E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSVATICAN CITY -- I had a front-row seat this week for one of the pressing ethical discussions of our time: Can religion and science ever get along? Specifically, can stem cell research proceed with the blessing of religion?
In an unprecedented and truly startling move, the Catholic Church has answered yes. The Vatican this week reiterated that it has entered into an unusual partnership aimed at boosting use of adult stem cells to treat disease, rather than focusing on research into embryonic stem cells.
Church leaders explicitly endorsed the work of New York-based NeoStem Inc. as part of the Vatican’s recently announced $1 million, five-year initiative to direct research toward adult stem cell therapies and away from embryonic stem cell use.
But do cardinals in red caps and men in collars trained in canon law and biblical study know best about how scientists should seek to find cures for damaged hearts, severed spinal cords, arthritic knees, lupus, peripheral artery disease and diabetes?
Will the scientific or investment community in America or around the world take the suggestions of the pious and devout -- but scientifically rather undistinguished -- seriously?
The leaders of the church have made it clear time and again that they oppose the destruction of embryos as a way to get stem cells. No news there. In fact, the scientific status of embryonic stem cell research never got a spot in the three-day conference, which ended Saturday with an audience with the Pope.
The point of this meeting, at which I was an invited speaker, was partly to reemphasize Rome’s implacable opposition to any research involving embryo destruction.
The meeting I went to was sponsored by the Pontifical Academy for Culture, one of a number of advisory groups that meet regularly inside the Vatican. There, church leaders sought to soften a tough ethical spot: intractable opposition to the use of embryonic stem cells that could hold cures for a long list of awful diseases.
The point of the meeting was to crack the dilemma by making it clear to the world that the Vatican is aware of the need to find solutions.
But the Vatican’s earnest desire to offer hope without compromising a core moral stance led to way too much enthusiasm about the prospects for current research in adult stem cell research.
While some top-tier science was presented at the conference, there was too much time given to claims of cure that had little to support them but patient testimonials, small studies with no long-term follow-up, and, to be blunt, some science that has nothing but the backing of a single very optimistic scientist looking to attract a grant or an investor.
The church is not yet very good at picking the wheat out of the biomedical chaff. In its enthusiasm to be seen as wanting to help people worldwide suffering from chronic and miserable incurable diseases, the Vatican is far too enamored of every claim of cure involving non-embryonic stem cells.
Adult stem cell research holds promise for many diseases. But the Vatican needs to realize that it has its own pitfalls, including a lack of adequate international regulatory oversight, companies rushing to hype their work to attract investment, an absence of standardized registries to evaluate claims of cure, and not a few outright scammers looking to make a quick buck off of the desperate.
Pushing for adult stem cell research means pushing for it to be ethical in all regards, not just because no embryos are destroyed.
It remains to be seen how this campaign for moral stem cell science plays out. Many researchers pursuing embryonic and cloned stem cell research will pay no attention to the church’s message. Politicians representing nations with large numbers of Catholic voters are likely to press harder for funding for adult stem cell work.
My own view is that the Vatican still has a ways to go in distinguishing sound science from hype and insisting on good science as the basis for what the church wants to promote as moral.
Arthur Caplan, Ph.D., is director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania.
Related commentary:
Human rights for embryos? Initiative at odds with science
Leave a Comment:
How is it that imaginary gods, devils, and so forth can control anything -- let alone science?
Control isn't the issue, respect of life is. The Vatican knows it cannot 'control' science, but requests that life as the Catholic Church views it is respected. At the very least they are putting their money where their beliefs are. At present, there have been positive results from adult and umbilical cord stem cell research. The Vatican is encouraging future research in those areas.
There is nothing more than ethical 'control' over embryonic stem cell research. To often mainstream media does not differentiate between the varied types of stem cell research leaving the indication that religious groups are not only against all stem cell research, but against all science. Such innuendos are misleading.
The Vatican's tried to control science for centuries. Who made people like Galileo heretics again? Oh yeah.
If it's about ethics, after the initial creation of the church and the priests/bishops who turned their flock into the Romans to be crucified and gave the Romans bibles to be burned...This religion has no moral ground.
Life is what you make of it. If after birth you chose to diddle little boys, launder money for drug cartels, and essentially be a pain to your species, then you serve no useful purpose.
"Respect for life" from the child molesters and cover-up artists?
Joke right? Money where you mouth is? $1m..... let's see.... $400M for setting child charges... and they give them $1m..... that's a joke.... it's a token!
Go away Catholic demons.
Catholic Church for centuries has been haven to pedophiles with the church complicit in their crimes.
Catholic Church feigns concern over clump of cells and yet turns blind eye to life-agonizing molestation of our children.
.
Mmmm... I wonder which word I should take for how to go about the subject of stem cell research. One group has given numerous advancements including but not limited to, antibiotic therapy, anti-viral therapy, limb replacement, vision improvement, life-span increase, later to end of life care, pain reduction, cancer treatment/prevention/removal, organ transplant, drug treatment, etc.... the other one decided to hide pedophilia in its ranks for fear of losing money... Oooh tough choice... But, I think I'm going to have to go with group #1 seeing as group # 2 has done jack-@!$%# to advance science.
Apparently, there are six morons who don’t know how to reason with information.
Dangerous Mind? More like, no mind at all. Without question, The Vatican did try to control science for centuries, but like other global institutions, the Vatican has learned from its mistakes of the past. If you had the intellectual capacity to comprehend the gist of the article: Can Religion and Science ever get Along? (…) the Catholic Church has answered yes. You would have understood that a number of important issues had been discussed. The Vatican hasn’t changed its view regarding embryonic stem cell research. It does support adult stem cell research. It is concerned about financial regulation, etc, etc.
IMHO, what the hell are you babbling about? The article is about science in general, and stem cell research in particular.
You know nothing about the history of the Christian church, and even less about the history of Rome. However, you do seem to know something about didling little boys, and laundering afterbirth for drug money.
I am convinced that you are a pain in the ass, and that you serve no useful purpose. Thanks for playing.
Devil’s Son, Do you share a brain with IMHO? You probably got beat up a lot in high school, right? I think you respect child molesters, because you’ve spent a lot of time under the covers with male make-up artists. But it’s all good.
Kevin, the joke’s on you. We don’t know where your mouth’s been.
Go away UnitedStates1776, you’re brain dead. You Claim: “Catholic Church for centuries has been haven to pedophiles with the church complicit in their crimes. Catholic Church feigns concern over clump of cells and yet turns blind eye to life-agonizing molestation of our children.” Cite your sources.
Without question, there are pedophiles in the Catholic Church. There are pedophiles in the post office; there are pedophiles in the military; there are pedophiles in the fire department; police department; IBM, NASA; FBI; KGB; and without question, your family. Sarcasm aside, there are pedophiles in all walks of life, and how far back in time it goes is anybodies guess. More than likely, it goes right back down the tree of life to every species of primate.
For you to claim that you know for a fact that the Catholic Church “feigns” anything with a “blind eye” without providing the slightest piece of evidence, puts you right down there with the chimps and the baboons. How stupid do you think we are? If you can’t prove it…don’t say it. Bullsh!ters are a dime a dozen.
Doggysaywhat, Mmmm…I wonder what Eastern European mud hole you crawled out of. You speak English like Bella Lugosi.
Here is for you to handle about critical thinking. It is often that article talks about one subject…no? This article talk about adult stem cell bowling. When you for writing reply to article is good to talk of subject of article, not pedophiliac uncle who molested your dog last Easter. Do not speak of kielbasa in pants at night club either; it is not part of article. Stay focused.
FYI- I’m not a Catholic, I’m an agnostic.
LOL, you have no "respect for life". If you did you would treat everyone equally and care for all living things.
JerseyJ9, who are you addressing your comment to?
Arkius, you missed the point entirely... When looking at the advancements given through science vs the current catholic church, we see huge benefits from science. You're typing on one of those advancements now. What has the catholic church done in the past century with regards to creating advancements that we use or curing ailments afflicting us? Also, it wasn't the amount of pedophilia in the church that was the problem but rather, the cover up of the abuse to protect the organization and members (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases).
What most people have come to understand is that it's extremely hypocritical for the catholic church to claim moral superiority as the reason for doing something or not doing something (embryonic stem cell research) in science given their past behavior in other areas (pedophile priest). See, that's how critical thinking works. You draw conclusions using knowledge gained in areas outside of those presented in the article. Here's an easy example for you to follow. If I were to say, "Gravity will be reversed tomorrow" 10 times and been proven wrong each time, should you really analyze that statement without the knowledge of the other times? If I then said "The moon is made of cheese." would you analyze that statement without the knowledge of my previous one? No, you wouldn't.
For the catholic church, they know very little about science as demonstrated by what was presented at their meeting (see article above). They also clearly believe they have the moral authority to make decisions for the actions of others. But, we see several situations where their behavior was questionable at best, immoral/illegal at worst (see wikipedia link above).
So, the catholic church doesn't have scientific authority to make such statements, and their behavior regarding pedophile priest negates any moral authority to make such decisions. Again, we're far better off trusting the science community to make decisions about stem cell research.
Doggy, if anyone has missed the point it’s you.
What you and the other five “contributors” seem to be tripping over is that the church isn’t claiming moral superiority, only moral authority. Can you tell the difference? And you have got to be the last person on earth to even attempt to explain critical thinking to anyone. On that issue you remain clueless.
Let’s examine your arguments for “critical thinking”: “For the catholic church, they know very little about science as demonstrated by what was presented at their meeting (see article above).” To begin with, the Vatican is kept up to date on every discipline of science by the Pontifical Academy of Science. Therefore, on that point, you don’t know what you’re talking about.
“They also clearly believe they have the moral authority to make decisions for the actions of others. But, we see several situations where their behavior was questionable at best, immoral/illegal at worst (see wikipedia link above).” Uh………hello. Earth to doggy….come in. Every religion believes it has a moral authority….duh….that’s the nature of religion. I don’t know where you’re getting the “make decisions for the actions of others” part from, but your thinking is more than a little strange to start with, so I’ll just let that one slide. Again, you’re clueless.
Your thinking is just plain stupid. Do you really believe any Christian sect, or Muslim sect, or Judaic sect et. al. is flawless? If you do, than you’re dumber than a doorknob. Do you really believe that the members of those sects don’t try to cover up crimes committed by their collogues? If you do, than your head is firmly up your ass.
Try and wrap your brain around these concepts:
All religions are dogma. The dogma is a framework of principles to help people co-exist with one another, e.g., the Ten Commandments. The dogma is bland, but has universal appeal. The folks administering the religion are part of the population the dogma is designed to influence.
Some of the folks involved with administering the religion occasionally get into trouble with their local communities.
Question 1: Does this mean that the dogma is flawed?
Question 2: Does this mean that some of the folks involved with administering the religion are flawed?
No. The dogma is what it is. You either follow its tenets or you don’t.
Yes. For whatever reason, some of the folks involved with administering the religion are messed up. And yes, some of their supervisors tried to cover up their crimes. The crimes are heinous, and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The cover ups are stupid, and the perpetrators should be held accountable. But for you to suggest that the behavior of an unknown number of priests somehow discounts and disregards centuries of good works by the Catholic Church and other Christian denominations, as well as other religions and religious sects, and relieves them of their moral authority, is absolutely the most ignorant thing any human being has ever said any where on this planet.
No institution, especially one as vast as an organized religion, can manage its staff down to the individual level. All human beings who supervise other human beings, are themselves flawed human beings. It is a vicious cycle, and it will continue until the human species ceases to exist.
The Vatican should have NO problem with embryonic stem cell research for non-Catholics, since by the teaching of the church, they are all doomed to hell anyway. Get the church--and all the other religious voodoo--out of my life and out of my government. It might be instructional to note that Italy's birth rate ranks 207 out of 221 countries--near the bottom. Abstinence? Get real. If Italians put convenience or economics ahead of the tenets of the church, should we not put saving lives ahead of obeying the pope?
Sherrie, the Church does not teach that all non-Catholics are going to hell. Perhaps you should do some research before babbling?
Agreed, Mr. Spock. The Catholic Church does not teach that anyone goes to hell. Only God knows a person's heart. Sherrie, try reading the Catechism. I will even supply the info for you so you don't have to look it up:
839: Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways."325
The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People,326 "the first to hear the Word of God."327 The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God's revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews "belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ",328 "for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable."329
840 And when one considers the future, God's People of the Old Covenant and the new People of God tend towards similar goals: expectation of the coming (or the return) of the Messiah. But one awaits the return of the Messiah who died and rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and Son of God; the other awaits the coming of a Messiah, whose features remain hidden till the end of time; and the latter waiting is accompanied by the drama of not knowing or of misunderstanding Christ Jesus.
841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."330
842 The Church's bond with non-Christian religions is in the first place the common origin and end of the human race:
843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."332
Sherrie, you are a very angry woman, and your anger has turned you into a babbling idiot.
Modern day Catholicism does not doom to hell non Catholics. You didn’t tell us where you live, but where I live, in the United States, we have something called: separation of church and state; you might want to look into it. It might be instructional FOR YOU to note that your Italian birth rate argument is complete garbage.
To begin with, you expect the readers to accept your claim that Italy’s birth rate ranks 207 out of 221 without citing your source. You also discount, without any proof, the possibility that abstinence, among other things, can be one of the causes of Italy’s declining birth rate.
Next, in your syllogism: “If Italians put convenience or economics ahead of the tenets of the church, should we not put saving lives ahead of obeying the pope?” your conclusion does not follow from your premise; it is the stuff of fools.
Your premise: If Italians put convenience or economics ahead of the tenets of the church, comes out of the clear blue sky. Nowhere in your statement do you discuss the Italian people struggling with their conscience, i.e., balancing their checkbook, using a birth control device or relying on abstinence as a means of birth control as the church prescribes.
Your conclusion: should we not put saving lives ahead of obeying the pope? You’re kidding, right? Again, nowhere in your statement do you discuss how lives are being lost because Catholics are obeying the Pope.
Your thoughts are a jumbled mess. You’re letting your anger and your hatred overwhelm your judgment. Take a pill and try again later.
Sherrie don't bother reading the bull@!$%#, some people are forever duped by religion, but as far as religion goes the Catholic church is the bottom of the barrel.
Bayner, this isn’t about religion, it’s about critical thinking, i.e., reasoning with information and making sensible arguments that people can understand. And clearly, you did not understand the article or Sherrie’s reply or you would not make the statement you made.
As far as the Catholic Church goes, it is no better or no worse than any other dogma. It gives hope to those who need hope, and it is abused by those who are prone to be abusive.
Personally, I’m agnostic, but I can see some value in organized religion. The scientific method is not for everyone.
One of my earliest recollections while held prisoner in a Catholic boarding school was the first Mass I was forced to attend.
When the priest was ready to give us a sermon, the first thing he said as he scanned us all very slowly was, "I'm looking to see which of you will be going to hell to burn forever."
That was the end of religion for me. Even at ten years old I knew I was hearing a total moron.
Later, child abuse and even the accidental killing of a child while being buggered, the cover up and confession of the perpetrator which I was a witness to, confirmed my original thought.
Beyond that was the fact that even my father would not believe me when I told him about it. He said, " You must be wrong son, these are men of God."
The Catholic church sells franchises that come with a liscense to beg and a freedom from taxation. Face it.
Face this Pippo, the article has nothing to do with your father buggering you when you were ten. It does, however, have a lot to do with adult stem cell research. Do you have anything to say about that topic?
For Arkius. The catholic church has no scientific authority to make decisions or offer opinions about stem cell research (adult or embryonic) given the last hundred years of their "scientific advancements". They also have no moral authority to make such judgments given their past behavior with regards to allegations of child abuse among their priesthood.
Doggy, once again you don’t have a clue. The Catholic Church isn’t in the science business, therefore they haven’t made any claims to scientific authority. The Catholic Church, a.k.a., the Vatican, is advised by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, so they can offer a pretty good informed opinion on anything scientific. By the way, who’s informing your opinion, Irwin Corey?
The Catholic Church’s moral authority? I cover that issue in my above response to you. The church still maintains it’s moral authority.
As of now, your ability to argue a point had been challenged, and defeated.
Thank you for playing.
Religion and science stopped being a good match the second Lord Zenu landed here. I'm sure the Church has more important spiritual matters to concern itself with.
The entire Caplan article, as with every article on the embryonic science fiction, pretends to back science. The truth is, every such article IGNORES science.
Leaving abortions and ethics aside, all science has EVER done is prove the lie of the embryonic hoax, but you are not allowed to read that in North America so as to protect the profits of the worst medical system in the history of the world.
Our medical system has three rules:
1--Profits are all that matters
2--Cures of chronic diseases hurt profits, so none are allowed (the Caplans, bribed by Pharma, are not allowed to point out that sixty years have gone by since polio was kayoed). MDs who ignore this rule lose their license if they are lucky, or go to jail if they are not.
3---Patients are Lab Rats who have no rights at all, and absolutely NO CHOICE in this worst of all systems. 18% of our GNP goes to the ruthless medical profiteers who pitch useless, toxic drugs and outrageously priced dangerous therapies, while the second worst country spends only 12% and Europe averages 9%.
Caplan pretends lack of oversight is the issue that these stem cell cures should be kept away from us. All he wants is for the huge majority of corrupt scientists in this corrupt system to be allowed to keep the truth (and the only stem cells which will ever work) away from those that need them. Pharma is very happy with their $300MILLION PER DAY profits, and pays the Caplans (or in this case a patient-hating University of Pennsylvania) millions and millions to perpetuate the hoax.
Dr. Caplan, why not try a tiny sample of the truth just one time? Tell your readers that in North America they are not allowed to read any articles about the 1500+ ongoing or completed successful clinical trials using ADULT stem cells on over 10,000 patients. But they are allowed to read ten times a week about Geron's embryonic clinical trial, which, if successful, will put embryonics behind where adult stem cells for spinal cord patients were in 2002! That's right, with a lot of luck they will be TEN YEARS BEHIND!
Don Margolis, Chairman, The Repair Stem Cell Institute
Sorry catholics (and I am married to one), if was faced with being bedridden for life, or a terminal disease, I would volunteer to be the lab rat for others going through the same thing. I am not one to quote scripture, but didn't Jesus tell us to love, respect one another, and be compasionate?
If I am given the chance at some point in time, and one that helps others after me, I will do it. If it hasn't been for science, we would all be still standing around fire pits in bear rugs throwing rocks at the moon.
A man with a funny hat is supposed to tell me what GOD wants me to do, or should do? Maybe science can develope a drug that stop priests from sodomizing boys, but that's a stretch
Don get help you don't know a thing about medicine or research.
Mr. Margolies,
The mother ship is waiting for you behind the moon.
Don, There has never been a trial for SCI in the U.S. with adult stem cells. If you can list a link from clinicaltrials.gov to prove otherwise we would all be most grateful. I know those with chronic SCI certainly would want to know.
This is why religion sucks and Catholicism in particular. More concerned with a few cells than with human beings. If you are Catholic and do not want the benefits of embryonic stem cell research it is your choice. Do not make the rest of the world suffer because of your skewed perverted views of human existence. Get rid of your pedophile problem then you may be considered almost moral enough to make these proclamations.
I am not religious. However, I realized some time ago that the advances in medicine concerning embryonic stem cells are nothing worth publicizing. In fact, they have been like "taking one step forward and two steps back," as the phrase goes.
Researchers in China injected embryonic stem cells into a patient's brain, producing temporary improvement, but within two years the patient developed a brain tumor and died. An autopsy revealed that the fetal cells had taken root, but had then morphed into other types of human tissue - hair, skin and bone. These grew into the tumor, which killed the patient.
Even Paul Billings, a man with a PhD from Harvard University who studied stem cells' effects and co-founded a stem cell bank, said that hopes for major new medical treatments based on embryonic stem cells are "very remote".
I am all for researching new ways to treat horrible illnesses, but embryonic stem cell research is simply a waste of time and money. Adult stem cells hold much more promise. Using adult stem cells, we can rebuild faulty immune systems, improve eyesight, and even repair damaged brain tissue after a stroke.
I have not meant to offend anyone, only to state the facts are they are. Don't believe someone's opinion unless they have evidence to back it up.
Sir, you are liar. You quotes are straight from Pro-Life websites. There are many more PhDs that say otherwise, so this trumps you one PhD. Since you want to argue from a point of authority. And your single Chinese anecdote does not prove anything.
The Chinese have an 8000 year written history with no mention of a flood.
And we should care what the Catholic hierarchy thinks because ...? Perhaps it matters to some Catholics, but this church or any other is not deserving of a "seat at the table" in such discussions. The idea that churches and religion are somehow imbued with greater insight, moral understanding or ethical certitude is laughable. Leave this to rational, thinking folks.
Yours, B.R., is a sane position.
Unfortunately B.R. it is not a political position. And all those insisting that the religions have a seat at the table for this discussion would probably state that they don't like politics. The IRONY, The IRONY. LMAO
Let the Catholics forbid it for members of their club if they like, but keep them away from the rest of us. It is always religion that has to accept science in the end - be it the Earth orbiting the sun or evolution (which even the Pope acknowledged about 20 years back!). It is never science that has to accept that religion was right.
and if religion was right, science would have accepted it hundreds of years ago. That is the beauty of the scientific method.
Hey, what are we talking about here, religion or the catholic church ? ? ?
To some, it is pretty much the same. Catholics, Prodestants, Hindus, Muslims, etc.
Leave science and morals alone because they haven't done a good job of it.
The Catholic Church's opposition to embryonic stem cell research is incomprehensible given their own doctrine that every unbaptized baby (or embryo) that dies goes to an eternal state of "perfect natural happiness" (though unfortunately not to Heaven), whereas a vast number of those babies who become adults will spend all eternity in Hell. In traditional Catholicism, in fact, even children can suffer eternal damnation. These were the Church's teachings the last time I checked. It's hard to see the compassion--or the sense--in such dogma.
Quit trying to make some sense of a senseless institution. Now, emotional and hiearchical pretty much explains it. Actually, it's very much like science only take away the logic, reason and responsibility and you have religion.
That's what Jack Nicholson said when he played a writer who was asked by a breathless fan, "how do you think of a woman? He said,"I think of a man, then take away logic, reason and responsibility."
ROFL, Patrick, that has NEVER been the Church's teachings! You also need to look up the info before making such an iunane comment. Never has the Church taught that ANY person under the age of reason goes to hell!
Does the state of Alabama know and approve of stem cells being used? Alabama wants to roll the moment life begins to the bulge in a man's pants at a hoe-down.
But...I guess Alabama has more authority than the Vatican in such matters....
why not just avoid the conflict all together and just use animal stem cells there has been no scientfic suggestion that studying animal stem cells is any less benifcal than human stem cells because the main purpose it to find how and why they change into the cells they do
Bush and the Republicans who backed him, probably most of them not Catholics put the stop to embryonic stem cell research. The problem is not only the Catholic Church. It's also the religious right as a whole.
Vatican needs to push for harsher sentences for its child molestors still residing in the Catholic church.
The catholic church, the old man pope and the vatican are irrelevant.
Just the point of view of an intelligent person, who was raised catholic.
What about a vow of poverty for the pope and the vatican ? Sell the riches of the vatican, and feed the poor ! Or is the vatican too busy shielding the pedophiles from justice ?
Given the Catholic church's pathetic record on any thing concerning science, logic or reason, if these guys are against it you can pretty much bet that it's the right course of action. These folks have absolutely no business interjecting in to matters of science or health. They need to stick to their dogmas, miracles, and faith lessons and leave science to those who are qualified and trained to determine the best course of action. The church has done enough to set mankind back for another 1000 years without any more help.
Maybe we can clone Jack Kennedy...
When I was a child in parochial school, sister did say all Protestants and Jews would go to hell.
Captain Zorloff Speaks!
When did he come to life, or why are we printing what he thinks? It could very well be that that institution is extremely negative and backwards and totally un-natural - when it comes to the 'sexual' cleanliness of their followers...as sex is the basis of all life - and the fact that they are 'supposed to abstain' is supposed to equate to them being Elevated over the rest of us lowly sinners on Earth - and that they have some special Voodoo Magic power of Supremacy all over the World which would be COMICAL if it wasn't so frightening?
Sounds to me like he's funding his own extension of his life, LOL!
I don't usually make post but if you research the company NeoStem Inc. you would also see that this is linked to a pharmaceutical company which is linked to China and many people believe that these two equations are part of what is causing so many problems in our Country with uprisings, outsourcing and drug companies aiding in ruling politics which religion should have no part of. This is just an opinion.
Please, quit giving the Catholic Church access to a microphone.
A couple of points:
"Life" is a stupid starting point. Bacteria are alive, but bacteria are not sentient. Single celled eukaryotes are alive, but not sentient. There is no difference between single celled eukaryotes and a fertilized human egg which is also not sentient. Flatworms, roundworms, annelids are multicelled organisms, but none are sentient. There is no difference between an early term embryo an other nonsentient multicelled organisms. A lizard, a turtle or other reptile is also not sentient and neither is a mid-term embryo. The key here is sentience, not "Life". To be human is to be sentient, self aware, able to think. No embryo at any stage qualifies. Newborns only begin to express rudimentary sentience and only then can they be considered "human" and human life, sentient human life, is the point.
This whole thing about "Life" is religious bull@!$%#, made up as the word of some mythical being in the sky. You may argue about when a developing in utero or born baby develops sentience, but it certainly isn't at the ball of cells level or even at mid stage development. To not use embryonic stem cells for medical research is unconscionable, especially given the present level of adult stem cell research.
Ironically, when research creates adult stem cells that are truly equivalent to pluripotent embryonic stem cells, those adult stem cells could then be implanted to produce a human baby. That baby could be indistinguishable in every way from a normal baby. Would the Pope then deny that adult stem cell derived baby its humaness?
The Pope might call humaness the soul if he wishes, but it seems unlikely that the soul or mind, that which I would call the sentient mind can exist independently of the fully functioning sentient brain. After all, injury to the brain always has some effect on the mind and if you destroy the brain, you destroy the mind.
This rationalization of supporting adult stem cell research while condemning embryonic stem cell research appears to be based on not wanting your mid evil religion to look like it's anti science (which it most certainly is) and for contributing to medical progress (something it's hindering quite successfully). The irony of the ultimate possible equivalence of adult stem cells seems to be totally lost on them.
i don't accept your atheist bull*&^%.
turtles and lizards are not sentient, therefore they're the same as a blind baby? lol.
what about when you're sleeping and not dreaming. are you not sentient here? so it doesn't matter if your boyfriend rapes you while you're sleeping, since technically you weren't "sentient"?
and what about the atheist scientists who conducted biological testing on prisoners during world war 2? i mean, it doesn't matter if it's just experimenting for the knowlege of the human species, right?
don't bash catholicism without bashing all the negatives of atheism. you act exactly like those you are criticizing. you're on a high horse and talk self-righteously.
There is a lot of ignorance in your statement, i dont know where to start.
you're just simply wrong about ww2, the nazi's were doing gods work; gott mit uns.
can you prove that there were zero atheists in germany?
can you prove that the catholic church was not used by hitler for propaganda to influence the public?
and since you're such an expert on "sentience", can you enlighten us with your views?
A Hitler Youth marching song (Grunberger, A Social History) illustrates it:
Brownsmith, after reading your reply I get the impression that YOU are barely sentient.
Here’s a quick, non dictionary, off the top of my head definition of sentient for you: A living being that is able to reason with information, and experience life, i.e., understand that it is alive (cogito ergo sum).
You wrote: “turtles and lizards are not sentient, therefore they're the same as a blind baby? lol.” Did you even read Batrax discussion? Nowhere does he or she compare turtles and lizards to blind babies. Where are you getting this stuff from?
“what about when you're sleeping and not dreaming. are you not sentient here?”
Duh…..yeah, you freakin’ moron. If you can think and you know you’re alive, and you go to sleep, you’re a sentient being. Sleep is part of life.
“you're on a high horse and talk self-righteously.”
You are on a large dog and talk like a man with a paper ass.
I am embarrassed for you.
@Batrax, I doubt they understand your well made point or the difference between in-vitro and in-utero for that matter. Here we are two years since the first Geron patient was injected yet no ill effects and no tumors. Wish they had the money to have finished Phase I.
In this article, Art Kaplan, Ph.D. writes ".... its own pitfalls, including a lack of adequate international regulatory oversight, companies rushing to hype their work to attract investment, an absence of standardized registries to evaluate claims of cure, and not a few outright scammers .... Pushing for adult stem cell research means pushing for it to be ethical in all regards, not just because no embryos are destroyed."
Art - just exactly what is your point in this meandering babble?? Surely, ALL forms of stem-cell research, whether adult or embryo - require oversight, registries, scientific controls, etc. - are you just spouting nonsensical drivel like this just to fill the page - that must be it - you probably get paid by the word - in which case - then you're the scammer!!!
As an apprentice researcher, I should have insisted on using you, the people who supports embryonic stem cells, when you were an embryo to do stem cell research. It would not have mattered anyway if you continued to live and exist.
You need to find a new career, obviously you cant be objective.
@Tony-1802256, Would you have used us in-vitro or in-utero where we actually had a shot of developing by attaching to the wall of the womb ?