Amen!!! Now lets get to doin' some cloning! Or atleast some stemcell transplants!

Yeah, why dont we. If the Christian right had their way, most of the medical technicians, doctors and nurses who currently work in the field of embryonic stem cell research would already be safely imprisoned by now. Too bad we arent living in the day of Galileo huh? Dodged a bullet.

I just wonder how many of them are going to be signing up to get the life saving treatment down the road. Say 20 years from now when stemcell research has cured alzheimers. Do you think they'll stand on their "moral" ground then?

I dont understand that comment at all. It sounds very "Christian" like however. Perhaps even right wing Christian.

Not at all. He is just wondering whether these fighters against it will cue for their treatment when the cure is found.

OHHH Okay Im sorry. I misread. My mistake. I thought you were saying something totally different. They actually arent that far off. A windpipe was grown just recently from a woman's own stem cells and implanted. She is doing fine and since the organ was grown from her own stem cells, this means NO immune suppression therapy needed. We arent 20 years off anymore. Maybe 10 for more complex organs.

Nope they will be in line with others, they just won't make themselves known. It's just sad that so many people suffer in the mean time....

this is not what I believe

but what I think they believe

I think the issue (for them) isn't so much cloning itself but for the potential for "baby farming"

We are just now getting to the point where we are not as reliant on the embryonic stem cells. In order to reach that level of understanding, we REQUIRED the use of the embryonic stem cells. This new research is very promising indeed, but the new technique, like de-differentiation before it, won't replace embryonic stem cells, and wouldn't have been possible without them to begin with.

well, if they can grow kidneys I'm all for it

Thats around the corner. They did the windpipe. Certain organs are more complex in function. Like take a pancreas for instance. That contains the insulin producing beta cells so that is a little more complicated in its function but that will essentially cure type one diabetes. Kidneys are not as sophisticated as a pancreas.

separation of church and state is like some womens legs.... they just ain't separating

You post begs a humorous response but I am afraid all the best ones might be construed as a personal attack so I won't do it.

It did make me chuckle though

I would rather actually argue about this. Where are the right wing Christians when you want them? Busy proselytizing up a storm on secular threads I guess.

I like hearing the here comes the cloning arguments.

You could take any number of activities to extremes and cause harm.

We saw that propaganda here in Michigan last fall when there was a stem cell research proposition on the ballot. Of course most of the money to run ads, that even the people who opposed the proposition admitted were lies, came from sources outside the state including churches and right to life organizations.

The ads used the typical scare tactics but this time they lost.

It was a victory for science, logic and facts over voodoo, scare tactics and big money religious organizations.

Oh happy day!

I like you. You're nice to people on here.

All I wanna know is, why politicians are so quick to throw religion under the bus in the name of "Separation of Church and State" but are reallllll quick to haul their bibles out to condemn gay marriage??? Nice double standard I'd say.

In reading over this thread a couple of items have struck me.

First is the historical perspective of Separation of Church and State. The U.S. was seeking to establish an identity separate from that of England. Several colonies (but not all) were established so people could practice their religion as they saw fit. To prevent several colonies/states would not adopt the Constitution without there being a provision that would prevent the Federal Government from DENOMINATION as the official church of the U.S..

Second, there are a number of differences between a religion, denomination, and church.

Third two of the documents that greatly influenced the writers of the U.S. Constitution were the Constitution of the Iroquois League of Nations and the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church. Both documents focused on a division of power and the opportunity for equal expression of all opinions.

Yes a number of the Founding Fathers had Deistic leanings. Several also had Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, and a number of other denominational leanings. A Deistist believes in Higher Power/God. They don't believe that Power is actively involved in the day to day activities of Their creation.

Unfortunately people often us words such as religion, church, and specific denomination as synonyms. They are not.

The purpose of the Separation of Church and State was so that the Government would not force a specific set of religious beliefs upon other. The interpretation of that is very difficult task. Personally I have not agreed with all those interpretation. But then I also do not agree with the Biblical interpretation of the denomination to which I belong.

Each person has a right to their opinion. If they don't agree with how the government has interpreted something. Get involved!

Peace and Shalom to all.

I do not particulary understand this legal stuff, but there is an agrument between christians and nonbelievers where christians say we were founded on judeo christian values, what the heck does that mean exactly, and if we have seperation of church and state, shouldn't it mean just that, the church stays out of the states business? Or do I have that wrong?

No it doesn't mean that members of a church should not be politically involved. All it means is that the government can not adopt an Official State Church or Religion. Such as England has with the Church of England.

As for Judeo/Christian values...think you would find different denomination interpreting those in a variety of ways.