the attack on innocent life, but also the robbing, of the child, the natural right to the fruit of an authentic loving act of wife and husband — the prelude to a natural family. IVF puts conception at the whim of the lab technician, thus attacking the sanctity of marriage and the proper finality of conjugal love."


    While Father Seger believes he understands that researchers’ push to use embryonic cells is because they are toti-potential, he has not been convinced that adult cells and cord blood cannot be used to achieve similar results.


    "All research is an expression of God’s creative spirit and must be aligned with God’s will for the benefit of the human family," he said.

    Therefore, the "litmus test" is that attacking the embryo "violates the dignity of the human person. At the moment of conception, a unique person is present and must be afforded full human dignity and its right to life.


    MORE ON LINK
    http://www.catholiccincinnati.org/tc...6stemcell.html

  2. #2

    Marking 33 years of opposition


    On the 33rd anniversary of the Roe vs. Wade decision, abortion opponents rallied at a downtown park to oppose the procedure and human embryonic stem cell research.

    About 150 people gathered Sunday afternoon to attend the rally. Similar events were held nationwide, both by abortion opponents and abortion rights advocates.

    Pojman urged those in attendance to make their opposition to abortion known through letters to their elected officials and local newspapers. As should we for our cause

    He also spoke against human embryonic stem cell research. Because taking embryonic stem cells destroys embryos, many conservatives equate the process with abortion and view it as immoral.

    "We don't think it should be paid for with our tax dollars," Pojman said.

    Juan Gaona, who participates in anti-abortion protests around San Antonio and Austin, said it was "awesome" to see so many at the rally despite the cold weather.

    "These are the die-hards," Gaona said. "We're Christians, and we believe that life was created by God and life begins at conception."

    MORE ON LINK

    http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/met...y.814f2f1.html

  3. #3

    Letter to the Montgomery Advertiser

    'Ideological' approach not due scorn

    This concerns your editorial on stem cell research on Jan. 7.


    If I choose to be a voice for the smallest members of the human race who cannot speak for themselves, why is that labeled as "ideological?" My embryonic stem cells belonged to me and yours belonged to you. Each embryo has his or her unique genetic package. That is a scientific fact.

    Why is it "shortsighted" for the federal government to avoid funding research which involves killing human embryos who are future citizens of this country? How can it be ethical to eliminate the smallest humans in order to find medical cures for more mature humans? Research should be focused on umbilical cord and adult stem cells. At least she attempts to highlight there are other areas of research to attend to also, which is more than others do I suppose.

    According to the Montgomery Advertiser, this is "enormously complex work, far beyond anything that can be easily explained in a newspaper editorial." Here is a simple explanation.

    A lab technician isolates a human embryo in a Petri dish or tube and extracts the stem cells. The human embryo dies. The stem cells may keep growing in a nutritious solution and develop into a continuing line of cells to use for experiments.

    If a person believes this is acceptable, that is labeled as scientific thinking, according to this newspaper. If a person believes this process ends a human life, that is labeled as ideological thinking.

    It should be remembered that ideological thinking brought our nation into existence and attention to ideals continues to make this a better country.

    Maureen J. Smith
    Montgomery

  4. #4

    Talking Leif, have you booked your seat?

    MORE ON LINK

    http://www.thecatholicspirit.com/arc...p?article=4988

    Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk, a scientist and theologian who will speak at St. Joseph in Hopkins Feb. 2, is an engaging and riveting speaker who communicates complex scientific and moral issues in a way that makes them easily understandable to those of us without advanced degrees.

    His background makes him a compelling speaker in defense of human life, especially on ethical issues related to embryonic stem-cell research and other beginning and end-of-life issues.

    Father Tad consulted with members of Congress to create alternative legislation to the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act (HR810), which was passed by the House. He was called upon to assist in the effort to overturn California’s Proposition 71 that provides $3 billion in state funds to embryonic stem-cell research, and he testified before members of the Massachusetts and Wisconsin legislatures when they were deliberating a bill to ban human cloning.

  5. #5
    What a bunch of BS! It's robbing the child if the mother and father didn't screw to conceive him or her?


  6. #6
    Father Tad consulted with members of Congress to create alternative legislation to the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act (HR810), which was passed by the House. He was called upon to assist in the effort to overturn California’s Proposition 71 that provides $3 billion in state funds to embryonic stem-cell research, and he testified before members of the Massachusetts and Wisconsin legislatures when they were deliberating a bill to ban human cloning.
    Looks like those that support alternative legislation to the ESC bill are also fighting to end ESC research.
    Don't ignore the Reeve Legacy, Remember he and Dana supported open research and fought hard for ESCR

    StemCellBattles

    Support H.R. 810

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    17,427

    Thumbs down Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk

    Quote Originally Posted by Cherrylips
    Here is a comment in a meeting for a cure for our misery by Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk.

