Gene Frenkle Posted March 11, 2011 Posted March 11, 2011 Quote Several Minnesota Democrats joined with 31 Republicans in offering a bill Wednesday that would ban embryonic stem cell research in the state under the guise of banning “human cloning.” The Human Cloning Prohibition Act of 2011 would make somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), a component of creating embryonic stem cell lines, illegal and would impose a felony charge on scientists who conduct such research. Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, the main proponent of the bill, has stated that creating stem cell lines is akin to killing a human being. http://minnesotaindependent.com/78718/legislators-seek-to-make-embryonic-stem-cell-research-a-felony I'm not even going to bother commenting on this one, mostly because I'm a pro-baby-killing hippie liberal.
DC Tom Posted March 11, 2011 Posted March 11, 2011 On 3/11/2011 at 12:25 AM, Gene Frenkle said: http://minnesotaindependent.com/78718/legislators-seek-to-make-embryonic-stem-cell-research-a-felony I'm not even going to bother commenting on this one, mostly because I'm a pro-baby-killing hippie liberal. Bunch of retards. And not just because the argument is specious...banning it in the state is only going to drive whatever R&D is going on into other states.
UConn James Posted March 11, 2011 Posted March 11, 2011 I'm not the most science-minded person. Is this the process developed a couple of years back that was supposed to wipe out the debate of embryonic vs. adult stem cells? If so, this is idiotic. This is tissue cloning, not cloning an entire human being. I really wish they would stay away from these losing side issues and concentrate wholly on the economy and defense.
Gene Frenkle Posted March 11, 2011 Author Posted March 11, 2011 On 3/11/2011 at 1:16 AM, UConn James said: I'm not the most science-minded person. Is this the process developed a couple of years back that was supposed to wipe out the debate of embryonic vs. adult stem cells? If so, this is idiotic. This is tissue cloning, not cloning an entire human being. I really wish they would stay away from these losing side issues and concentrate wholly on the economy and defense. Unfortunately, nothing is so simplistic. Embryonic cells lines are still used in specific areas of research in which adult cells are not as promising. That's my understanding of it at least. I'd imagine that one day your statement will be correct, once we truly understand how these things work.
Chef Jim Posted March 11, 2011 Posted March 11, 2011 On 3/11/2011 at 12:25 AM, Gene Frenkle said: http://minnesotainde...search-a-felony I'm not even going to bother commenting on this one, mostly because I'm a pro-baby-killing hippie liberal. But again in your mind this isn't about politics.
3rdnlng Posted March 11, 2011 Posted March 11, 2011 On 3/11/2011 at 12:25 AM, Gene Frenkle said: http://minnesotaindependent.com/78718/legislators-seek-to-make-embryonic-stem-cell-research-a-felony I'm not even going to bother commenting on this one, mostly because I'm a pro-baby-killing hippie liberal. I'm a pro-baby-killer myself. It's just that the babies I'm for offing are much bigger babies and are liberal.
Gene Frenkle Posted March 11, 2011 Author Posted March 11, 2011 On 3/11/2011 at 6:52 PM, Chef Jim said: But again in your mind this isn't about politics. No, this one actually is about politics. Politics and the legislation of "morals". VERY un-libertarian and VERY intrusive. In the part I quoted, I made sure to include a reference to the fact that this involves bi-partisan stupidity. On 3/11/2011 at 7:26 PM, 3rdnlng said: I'm a pro-baby-killer myself. It's just that the babies I'm for offing are much bigger babies and are liberal. Well of course you are. You're stereotypically only interested in preserving human life prior to birth. In related news, water is still wet.
DC Tom Posted March 11, 2011 Posted March 11, 2011 On 3/11/2011 at 6:27 PM, Gene Frenkle said: Unfortunately, nothing is so simplistic. Embryonic cells lines are still used in specific areas of research in which adult cells are not as promising. That's my understanding of it at least. I'd imagine that one day your statement will be correct, once we truly understand how these things work. I think he's referring to a news report a while back whereby they could trigger some types of adult stem cells to "revert" to embryonic stem cells. Clearly, my memory's hazy on the report...and I'm too lazy to look for it right now. On 3/11/2011 at 7:53 PM, Gene Frenkle said: Well of course you are. You're stereotypically only interested in preserving human life prior to birth. In related news, water is still wet. Classic conservative philosophy: "life begins at conception and ends at birth".
3rdnlng Posted March 11, 2011 Posted March 11, 2011 On 3/11/2011 at 8:32 PM, DC Tom said: I think he's referring to a news report a while back whereby they could trigger some types of adult stem cells to "revert" to embryonic stem cells. Clearly, my memory's hazy on the report...and I'm too lazy to look for it right now. Classic conservative philosophy: "life begins at conception and ends at birth". Since you don't know my philosophy you would be better off not assuming anything.
Gene Frenkle Posted March 11, 2011 Author Posted March 11, 2011 On 3/11/2011 at 8:32 PM, DC Tom said: I think he's referring to a news report a while back whereby they could trigger some types of adult stem cells to "revert" to embryonic stem cells. Clearly, my memory's hazy on the report...and I'm too lazy to look for it right now. No, you're right, but there are limits to that method right now. Something about the cells retaining certain properties from before they were reverted, making them not-so-good. I'm not going to pretend to understand the details or reasons behind this, but it sounds like they just need more research. I think that working with the embryonic stem cell lines makes such research easier. Except in Minnesota apparently.
DC Tom Posted March 11, 2011 Posted March 11, 2011 On 3/11/2011 at 9:59 PM, 3rdnlng said: Since you don't know my philosophy you would be better off not assuming anything. You have a philosophy? I thought it was just a kind of generalized seizure disorder. Give it a rest, dipshit. You were the furthest thing from my mind when I wrote that.
3rdnlng Posted March 11, 2011 Posted March 11, 2011 On 3/11/2011 at 10:04 PM, DC Tom said: You were the furthest thing from my mind when I wrote that. In that case, I accept your apology.
Chef Jim Posted March 11, 2011 Posted March 11, 2011 On 3/11/2011 at 10:04 PM, DC Tom said: You have a philosophy? I thought it was just a kind of generalized seizure disorder.
DC Tom Posted March 11, 2011 Posted March 11, 2011 On 3/11/2011 at 10:10 PM, 3rdnlng said: In that case, I accept your apology. Ah, the Joe_the_6_Pack gambit. Good play. (That was sarcasm, in case you didn't know and/or had a debilitating stroke recently.)
3rdnlng Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 On 3/11/2011 at 11:28 PM, DC Tom said: Ah, the Joe_the_6_Pack gambit. Good play. (That was sarcasm, in case you didn't know and/or had a debilitating stroke recently.) Geeez, I'm beginning to like this new and kinder Tom. Complimenting me and showing your concern for your fellow man is touching.
RkFast Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) On 3/11/2011 at 12:43 AM, DC Tom said: Bunch of retards. And not just because the argument is specious...banning it in the state is only going to drive whatever R&D is going on into other states. Which is the state's rights to do such things. Minnesota dont want it....others might. That whole pesky Federalism thing at work. Edited March 12, 2011 by RkFast
Gene Frenkle Posted March 12, 2011 Author Posted March 12, 2011 On 3/12/2011 at 2:41 PM, RkFast said: Which is the state's rights to do such things. Minnesota dont want it....others might. That whole pesky Federalism thing at work. They're legislating morals, which is bull ****.
Nanker Posted March 12, 2011 Posted March 12, 2011 On 3/12/2011 at 3:14 PM, Gene Frenkle said: They're legislating morals, which is bull ****. Oh man, I really miss those cigarette and liquor ads on TV.
Gene Frenkle Posted March 12, 2011 Author Posted March 12, 2011 On 3/12/2011 at 4:06 PM, Nanker said: Oh man, I really miss those cigarette and liquor ads on TV. Cigarettes and liquor represent a health risk. What's your stance on recreational drug use?
Recommended Posts