Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 44
  1. #11
    mikowee is offline Junior Member Newbie
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    13

    Default

    I am against stem cell research. I believe in God, but that's not why I'm against it. It's because I feel that disease and death exist for a reason. It's mother nature's way of population control. So far humans have been able to circumvent her mechanisms with superior intelligence, but the consequences are catching up.

    The fact is, there's too many damn people in the world. Which of course leads to excessive pollution, rapid depletion of resources, poverty, and just the degradation of the planet in general. In other words, if the disease doesn't kill us, something else will.

    So my conclusion is that while this research has the opportunity to save countless lives, the price will eventually be paid by future generations. You may win a battle against nature, but she'll always win the war.

  2. #12
    adonai is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,630

    Default

    ^ What?

    Look at this way then, it's diverting resources from more basic things like food to something that only the more affluent portions of the world can afford; a reduced global population for you, and a greater chance at a longer life for me.

    Seriously though, by your logic there is no feasible option other than to live as animals.
    Intelligence is a tool that tends to promote survival, if it's not used then what's the point of having it in the first place?
    Last edited by adonai; 01-16-2007 at 09:44 AM.

  3. #13
    mikowee is offline Junior Member Newbie
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by adonai View Post
    ^ What?

    Look at this way then, it's diverting resources from more basic things like food to something that only the more affluent portions of the world can afford, a reduced global population for you, and a greater chance at a longer life for me.

    Seriously though, by your logic there is no feasible option other than to live as animals, intelligence is a tool that tends to promote survival, if it's not used then what's the point of having it in the first place?
    Are you implying the affluent are more deserving of life?

    As for your second point, man is a recently developed species, so there's no way of telling whether superior intelligence increases the chances for survival. The most successful survivors to this point are the least intelligent, such as the virus, bacteria, cockroaches, etc. What has intelligence done for man? We've just gotten better at consuming everything and killing each other more efficiently.

    By the way, I'm not this pessimistic and anti-life in person, this is just for the sake of argument.

  4. #14
    adonai is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,630

    Default

    I know, it may not have any value in increasing long term survival, but that's not how evolution works. The best short term solution will always be chosen, and since intelligence has obviously been the one defining trait of humans that at the very least increases the survival of the individual.

    I never said that anyone was deserving of live, but being alive generally brings with it a sense of self preservation, so there's there isn't really a choice for someone that's already alive, I personally would welcome nearly anything that would extend my own life though (even at the expense of the length of someone else's life) and I would respect any similar views that others hold.

    Besides that's why I said "seriously though", it's not really a question that have a correct answer, unlike the conscious choice to use human intelligence to it's fullest extent.

    Yeah, I love debating too, thanks for the opportunity.
    Last edited by adonai; 01-16-2007 at 01:41 PM.

  5. #15
    StealDragon's Avatar
    StealDragon is offline Super Moderator Community Builder
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    NCC-1701
    Posts
    13,424

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mikowee View Post
    As for your second point, man is a recently developed species, so there's no way of telling whether superior intelligence increases the chances for survival. The most successful survivors to this point are the least intelligent, such as the virus, bacteria, cockroaches, etc. What has intelligence done for man? We've just gotten better at consuming everything and killing each other more efficiently.
    i just want to note that this is an EXTREMELY unfair comparison. since bacteria, viruses, and insects have had BILLIONS of years to perfect their survival processes where as humans have only been around for a couple million years if that long. theyve had thousands of times longer to become hardy, well adjusted, and resourceful...

    ... so i call no fair.


    I'd like to die with the songs I love stuck in my head. I hope to make the most of these hollow bones we become.
    I raise a toast to the the souls that sang all along. I've been gathering friends to just to make some sounds,
    before the ship goes down, I've been making amends by making the rounds before the whole world ends


    [Chit Chat Specific Forum Rules] // Last Update - Friday March 13, 2009

  6. #16
    BlueDemon is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,286

    Default

    i´m 4such research with dna and such(as long as people won´t suffer from it)
    and i don´t think tht if we´re going to cure cancer and alzenheimer(sp?) would cause overpopulation(with the "help" of humans,mother nature kills enough humans already,that is with tsunamis etc.)

  7. #17
    adonai is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,630

    Default

    ^ Most bacteria, viruses, and arthropods don't have a reason to interact with humans in any way, and the ones that do tend to require us as hosts, so there's no reason for them to kill us at all.

    and their short generation span allows natural selection to take place much more efficiently, they can adapt genetically while humans have to adapt behaviorally (through the application of our superior intellect).

    It's still true though that intelligence hasn't been established as a trait that supports long term survival (as opposed to the flexibility afforded by short generation spans and very large numbers of offspring).

  8. #18
    Jakko's Avatar
    Jakko is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, US
    Posts
    4,503

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StealDragon View Post
    http://www.wgal.com/health/10725552/detail.html

    lets not make this into a religious debate (<= Futile Plea .-. ) i think this is good, now that techniques have developed that dont require the "death" of human embryos and the potential good that they can do against previously uncurable diseases, theres no reason why President Bush has to keep up his "its ungodly" bullshit. these techniques would have been developed anyway if he had passed it the first time, im just dissapointed that advancement was impeded on such flippant of reasons with the least heavy proof to back it up.

    but then again im biased. ive got a family riddled with diabetes and alzhiemers [sp?]... the fact that my christian family supports this and Good-Ole-God-Fearing Mr. Bush doesn't vexes me terribly.
    Question:
    How can you ask not to turn this into a religious debate, when you bash religion itself in your post?

  9. #19
    Digital_Eon's Avatar
    Digital_Eon is offline Super Moderator Community Builder
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Kya~nada
    Posts
    17,429

    Default

    They've discovered many things that could be linked to Alzheimer's - what I don't understand is why not just do the research and fix things without resorting to debates about what's life and all. I'm sure there are ways to cure or prevent such diseases without having to kill something.

    And anyway, another question is - would you feel comfortable being treated with something that came from what could have been a human if you'd let it live in its natural environment? I wouldn't. It's not a religious issue, it's a matter of what you'd choose, and I want to be given that choice.
    ~Digital_Eon~




  10. #20
    adonai is offline Senior Member Community Builder
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,630

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Digital_Eon View Post
    They've discovered many things that could be linked to Alzheimer's - what I don't understand is why not just do the research and fix things without resorting to debates about what's life and all. I'm sure there are ways to cure or prevent such diseases without having to kill something.
    Well, basically pieces of the person's brain is missing, there's actually less neural matter in someone with AD. I don't see how that can be cured without replacing the atrophied flesh.



    Quote Originally Posted by Digital_Eon View Post
    And anyway, another question is - would you feel comfortable being treated with something that came from what could have been a human if you'd let it live in its natural environment? I wouldn't. It's not a religious issue, it's a matter of what you'd choose, and I want to be given that choice.
    No problem at all:
    Quote Originally Posted by adonai View Post
    I' never said that anyone was deserving of live, but being alive generally brings with it a sense of self preservation, so there's there isn't really a choice for someone that's already alive, I personally would welcome nearly anything that would extend my own life though (even at the expense of the length of someone else's life) and I would respect any similar views that others hold.

    And since you are placing so much emphasis on life instead of sentience, in my opinion (and yours if you follow through with that logic) the embryos would be better off as a part of someone flesh (in which case it will be alive), rather then discarded after it's sat in storage for too long.
    Last edited by adonai; 01-16-2007 at 01:42 PM.

 

 
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
vBulletin Skin by: ForumThemes.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162