    They can also be harvested from body fat removed in liposuction.
    Drawing laughter from the audience, he explained, “Fat from liposuction is one of our great national treasures.”


    Source
    I don't see anything funny in this.

    I urge all of you to send Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk and email and ask him what’s so funny being paralyzed and wanting a cure.

    Here is his email address; I have listed it 10 times so all of you can send him 10 emails each.

    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu

    Btw. Good thread idea Cherry' - Let’s collect all the nay-sayers here.
    Last edited by Leif; 01-28-2006 at 01:59 PM.

  8. #8
    Banned Faye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    6,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Leif
    Here is a comment in a meeting for a cure for our misery by Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk.
    I don't see anything funny in this.

    I urge all of you to send Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk and email and ask him what’s so funny being paralyzed and wanting a cure.

    Here is his email address; I have listed it 10 times so all of you can send him 10 emails each.

    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu

    Btw. Good thread idea Cherry' - Let’s collect all the nay-sayers here.
    Thanks Leif,

    I e-mailed Joni Erickson-Tada, and though I think it's important they hear from us, you simply cannot change a person's strongly held religious beliefs on when life starts.

    We just need to make sure that more and more of those who do not have these strongly held religious beliefs against ESCR join together and have themselves be heard. Like the 95% on CC who favor ESCR,........I don't see them speak up enough even here on CC.

    A good way for these pro-ESCR folks to exert their power is by pledging money to the Stem Pac War Chest for Pro-ESCR political candidates here:
    http://www.stempac.com/warchest/

    "There’s far too much unthinking respect given to authority,” Molly Ivins explained; “What you need is sustained outrage.”
    Kerr, Keirstead, McDonald, Stice and Jun Yan courageously work on ESCR to Cure SCI.

    Divisiveness comes from not following Christopher Reeve's ESCR lead.
    Young does ASCR.
    [I]I do not tear down CRPA, I ONLY make peopl

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Leif
    Here is a comment in a meeting for a cure for our misery by Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk.
    I don't see anything funny in this.

    I urge all of you to send Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk and email and ask him what’s so funny being paralyzed and wanting a cure.

    Here is his email address; I have listed it 10 times so all of you can send him 10 emails each.

    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu
    tad.grd.nsc@aya.yale.edu

    Btw. Good thread idea Cherry' - Let’s collect all the nay-sayers here.
    10 emails Hmmmm... what did he say that was so wrong that he deserves 10 emails, after all America is the heaviest country in the world. I sense an anti Catholic bias, no tolerence for people with an opposing veiw.


    " Father Tad is uniquely suited to address complex scientific and moral issues. He earned four undergraduate degrees — in chemistry, biochemistry, molecular and cellular biology, and philosophy — from the University of Arizona, where he graduated magna cum laude in 1988. Father Tad did post-doctoral work at Harvard in neuroscience and earned a doctorate in that same subject at Yale where his focus was cloning genes for neurotransmitter transporters expressed in the brain. For several years, he also worked as a molecular biologist at the Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School.

    His contributions to moral theology and bioethics are equally impressive. While studying in Rome for five years, Father Tad earned two degrees in advanced theology at the Pontifical Gregorian University where he did advanced work in dogmatic theology and in bioethics, examining the question of delayed ensoulment of the human embryo".

    Catholcs seemed to be veiwed as not enlightened or backwards, I actually listened to a person telling me that the Catholic Churches story of creation was so far fetched it could have never happened. I asked myself what Catholic story of creation? I guess he was talking about the bible account in Genesis, which by the way is not a scietific text on creation. For those of you who believe in the "Big Bang" theory this might interest you.

    In January 1933, the Belgian mathematician and Catholic priest Georges Lemaitre traveled with Albert Einstein to California for a series of seminars. After the Belgian detailed his Big Bang theory, Einstein stood up applauded, and said, “This is the most beautiful and satisfactory explanation of creation to which I have ever listened.” Lemaitre’s theory, the idea that there was a burst of fireworks which marked the beginning of time and space on “a day without yesterday”, was a radical departure from prevailing scientific understandings, though it has since come to be the most probable explanation for the origin of the universe.
    http://www.catholiceducation.org/art...ce/sc0022.html

    Catholic JimmyMack

  10. #10
    Banned Faye's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    6,839

    Pushing for Alternative of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act

    Cherrylips,

    Here is another one for your perusal

    September 14, 2005
    Stem-cell bill rests on 'false hope'
    By Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.)

    As a practicing physician and two-time cancer survivor, I have both a personal and professional interest in developing cures for diseases. However, I believe the American people need a second opinion on the potential benefits of destructive embryonic-stem-cell research. The bill pending in the Senate would, for the first time, direct the federal government to use taxpayer dollars to destroy human embryos.

    This proposal is likely based on a false hope. Not a single treatment has been developed from embryonic stem cells, yet 65 treatments have been developed from stem cells in umbilical-cord blood and adult tissues.

    Leading proponents of research on embryonic stem cells are themselves lowering expectations that dramatic cures to diseases such as cancer and Alzheimer’s are just around the corner. The Guardian newspaper recently reported that Lord Winston, the most prominent embryonic-stem-cell researcher in the United Kingdom, said that hopes for cures had been distorted by arrogance and spin.

    “I view the current wave of optimism about embryonic stem cells with growing suspicion,” Winston told the British Association for the Advancement of Science.

    Similarly, South Korean cloning expert Curie Ahn now warns that scientists won’t be able to develop cures from embryonic stem cells for three to five more decades. In experiment after experiment, scientists are learning that embryonic stem cells are too carcinogenic or “wild” for therapeutic purposes.

    For example, it is not uncommon in experiments on mammals for the animals to be killed by exotic tumors. In some cases, embryonic stem cells have triggered hair and bone growth inside the brains of subjects.

    Meanwhile, astonishing breakthroughs are enabling scientists to use non-destructive techniques to develop pluripotent stem cells. (Pluripotent stem cells, like embryonic stem cells, have the ability to develop into any tissue in the body.) Harvard scientists recently converted human skin cells into pluripotent stem cells without destroying a human embryo in the process.

    Every other useful stem-cell therapy developed so far has not required the destruction of human embryos.

    Science is demonstrating that we will likely arrive at the same destination — and cures — without needing to go down the path of taxpayer-funded research that destroys human life. I’ve introduced legislation in the Senate to fund this promising avenue of research.

    The Respect for Life Pluripotent Stem Cell Act of 2005 would authorize $15 million for the National Institutes of Health to develop ethical techniques to create and study pluripotent stem cells. The bill would also prohibit any research that would harm or destroy a human embryo while directing studies on animal models to develop and test techniques for producing human pluripotent stem cells.

    Congress should pursue alternatives that offer all of the benefits of embryonic stem cell research but do not open a Pandora’s box of ethical problems.

    At the dawn of the biotech century, advocating taxpayer-funded destructive experimentation on human embryos that will be “thrown away anyway” would set us on a dangerous course. If human life is sacred and worthy of protection unless it is unwanted or destined for destruction, then many human lives, such as the terminally ill or severely handicapped, would be cheapened and endangered.

    The response many supporters of destructive embryonic-stem-cell research offer to these ethical concerns is troubling. Rather than offering a coherent ethical statement on when human life deserves protection, some of the more fervent supporters of research on embryonic stem cells prefer to portray critics as unscientific or even superstitious. This stance is ironic considering that more faith is required to believe in an avenue of research that has not produced any therapies than an avenue that has produced therapies.

    The development of research on embryonic stem cells as an article of faith is evident in news coverage. When The Washington Post reported on the breakthrough at Harvard, its headline said the development would “muddle” the debate. When a scientist is able to set aside bias, any new factual discovery provides clarity, not confusion.

    A more ominous explanation for the lack of enthusiasm for the Harvard announcement is that researchers want to keep the door open to “fetal farming” — a process by which embryos are cloned, implanted and harvested for spare organs. Studies on animals are showing that the real potential of research on embryonic stem cells is not found in embryos that are days old but in weeks-old, when tissue growth can be controlled........



    http://www.thehill.com/thehill/expor...91405/ss8.html

    "There’s far too much unthinking respect given to authority,” Molly Ivins explained; “What you need is sustained outrage.”
    Kerr, Keirstead, McDonald, Stice and Jun Yan courageously work on ESCR to Cure SCI.

    Divisiveness comes from not following Christopher Reeve's ESCR lead.
    Young does ASCR.
    [I]I do not tear down CRPA, I ONLY make peopl

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-18-2007, 04:49 AM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-23-2005, 03:50 PM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-15-2004, 09:40 PM
  4. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-17-2004, 09:26 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •