Home - List All Discussions

Clinton: OK to experiment on 'unfertilized embryos'

Former president confused about origin of 'little babies'?

by: lycan

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=91521

reply from: BossMomma

Unfertilized embryos? No such thing.

reply from: BossMomma

Hold the phone, my tax payers dollars are going to completely unproven research on embryos? WTF? I don't recall this being up for vote.

reply from: Shenanigans

Heh, and people say Bush Jr. is the dumbest president you guys have ever had.

reply from: BossMomma

Heh, and people say Bush Jr. is the dumbest president you guys have ever had.
Clinton got tossed out of office for getting a blow job, how dumb do you get?

reply from: Banned Member

My religion says that abortion is wrong. And while I may believe that life begins when the sperm meets the egg, and that only God should decide whether to take a life, I will not stand in the way of a woman's right to choose. If women do not have a right to choose, then it's a civil rights violation. -Al Sharpton
Pro-aborts have a rish history of saying stupic things.
Where is a person's "right to choose" in the Bible? Where is the right to choose in the Constitution?
Choose? Choose what? Choose abortion of course! No one contests a woman right to choose chocolate over vanilla, plaid verses stripes, cotten veses polyester or any one of a million other choices. The only choise that a woman makes that she doesn't have the right to make is her choice to kill an unborn baby!

reply from: micah

BossMomma, you seem like a pretty rational person, so I want to know why specifically you came to this conclusion on embryonic stem cell research.
Is it because you think it will be a waste of money? And if this is the case, would you change your mind if successful medical treatments came out of this research?

reply from: Banned Member

Tell me Micah, if you could cure cancer, for all people, for all time by simply killing one perfectly healthy living 3 month old child, would you kill that child?

reply from: Banned Member

I am not surprised to find that Spinwiddy has aspirations to be a prostitute.

reply from: micah

Of course I would. The most just war ever fought would (should) have involved a decision far harder than this.

reply from: Banned Member

Why would I even like to be anything like the things that you describe Spinwiddy? Do you think that there is some prestige in the things that you describe? I don't want sex for the sake of sex. Women are not things for my amusement and yet you would happily be the object of someones amusement, even for money. That you would even joke about it shows the kind of person you are. I don't use woman and I would never encourage a woman to have an abortion. I believe in the family and the sanctity of life. That is the kind of person that I am. What kind of person are you? Children should be conceived in the sacrament of marriage but they first and always deserve the right to be born and to live. You Spinwiddy, present the image of a completely immoral person steeped in sin. And every person that you brag about sleeping with rather than lament as a personal failure confirms that you are an immoral person. Every attack on the Catholic Church which portrays many good people as being the same as a few bad ones makes you an immoral person. Every defense of abortion and attack on the pro-life movement makes you an immoral person. You don't respect anyone and you don't respect anything. You don't even respect yourself. Do you really expect us to believe that a 46 year old woman who can brag about her past relationships and that she has been living with a man for 12 years really wishes that this what you wanted out of life? I think that you mock and denegrate me because even though I am still single, I can still have what you have never had. Worse, I can treat a woman the way that you have never been treated, as something special, unique, cherished and loved with respect being the only condition for that love. You can never be treated the way that I would treat a woman because you have already spent a lifetime allowing men treat you the way that I would never treat a woman. You are really quite an object of pity Spinwiddy.

reply from: Banned Member

You would kill a three month old living born child?
What if it took 3 children? Or 30 children? How many born children would you kill to find that one cure for cancer Micah?

reply from: Banned Member

Any man that would allow you as much time as you spend online in this forum doesn't adore you. A real women wants to loved and respected, not put on a pedastal and worshiped. How needy and desprate does a man have to be to offer worship and sex to have a woman. So I imagne that he allows you whatever you want and whenever you want it. How spineless and pathetic is that?

reply from: micah

Yes. Just imagine every child and adult who is dying from cancer waking up tomorrow and discovering that the disease over which they have prayed and begged god for years to help them (with no answer) simply doesn't exist any more.

reply from: BossMomma

BossMomma, you seem like a pretty rational person, so I want to know why specifically you came to this conclusion on embryonic stem cell research.
Is it because you think it will be a waste of money? And if this is the case, would you change your mind if successful medical treatments came out of this research?
I would prefer my tax payers dollars went to something that didn't include research on human embryos, it comes too close to using human beings for parts. And before you get started I know we disagree on what defines a human being, I'd rather support adult stem cell and cord blood research.

reply from: Banned Member

How many children would you kill Micah? 1, 10, a 100, a 1000? to cure a million?
How many perfectly healthy born children would you kill Micah?

reply from: BossMomma

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Clinton reigned over the greatest era of peace and prosperity in American History. He left office at the end of his second term.
I'd be happy to blow him if it meant the return of happiness and cash. (I really enjoy hapiness and cash...)
Just don't let him skeet on your dress, that stuff just never comes out..

reply from: BossMomma

Of course I would. The most just war ever fought would (should) have involved a decision far harder than this.
That's sick Micah, what if your child had the cure to save millions, would you sacrifice your child?

reply from: BossMomma

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
I'd be surprised if you could land a crackwhore with a kilo of high-test glass...
:chokes: OMG LOL remind me never to read this forum and drink coffee at the same time!

reply from: Banned Member

No man can look at you the way that the woman that I will love will be looked at by me, or anyone like me. You are woman who is one of many, the next and soon to be the last to be replaced by another next woman. How many times have you been compared to someone else by a man when he was with someone else? or when that man was with you?
A woman doesn't have to worry about that with me or other men like me. To be treated as unique and special. That's a blessing Spinwiddy. That's a blessing!

reply from: BossMomma

Just let us count the ways..

reply from: BossMomma

No man can look at you the way that the woman that I will love will be looked at by me, or anyone like me!
Even when you slap her on the ass and tell her to make you a sandwich?

reply from: Banned Member

Any man that would endure as much time as you spend online in this forum Spinwiddy is apparently more desparate than anything that I can certainly imagine. Again, pathetic!

reply from: micah

A fellow South Park fan?!

reply from: BossMomma

It could be that while Spin is signed on and logged in she is doing other things. I've been logged in for hours and not posting because I'm busy with the house and kids. ASSume much?

reply from: Banned Member

How many living children would you kill to cure cancer Micah?
Answer the question!

reply from: BossMomma

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Ooooooh!
Captain Control Freak is seeking obedience again!
Hate to say it but Micah's answer shocked me, she would agree to forcing an innocent 3 month old baby to be a sacrifice to save others. Saving others from suffering is one thing, but murdering an infant is abhorrent no matter how you slice it.

reply from: Banned Member

Micah has already said that she would kill one. I am wonder if she will go on record as to how many she would kill.
10 living born babies?
100 living born babies?
1000 living born babies?
To cure cancer?
How many?

reply from: micah

Again, 1 death is better than a million, isn't it? (And another thing, why is the death of so many US soldiers okay?)
But! Let us remember what exactly we are killing here. A 100-cell blastocyst:
http://ecuprophets.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/jj_blastocyst.jpg
Not exactly a 3-month old girl in a crib, is it?

reply from: BossMomma

Again, 1 death is better than a million, isn't it? (And another thing, why is the death of so many US soldiers okay?)
But! Let us remember what exactly we are killing here. A 100-cell blastocyst:
http://ecuprophets.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/jj_blastocyst.jpg
">http://ecuprophets.files.wordp..._blastocyst.jpg
Not exactly a 3-month old girl in a crib, is it?
No it isn't but you stated you would agree to sacrifice that three month old girl to cure cancer. What if your three month old girl had to be sacrificed to cure cancer? Would you serve your baby up as a martyr?

reply from: micah

I'll answer that when you answer one of my questions. How many kids would you let die before allowing us to conduct embryonic stem cell research?

reply from: Banned Member

What if they were 7 months in the womb?
Or 8 months in the womb?
How many would you be willing to kill?

reply from: Banned Member

I would kill any life to save life. It is a principled decisions based upon objective right and wrong. Killing human persons is wrong, for any good that might result, large or small. Evil cannot accomplish good no matter how it is rationalized.

reply from: micah

You mind if I take a pass on this question since it involves my kids?
And can I ask you a question? What would you choose? The death of one of my kids, or the death of millions of other people's kids?

reply from: micah

Well then this completely changes the context, doesn't it? I don't know anyone who would advocate experimenting on 7 month fetuses. You take about 75 cells, however, and that's another story.

reply from: BossMomma

You mind if I take a pass on this question since it involves my kids?
And can I ask you a question? What would you choose? The death of one of my kids, or the death of millions of other people's kids?
Neither, no one should be obligated to die for anyone else which is why I make an exception on abortion if the mother's life is in danger and yes, you may pass on the question involving your child, I think that refusal to answer says more than enough.

reply from: BossMomma

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Yeah, but in real life we're talking about 18 cell divisions in a petri dish.
I know that, Micah just shocked me is all. I'm not very comfortable with the research on embryos because I feel it opens the door to research on humans at much older stages in life.

reply from: micah

I'm sorry this shocks you. May I ask, how then do you justify any war?

reply from: BossMomma

I'm sorry this shocks you. May I ask, how then do you justify any war?
I'm anti-war actually. War occurs when the brain gets pushed aside and the balls take over. Innocent lives are butchered because of uncompromising idiots. There really is no justifying war.

reply from: micah

Well, you're consistent. Especially because the cost of war is *far* higher than one innocent child. But then I ask, is pacifism always the answer? What if there is a mad man who wants to take over a continent? He shouldn't be stopped, even if it means war?

reply from: micah

I would never let my kids go to war. I would move to Canada before letting my kids become cannon fodder.

reply from: BossMomma

Well, you're consistent. Especially because the cost of war is *far* higher than one innocent child. But then I ask, is pacifism always the answer? What if there is a mad man who wants to take over a continent? He shouldn't be stopped, even if it means war?
I think he could be stopped without death, it just wouldn't be as easy as shooting him dead. War is the easy way, war is throwing all intelligence aside and saying ***** it, lets just kill the bastards! I'm not known for supporting the short cuts in life.

reply from: BossMomma

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
If I had a child who signed up to fight in Iraq, I'd break their legs before I'd let them die in that pointless catbox.
On the other hand, I'd think it was patriotic if I had a child that chose to risk their life in Afghanistan.
It's just one of those weird valuation things.
There are parents who won't get their kids vaccinated because the vaccines were produded with an embryonic cell medium. I think they're BATS!
Do you care if an embryo died in order to protect your kids?
Would you refuse the vaccine and risk your children's lives?
My kids are all current on their vaccines, what do you think? If I was sure that stem cell research would stay with 18 cell embryos with no hearts or brains or any ability to suffer I'd support it. But in giving science an inch in human research their track record says they'd take a mile. Look at what medical research already does to animal models? Thousands in government funding to see how a group of monkeys does with their eyes sewn shut and electrodes implanted into their brains. It's not the stem cell research so much as what could evolve from it that makes me leery of it.

reply from: BossMomma

Ditto. My kids will not be the martyrs for some champagne drinking cigar toking politician's agenda.

reply from: micah

I would disagree here and say that there have been situations where war was necessary as the lesser of two evils.
And let me say another thing that you are really atypical for a pro-lifer. Almost every pro-lifer I know tends to be relatively aggressive when it comes to military policy. If I have a picture of an aborted fetus, and a picture of an Iraqi child with his legs missing due to an errant bomb, sympathy tends to be inversely proportional between the two pictures.

reply from: BossMomma

I would disagree here and say that there have been situations where war was necessary as the lesser of two evils.
And let me say another thing that you are really atypical for a pro-lifer. Almost every pro-lifer I know tends to be relatively aggressive when it comes to military policy. If I have a picture of an aborted fetus, and a picture of an Iraqi child with his legs missing due to an errant bomb, sympathy tends to be inversely proportional between the two pictures.
I tend to be the exception not the rule in just about everything I do lol. But an aborted fetus and an Iraqi child maimed by war would get the same amount of sympathy from me and the same amount of protest against further incidences.

reply from: Shenanigans

Yip. But at least Bush knew what an embryo is.

reply from: Shenanigans

Just be sure to wear protection, Lord only knows what diseases that filthy mutt has picked up.

reply from: Shenanigans

This doesn't surprise me, really but I'd like to hear some more specifics. Would it be with a lethal injection? Or with a mace because a mashed up brain is needed?
What if it was Micah's child? Or a nephew, or niece or sibling? Could you, Micah, look your own child in the eye and kill them thinking "its for all those poor cancer people who can wake up one morning and not have cancer?"
I had a friend die from cancer, this was around the time when everyone was harping on about foetal research and the beginnings of stem cell research - she stated before she died she would never accept a cure that came from a child created or killed for that purpose.

reply from: BossMomma

This doesn't surprise me, really but I'd like to hear some more specifics. Would it be with a lethal injection? Or with a mace because a mashed up brain is needed?
What if it was Micah's child? Or a nephew, or niece or sibling? Could you, Micah, look your own child in the eye and kill them thinking "its for all those poor cancer people who can wake up one morning and not have cancer?
Micah didn't want to answer this question, I asked the same thing. It is easy to put someone elses child on the chopping block, but your own? I do not care how many men, women or, children die of cancer each year, I would not, could not sacrifice one of my babies and people may quote me on that.

reply from: micah

Then has been a fun little hypothetical situation we have discussed, but the real thing is coming from the anti-choicer. If a cure comes from embryonic stem cell research, the anti-choicer will have to decide what it more important: a person's life or the dignity of a blastocyst. Will the anti-choicer deny their own kids a cure to be consistent with their viewpoint?

reply from: faithman

What the bortheads, and the false pro-lifers do not understand, is that there is more to life than this physical world, and our physical bodies. Our bodies are merely the containers of the precious substance Called life. Life has to have that container to express itself in the natural world. Even if the container is flawed, it still makes it possible for the miracle of life to be expressed. Our common value is not found in the container, but what is contained. The life of a womb child is equal to the life contained in all of us. The only legitimate breaking of this container, is if it has the compunction to smash other containers without cause. When you take way the ability to express life, you loose the great privilege to express your own. Evil aggression must be subdued, or no container can have any security from unjust breakage. To take away the possibility of this wonderful spark of life to be expressed, makes this world a darker place, and the rest of us containers a little more impoverished, and alone. Though the womb child is a small container, it does not lessen the value of the life it contains. If fellow containers do not value the life of the womb child container, then they have placed their personhood container in great jeopardy. Anyone who does not see that womb children are fellow human containers, containing life of equal value to their own, is a self destructive fool, drunk on the power to kill, and must be stopped for the sake of the rest of us life containers. It is the life in us that makes us equal, not our degree of ability to express it.
-------------------------

reply from: Shenanigans

You bet your arse I would once I have my squeakers.
Whenever my doc wants to come at me with a vaccine I wanna know exactly where it came from. I don't want no murdered unborns stabbed into my body to protect me from somethig my bloody immune system could do itself.

reply from: yoda

That reminds me of an incident years ago, when I went to an emergency room for chest pains. After some tests, the nurse came into my room with a large hypodermic with a red fluid in it. I asked what it was. She replied "It's for you". I said I already figured that much, but I'd like to know what's in it. She said "Are you a physician or a pharmacist?" I replied that I was not, but that unless she told me what was in the syringe she wasn't going to put it in me. "Well I'll just put you down as refused the medication" she says. "Good", I replied, because that's what I'm doing". Way, way back then the didn't tell patients what they were being given, because doctors were Gods, and the nurses were their angels, and we were just the peons.

reply from: micah

Key part is underlined. You (and I) would be willing to forgo a vaccination you perceived is useless. But if it comes down between a blastocyst and your baby child...

reply from: Banned Member

Coward. You would kill a child for a cure but let your child fight for someone elses freedom. Coward.

reply from: BossMomma

Coward. You would kill a child for a cure but let your child fight for someone elses freedom. Coward.
Thats because it'd be her kid, as I said before, it's easier to see someone elses kid on the chopping block than your own.

reply from: Banned Member

And it's a lot easier to talk about other people killing their own unborn children than it is your own unborn children.

reply from: Banned Member

Spinwiddy, ugly man-woman who demands to be adored by spineless sex crazed wimps.

reply from: BossMomma

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
If I send you round-trip airfare and a tasty per diem, will you come tell my boyfriend that he's a "spineless, sex-crazed wimp?"
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!?
(This is gonna be GREAT! I'll post the video on YouTube...)
lol the forty year old virgin gets his ass beat.

reply from: Teresa18

What? Uh, Bill...after conception, the sperm has fertilized the egg, and a zygote (a new person) is present. The zygote then develops into a blastocyst, implants, and becomes an embryo. I don't know why Bill would care anyway, as he supported abortion up to partial birth when President.

reply from: AshMarie88

Yes. Just imagine every child and adult who is dying from cancer waking up tomorrow and discovering that the disease over which they have prayed and begged god for years to help them (with no answer) simply doesn't exist any more.
Not even my pro-choice friends would kill a 3 month old just to cure cancer... You're a psycho. I hope you don't have children or CAN'T have any.
If you HAD a child... say a year old or so, would you kill him/her to cure everyone in the world's cancer?

reply from: AshMarie88

You mind if I take a pass on this question since it involves my kids?
And can I ask you a question? What would you choose? The death of one of my kids, or the death of millions of other people's kids?
NO CHILDREN!
MURDERING a child to stop the NATURAL deaths of children is WRONG! Yes cancer is sad but you don't MURDER a child to prevent the deaths of many others!
I was once asked the same thing a couple years ago, and my answer remains the same: NO, I would NEVER sacrifice my own child's life to save a million, nor would I have an abortion to prevent all abortions. As sad as both of those situations are, I would do neither!

reply from: nancyu

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
If I had a child who signed up to fight in Iraq, I'd break their legs before I'd let them die in that pointless catbox.
On the other hand, I'd think it was patriotic if I had a child that chose to risk their life in Afghanistan.
It's just one of those weird valuation things.
There are parents who won't get their kids vaccinated because the vaccines were produded with an embryonic cell medium. I think they're BATS!
Do you care if an embryo died in order to protect your kids?
Would you refuse the vaccine and risk your children's lives?
My kids are all current on their vaccines, what do you think? If I was sure that stem cell research would stay with 18 cell embryos with no hearts or brains or any ability to suffer I'd support it. But in giving science an inch in human research their track record says they'd take a mile. Look at what medical research already does to animal models? Thousands in government funding to see how a group of monkeys does with their eyes sewn shut and electrodes implanted into their brains. It's not the stem cell research so much as what could evolve from it that makes me leery of it.
BossMomma, you are in support of human sacrifice.

reply from: Yuuki

I know you're quoting, but I could see you saying the above comment by yourself, too. Religion is your personal right. However, even the Bible states that it is wrong to force everyone to follow God's laws if they don't want to do so. They have FREE WILL to decide whatever they want. Thus, it is unfair to make any laws based solely on religious doctrine, from ANY religion. I'm sure you would not like being forced to obey Islamic laws.
Well free will is the right to choose, so if you look at it that way it's all over the bible. Freedom is also all over the constitution, so from that angle, there is an unstated right to choose.
That's because those rights are not currently being fought to become illegal. Abortion is, so that's what they have to focus on. And currently, she DOES have the right. It may not be ethical, but it is law.

reply from: Yuuki

I would. It wouldn't matter how old that person is. The moral good of curing cancer outweighs the moral evil of killing one person. And maybe I'd be sentenced to hell for that. But to know the good I'd given the world would make it worth it to me. Clearly, other people disagree on this subject. As for some of the follow ups on this I saw:
How many people would I kill? How many people will die from cancer this year? How many have died in the past? The original question asked for one. You can't up the stakes and ask the questionee to specify; that's not how your original rhetorical question worked.

reply from: nancyu

I would. It wouldn't matter how old that person is. The moral good of curing cancer outweighs the moral evil of killing one person. And maybe I'd be sentenced to hell for that. But to know the good I'd given the world would make it worth it to me. Clearly, other people disagree on this subject. As for some of the follow ups on this I saw:
How many people would I kill? How many people will die from cancer this year? How many have died in the past? The original question asked for one. You can't up the stakes and ask the questionee to specify; that's not how your original rhetorical question worked.
Great that's two "pro lifers" on here who approve of human sacrifice -- Yuuki and BossMomma. Anyone else?

reply from: yoda

Don't you just love how the faux lifers volunteer OTHER PEOPLE to die, but not themselves?

reply from: nancyu

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Are your kids vaccinated - particularly against Rubella?
How many more must die so that you can selfishly save your children?
Is there evidence that humans were intentionally sacrificed to produce the rubella vaccine? If there is I would be interested in seeing it.

reply from: nancyu

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Vaccines and Fetal Cell Lines
Thu, 01/01/2009 - 1:09pm | original article
There are three cell lines, derived from three abortions, that are involved in vaccine manufacture. From the National Network for Immunization Information (NNii): Immunization Issues: Human Fetal Links with Some Vaccines
Two different strains of human diploid cell cultures made from fetuses have been used extensively for vaccine production for decades. One was developed in the United States in 1961 (called WI-38) and the other in the United Kingdom in 1966 (called MRC-5).
WI-38 came from lung cells from a female fetus of 3-months gestation and MRC-5 was developed from lung cells from a 14-week-old male fetus. Both fetuses were intentionally aborted, but neither was aborted for the purpose of obtaining diploid cells. The fetal tissues that eventually became WI-38 and the MRC-5 cell cultures were removed from fetuses that were dead. The cellular biologists who made the cell cultures did not induce the abortions.
..........
The virus that led to the only rubella vaccine available in the United States and that is widely used overseas (Meruvax II, Merck) came from tissues obtained at the time of an abortion performed on a rubella virus-infected mother. The abortion was not conducted in order to isolate the virus, but rather because the mother and the fetus were infected with wild rubella virus that posed a risk of major birth defects.
Since that wild strain of rubella virus (known as RA27/3) was isolated, it has been grown in human fetal diploid cells. There is no need to obtain additional cells from aborted fetuses to sustain the supply of attenuated rubella viruses used to manufacture additional batches of rubella vaccine for the future.
During the development of the present rubella vaccine, cells from animals other than humans were also studied for vaccine manufacture but these proved to be less safe and/or less effective than the RA27/3 vaccine grown in WI-38 cells.
According to the PONTIFICIA ACADEMIA PRO VITA, (pdf file downloaded from NCBF Vatican Response) an English translation of a commentary which appeared in Italian in the scholarly journal Medicina e Morale, as of 2005 the following vaccines are manufactured using the cell lines WI-38, MRC-5 and or RA 27/3.
A) Live vaccines against rubella:
the monovalent vaccines against rubella Meruvax® (Merck) (U.S.), Rudivax® (Sanofi Pasteur, Fr.), and Ervevax® (RA 27/3) (GlaxoSmithKline, Belgium);
the combined vaccine MR against rubella and measles, commercialized with the name of M-R-VAX® (Merck, US) and Rudi-Rouvax® (AVP, France);
the combined vaccine against rubella and mumps marketed under the name of Biavax® (Merck, U.S.),
the combined vaccine MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) against rubella, mumps and measles, marketed under the name of M-M-R® II (Merck, US), R.O.R.®, Trimovax® (Sanofi Pasteur, Fr.), and Priorix® (GlaxoSmithKline UK).
B) Other vaccines, also prepared using human cell lines from aborted foetuses:
two vaccines against hepatitis A, one produced by Merck (VAQTA), the other one produced by GlaxoSmithKline (HAVRIX), both of them being prepared using MRC-5;
one vaccine against chicken pox, Varivax®, produced by Merck using WI-38 and MRC-5;
one vaccine against poliomyelitis, the inactivated polio virus vaccine Poliovax® (Aventis-Pasteur, Fr.) using MRC-5;
one vaccine against rabies, Imovax®, produced by Aventis Pasteur, MRC-5 strain;
one vaccine against smallpox, AC AM 1000, prepared by Acambis using MRC-5, which as of 2005 was still on trial.
The National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBF) on the Pontifical Academy for Life Statement regarding the Use of Vaccines
From the FAQ:
What is the Church's teaching about the use of certain vaccines that have a distant historical association with abortion?
There are a number of vaccines that are made in descendent cells of aborted fetuses. Abortion is a grave crime against innocent human life. We should always ask our physician whether the product he proposes for our use has an historical association with abortion. We should use an alternative vaccine if one is available.
What does it mean when we say that these products are made in "descendent cells"?
Descendent cells are the medium in which these vaccines are prepared. The cell lines under consideration were begun using cells taken from one or more fetuses aborted almost 40 years ago. Since that time the cell lines have grown independently. It is important to note that descendent cells are not the cells of the aborted child. They never, themselves, formed a part of the victim's body.
Could you provide link to this article please.

reply from: yoda

I just love it when you faux lifers "play God", and decide who should live and who should die.......

reply from: nancyu

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
http://trusted.md/feed/items/system/2009/01/01/vaccines_and_fetal_cell_lines
Thank you.

reply from: BossMomma

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
If I had a child who signed up to fight in Iraq, I'd break their legs before I'd let them die in that pointless catbox.
On the other hand, I'd think it was patriotic if I had a child that chose to risk their life in Afghanistan.
It's just one of those weird valuation things.
There are parents who won't get their kids vaccinated because the vaccines were produded with an embryonic cell medium. I think they're BATS!
Do you care if an embryo died in order to protect your kids?
Would you refuse the vaccine and risk your children's lives?
My kids are all current on their vaccines, what do you think? If I was sure that stem cell research would stay with 18 cell embryos with no hearts or brains or any ability to suffer I'd support it. But in giving science an inch in human research their track record says they'd take a mile. Look at what medical research already does to animal models? Thousands in government funding to see how a group of monkeys does with their eyes sewn shut and electrodes implanted into their brains. It's not the stem cell research so much as what could evolve from it that makes me leery of it.
BossMomma, you are in support of human sacrifice.
Are YOUR kids deprived of health care or did you vaccinate them? If so you are in the same boat.

reply from: BossMomma

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Are your kids vaccinated - particularly against Rubella?
How many more must die so that you can selfishly save your children?
I dunno, she neglects her children's emotional needs, I don't doubt she'd neglect their health needs as well.

reply from: nancyu

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Vaccines and Fetal Cell Lines
Thu, 01/01/2009 - 1:09pm | original article
There are three cell lines, derived from three abortions, that are involved in vaccine manufacture. From the National Network for Immunization Information (NNii): Immunization Issues: Human Fetal Links with Some Vaccines
Two different strains of human diploid cell cultures made from fetuses have been used extensively for vaccine production for decades. One was developed in the United States in 1961 (called WI-38) and the other in the United Kingdom in 1966 (called MRC-5).
WI-38 came from lung cells from a female fetus of 3-months gestation and MRC-5 was developed from lung cells from a 14-week-old male fetus. Both fetuses were intentionally aborted, but neither was aborted for the purpose of obtaining diploid cells. The fetal tissues that eventually became WI-38 and the MRC-5 cell cultures were removed from fetuses that were dead. The cellular biologists who made the cell cultures did not induce the abortions.
..........
The virus that led to the only rubella vaccine available in the United States and that is widely used overseas (Meruvax II, Merck) came from tissues obtained at the time of an abortion performed on a rubella virus-infected mother. The abortion was not conducted in order to isolate the virus, but rather because the mother and the fetus were infected with wild rubella virus that posed a risk of major birth defects.
Since that wild strain of rubella virus (known as RA27/3) was isolated, it has been grown in human fetal diploid cells. There is no need to obtain additional cells from aborted fetuses to sustain the supply of attenuated rubella viruses used to manufacture additional batches of rubella vaccine for the future.
During the development of the present rubella vaccine, cells from animals other than humans were also studied for vaccine manufacture but these proved to be less safe and/or less effective than the RA27/3 vaccine grown in WI-38 cells.
According to the PONTIFICIA ACADEMIA PRO VITA, (pdf file downloaded from NCBF Vatican Response) an English translation of a commentary which appeared in Italian in the scholarly journal Medicina e Morale, as of 2005 the following vaccines are manufactured using the cell lines WI-38, MRC-5 and or RA 27/3.
A) Live vaccines against rubella:
the monovalent vaccines against rubella Meruvax® (Merck) (U.S.), Rudivax® (Sanofi Pasteur, Fr.), and Ervevax® (RA 27/3) (GlaxoSmithKline, Belgium);
the combined vaccine MR against rubella and measles, commercialized with the name of M-R-VAX® (Merck, US) and Rudi-Rouvax® (AVP, France);
the combined vaccine against rubella and mumps marketed under the name of Biavax® (Merck, U.S.),
the combined vaccine MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) against rubella, mumps and measles, marketed under the name of M-M-R® II (Merck, US), R.O.R.®, Trimovax® (Sanofi Pasteur, Fr.), and Priorix® (GlaxoSmithKline UK).
B) Other vaccines, also prepared using human cell lines from aborted foetuses:
two vaccines against hepatitis A, one produced by Merck (VAQTA), the other one produced by GlaxoSmithKline (HAVRIX), both of them being prepared using MRC-5;
one vaccine against chicken pox, Varivax®, produced by Merck using WI-38 and MRC-5;
one vaccine against poliomyelitis, the inactivated polio virus vaccine Poliovax® (Aventis-Pasteur, Fr.) using MRC-5;
one vaccine against rabies, Imovax®, produced by Aventis Pasteur, MRC-5 strain;
one vaccine against smallpox, AC AM 1000, prepared by Acambis using MRC-5, which as of 2005 was still on trial.
The National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBF) on the Pontifical Academy for Life Statement regarding the Use of Vaccines
From the FAQ:
What is the Church's teaching about the use of certain vaccines that have a distant historical association with abortion?
There are a number of vaccines that are made in descendent cells of aborted fetuses. Abortion is a grave crime against innocent human life. We should always ask our physician whether the product he proposes for our use has an historical association with abortion. We should use an alternative vaccine if one is available.
What does it mean when we say that these products are made in "descendent cells"?
Descendent cells are the medium in which these vaccines are prepared. The cell lines under consideration were begun using cells taken from one or more fetuses aborted almost 40 years ago. Since that time the cell lines have grown independently. It is important to note that descendent cells are not the cells of the aborted child. They never, themselves, formed a part of the victim's body.
Could you provide link to this article please.
Gosh spinwiddy, you sure are sneaky. (That's good, it keeps me on my toes)
This isn't evidence that humans were intentionally killed to produce the vaccine. This is evidence that (already killed) children were used to produce the vaccine. Either way I do find it dispicable, but not on level with embryonic stem cell research, which is intentionally killing people with the specific purpose of human sacrifice for the "greater good"
Also for those concerned, here is a response to the article spinwiddy posted:
http://www.ncbcenter.org/vaticanresponseNCBC.asp

reply from: BossMomma

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
Nancy wouldn't let those kids die. She needs their money to pay the bills.
True that.

reply from: nancyu

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
Nancy wouldn't let those kids die. She needs their money to pay the bills.
True that.
I haven't posted any lies about you two. It would be nice if you could return the courtesy.

reply from: nancyu

They were killed by abortion, which is despicable. But they were not killed to produce the vaccine.

reply from: BossMomma

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
Nancy wouldn't let those kids die. She needs their money to pay the bills.
True that.
I haven't posted any lies about you two. It would be nice if you could return the courtesy.
Wasn't it you who said you pay bills with your kids money? Wasn't it you who totally blew off your daughters cry for understanding? We haven't posted any lies about you either.

reply from: yoda

BM and spinnweenie, the odd couple, have nothing but nasty gossip......

reply from: BossMomma

BM and spinnweenie, the odd couple, have nothing but nasty gossip......
Nothing odd about us, we are of opposite opinions concerning abortion but are still friends, we are both educated, successful women with a desire to make abortion not a crime but a moot point with education (something you clearly don't support) and effective reliable contraceptive (something else you don't support) You prefer to make a huge ass of yourself by stalking people outside of clinics with your camera and I really hope someone kicks your ass for it, I really do. Dis me and spin if it makes you feel like a man but Spinwiddy is twice the pro-lifer you will ever be.

reply from: 4given

Blind Toddler Treated with Umbilical-Cord Blood Stem Cells Receives Sight
-----------------------------------------------------------
A two-year-old British toddler can see for the first time after treatment with a
revolutionary stem cells. Dakota Clarke, who was born blind with septo-optic
dysplasia, can now recognize her parents.
After exhausting all UK treatments, her parents traveled to southern China for a
pioneering therapy using umbilical cord blood. Dakota's cells were administered
intravenously through her hairline and reportedly traveled towards her optic
nerve, repairing the damaged area. After the treatment, Dakota could see people,
objects, colors and lights. Three weeks later, the child's eyes could track
objects for the first time and could recognize people and objects without
touching them.
British doctors plan to assess the little girl's condition as the treatment is
considered experimental.
[SOURCE: 3/11/09 - thesun.com]
http://www.christianliferesources.com/

reply from: Yuuki

I just love it when you faux lifers "play God", and decide who should live and who should die.......
I don't see it as playing God. I see it as assesing a situation, realizing good from bad, care from neglect, and doing something about it. It's called having a backbone.

reply from: Yuuki

I would. It wouldn't matter how old that person is. The moral good of curing cancer outweighs the moral evil of killing one person. And maybe I'd be sentenced to hell for that. But to know the good I'd given the world would make it worth it to me. Clearly, other people disagree on this subject. As for some of the follow ups on this I saw:
How many people would I kill? How many people will die from cancer this year? How many have died in the past? The original question asked for one. You can't up the stakes and ask the questionee to specify; that's not how your original rhetorical question worked.
Great that's two "pro lifers" on here who approve of human sacrifice -- Yuuki and BossMomma. Anyone else?
I'd be willing for said sacrifice to be myself if I had the choice. Sorry I have a backbone and I'm willing to make hard decisions.

reply from: Yuuki

Don't you just love how the faux lifers volunteer OTHER PEOPLE to die, but not themselves?
If you take a look at my above post, I say "I'd be willing to be the sacrifice myself if I had the choice".

reply from: yoda

And that is where you fail. Deciding who shall live and who shall die is something that no mortal has a moral right to do. Your denials do not make your megalomania any less despicable.

reply from: yoda

Talk is cheap. Go ahead and "sacrifice yourself", and leave other people's lives alone. You AIN'T God!!

reply from: nancyu

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
Nancy wouldn't let those kids die. She needs their money to pay the bills.
True that.
I haven't posted any lies about you two. It would be nice if you could return the courtesy.
Wasn't it you who said you pay bills with your kids money?
No I never did, or posted any such thing.
Wasn't it you who totally blew off your daughters cry for understanding?
You know nothing of the situation and what I did or did not do. Besides which it is none of your business.
We haven't posted any lies about you either.
Yes you have. But I consider the source realizing lies are all you know.

reply from: yoda

Without those nasty lies, spinny would be just an empty shell.....

reply from: nancyu

heehee. There's an idea for a chapter in "the mudslinger" story.

reply from: BossMomma

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
Nancy wouldn't let those kids die. She needs their money to pay the bills.
True that.
I haven't posted any lies about you two. It would be nice if you could return the courtesy.
Wasn't it you who said you pay bills with your kids money?
No I never did, or posted any such thing.
Wasn't it you who totally blew off your daughters cry for understanding?
You know nothing of the situation and what I did or did not do. Besides which it is none of your business.
We haven't posted any lies about you either.
Yes you have. But I consider the source realizing lies are all you know.
Speaking of lies, does this sound familiar?
My daughter had her first job at age 15. My son had a good paying job at age 17. If I had 10 more kids, I'd have 10 more now, to help pay the bills and help around the house. And it doesn't have to cost a fortune to feed children. There are plenty of ways to economize. Money saving tips in this thread
http://www.pro-lifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=5880&enterthread=y&STARTPAGE=4

reply from: yoda

I really think someone ought to open up a new college and name it after slick Willie...... where they could teach such things as "oral sex isn't really sex", and "human embryos are unfertilized"....

reply from: ChristianLott2

Apparently Dr. Gupta is in on it too.
Why hasn't the news picked this one up? Could it be that Bill has been lied to all these years?

reply from: Yuuki

Talk is cheap. Go ahead and "sacrifice yourself", and leave other people's lives alone. You AIN'T God!!
Really... is that how you feel? THEN LEAVE PREGNANT WOMEN'S LIVES ALONE. Don't condmen them for aborting to save their LIFE.
That, or stop being a hypocrite.

reply from: Yuuki

And that is where you fail. Deciding who shall live and who shall die is something that no mortal has a moral right to do. Your denials do not make your megalomania any less despicable.
Decisions like this must be made when one lives in reality.

reply from: nancyu

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Your children benefitted by using the cells of aborted fetuses. Other children would benefit from the embryonic cells gleaned in a petri dish.
Don't bother to delude yourself. It's the same thing.
Don't worry, I'm not deluding myself. You are very right. It is "the same thing", the way murder of a single person is "the same thing" as mass murder.

reply from: nancyu

BM and spinnweenie, the odd couple, have nothing but nasty gossip......
Nothing odd about us, we are of opposite opinions concerning abortion but are still friends, we are both educated, successful women with a desire to make abortion not a crime but a moot point with education (something you clearly don't support) and effective reliable contraceptive (something else you don't support) You prefer to make a huge ass of yourself by stalking people outside of clinics with your camera and I really hope someone kicks your ass for it, I really do. Dis me and spin if it makes you feel like a man but Spinwiddy is twice the pro-lifer you will ever be.
This could be true depending on the definition of "prolifer." Many "prolifers" are not at all pro life. (I can think of 3 or 4 of yous right off the bat.)

reply from: nancyu

I would. It wouldn't matter how old that person is. The moral good of curing cancer outweighs the moral evil of killing one person. And maybe I'd be sentenced to hell for that. But to know the good I'd given the world would make it worth it to me. Clearly, other people disagree on this subject. As for some of the follow ups on this I saw:
How many people would I kill? How many people will die from cancer this year? How many have died in the past? The original question asked for one. You can't up the stakes and ask the questionee to specify; that's not how your original rhetorical question worked.
Yuuki called it! No follow-up questionsies!

reply from: nancyu

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Are your kids vaccinated - particularly against Rubella?
How many more must die so that you can selfishly save your children?
I would not have approved of my children getting this vaccine had I known how the vaccine had been developed. I had the mumps when I was a child and again as a teen, it's no big whoop, and certainly not worth intentionally killing another child over.

reply from: nancyu

I would. It wouldn't matter how old that person is. The moral good of curing cancer outweighs the moral evil of killing one person. And maybe I'd be sentenced to hell for that. But to know the good I'd given the world would make it worth it to me. Clearly, other people disagree on this subject. As for some of the follow ups on this I saw:
How many people would I kill? How many people will die from cancer this year? How many have died in the past? The original question asked for one. You can't up the stakes and ask the questionee to specify; that's not how your original rhetorical question worked.
Great that's two "pro lifers" on here who approve of human sacrifice -- Yuuki and BossMomma. Anyone else?
I'd be willing for said sacrifice to be myself if I had the choice. Sorry I have a backbone and I'm willing to make hard decisions.
It's not good enough to be willing to make a hard decision. You must make the RIGHT decision, and killing one to save others is the wrong decision.
A hard (but right) decision might be to have to say to the many-- we're sorry, you will have to find another way to prevent and cure illnesses that does not take the lives of innocent human beings.

reply from: Yuuki

I would. It wouldn't matter how old that person is. The moral good of curing cancer outweighs the moral evil of killing one person. And maybe I'd be sentenced to hell for that. But to know the good I'd given the world would make it worth it to me. Clearly, other people disagree on this subject. As for some of the follow ups on this I saw:
How many people would I kill? How many people will die from cancer this year? How many have died in the past? The original question asked for one. You can't up the stakes and ask the questionee to specify; that's not how your original rhetorical question worked.
Great that's two "pro lifers" on here who approve of human sacrifice -- Yuuki and BossMomma. Anyone else?
I'd be willing for said sacrifice to be myself if I had the choice. Sorry I have a backbone and I'm willing to make hard decisions.
It's not good enough to be willing to make a hard decision. You must make the RIGHT decision, and killing one to save others is the wrong decision.
A hard (but right) decision might be to have to say to the many-- we're sorry, you will have to find another way to prevent and cure illnesses that does not take the lives of innocent human beings.
NANCYU THINKS CURING CANCER IS WRONG!

reply from: BossMomma

BM and spinnweenie, the odd couple, have nothing but nasty gossip......
Nothing odd about us, we are of opposite opinions concerning abortion but are still friends, we are both educated, successful women with a desire to make abortion not a crime but a moot point with education (something you clearly don't support) and effective reliable contraceptive (something else you don't support) You prefer to make a huge ass of yourself by stalking people outside of clinics with your camera and I really hope someone kicks your ass for it, I really do. Dis me and spin if it makes you feel like a man but Spinwiddy is twice the pro-lifer you will ever be.
This could be true depending on the definition of "prolifer." Many "prolifers" are not at all pro life. (I can think of 3 or 4 of yous right off the bat.)
Me too, you,nany, Faithmonkey, Joe and, Christiansnott2.

reply from: yoda

Since you know very well that I NEVER HAVE DONE THAT, I can only assume that you have joined your lying proabort cohorts in trying to tear down the legitimate prolife efforts on this forum.

reply from: Yuuki

Since you know very well that I NEVER HAVE DONE THAT, I can only assume that you have joined your lying proabort cohorts in trying to tear down the legitimate prolife efforts on this forum.
You're not in the crowd who says "no abortion, ever?" I could have sworn I heard you saying no abortion is justified and that the unborn should be removed via c-section.

reply from: yoda

Oh, you'd prefer that an "abortion" per se be done instead of a c-section or an induced delivery?
Something about the word "abortion" that just appeals to you, or what?

reply from: nancyu

I would. It wouldn't matter how old that person is. The moral good of curing cancer outweighs the moral evil of killing one person. And maybe I'd be sentenced to hell for that. But to know the good I'd given the world would make it worth it to me. Clearly, other people disagree on this subject. As for some of the follow ups on this I saw:
How many people would I kill? How many people will die from cancer this year? How many have died in the past? The original question asked for one. You can't up the stakes and ask the questionee to specify; that's not how your original rhetorical question worked.
Great that's two "pro lifers" on here who approve of human sacrifice -- Yuuki and BossMomma. Anyone else?
I'd be willing for said sacrifice to be myself if I had the choice. Sorry I have a backbone and I'm willing to make hard decisions.
It's not good enough to be willing to make a hard decision. You must make the RIGHT decision, and killing one to save others is the wrong decision.
A hard (but right) decision might be to have to say to the many-- we're sorry, you will have to find another way to prevent and cure illnesses that does not take the lives of innocent human beings.
NANCYU THINKS[that killing innocent human beings to] CUR[e] CANCER IS WRONG!
Shame on me.

reply from: yoda

Shame on me.
I just can't get my mind around the "expendable" innocent person.....

reply from: Yuuki

Oh, you'd prefer that an "abortion" per se be done instead of a c-section or an induced delivery?
Something about the word "abortion" that just appeals to you, or what?
The hypothetical situation was one in which - for whatever reason - a c-section was not possible or would be deadly for the woman, so that abortion was the only way to safely save her life. Some pro-lifers on here would condemn that woman to death and refuse her an abortion. I thought you were one of them.

reply from: CharlesD

There are plenty of sources for stem cells that don't involve the destruction of human beings and those cells show just as much promise in research as the ones from embryos. There is absolutely no reason that one embryo has to be destroyed for this research, except that it perpetuates the status quo of wanton slaughter.

reply from: nancyu

Did anyone learn this in driver's ed?: If you're considering passing another vehicle you should NOT unless you can answer ALL of the following questions in the affirmative:
1.) Is it safe?
2.) Is is legal?
3.) Is it necessary?
I think these three questions are ones everyone should ask regarding ESCR or any type of human experimentation as well. In my opinion, the last question is most important. If it's not necessary, then you DON'T do it!
1.) Is it safe? (nope, not for the embryo)
2.) Is is legal? (only if you think intentionally killing innocent human beings is legal)
3.) Is it necessary? (NO.)

reply from: yoda

I've never heard of such a condition. Got a link?

reply from: Yuuki

I've never heard of such a condition. Got a link?
It was hypothetical, it doesn't have to exist.

reply from: yoda

Then it is not a "real" argument for abortion.

reply from: Yuuki

Then it is not a "real" argument for abortion.
I never said it was. I asked, what would you do?

reply from: nancyu

Must've gone to the same school as fetalisa and rosarie...

reply from: fetalisa

Why couldn't we do experiments on embryos? They aren't persons. They are property;
http://www.christiantelegraph.com/issue3452.html
We have the legal right to do as we wish with our property.

reply from: nancyu

The point genuis, is that there is no such thing as "unfertilized embryos"

reply from: saucie

Spoken like a good little slave owner.
It must stink to have been born in the eras where people realized how wrong and evil it is to "own" another human being, or murder another human being at will.

reply from: fetalisa

Until and unless you can prove slaves inhabited the body of another as ZEFs do, you have no basis at all to compare ZEFs to slaves.

reply from: nancyu

Anything can be compared to anything. We can compare you to a kind and intelligent human being even though you aren't any of those things.

reply from: fetalisa

Just as I suspected, you have no proof to offer that slaves inhabited the body of another as ZEFs do.

reply from: carolemarie

Heh, and people say Bush Jr. is the dumbest president you guys have ever had.
Well, Clinton was from Arkansas.....that explains quite a bit

reply from: saucie

Heh, and people say Bush Jr. is the dumbest president you guys have ever had.
Well, Clinton was from Arkansas.....that explains quite a bit
Oh the hypocrisy....weren't you the one just lectureing us on civilities and here you go and belittle an entire state of people...none of which, I bet you've ever met.

reply from: carolemarie

Arkansas is rated 49th in the country in education.


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics