51 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
zimmcomm says:
As soon as the cells start to divide, you have a complete genetic replica of the human who supplied the somatic cell - a clone. What you do with it at that point doesn't change the fact that it is a human life. If left to do what it does naturally, that blastocyst will develop through the stages of zygote, embryo, fetus, and then baby - which then goes through the growth stages of toddler, teenager, adult, etc.

It's like the hypothetical situation that has been proposed - if there is an embryo in one room and a five year old in another and you can only save one from a fire, which would it be?

Okay - what if it's a newborn and a five year old? Or a teenager and a five-year-old? An senior citizen or a young cancer patient?

Stages of life or location do not determine humanity - only the genetic makeup does. That is present from the cell-division stage of SCNT - a genetic replica of the original somatic cell. Whether you harvest the cells or let it grow in a uterus, or maybe an artificial womb someday - they are human from the very start. Otherwise, what use are they to researchers?
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
pakaal says:
In the SCNT process, the nucleus of an egg is taken out and replaced with another nucleus (from a somatic cell; that is a cell other than an egg or sperm), then the cells are allowed to divide. This creates the stem cells that are used in treatment.

To make a human clone you need to skip the step of harvesting the stem cells for research and instead take the following step: the egg with the replaced nucleus is inserted in a womb and the fetus is brought to term.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
pakaal says:
I have to disagree with you cindyzimmer. First of all, SCNT is used in therapeutic cloning and stem cell research as well as in reproductive cloning (of any animal including humans). It is only the first step - as I said. The next steps taken in the SCNT process define the results, whether it is therapeutic cloning, stem cells or reproductive cloning.

The discussion is about using the process to create stem cells, not about reproductive cloning (to "make human clones"). Since Amendment 2 (link in the article above) specifically says "No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being", and since the Amendment is specifically for allowing research into stem cell research, the argument that this is about Human Cloning doesn't apply.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
bluestardad says:
STEP BACK FROM FEAR!
We in America need to pull back from this Frenzy of Fear that has spellbound us since September 11, 2001. I am not saying to let down our guard or not be prudent with our Law enforcement, Intelligence agencies or Military as their constant job is to protect the American people and they do it well. Rationally speaking it is more likely that a person will be killed in a car accident on the way to get milk than killed by a Terrorist in America. Hispanics coming across our border for work are not the terrorist or the enemy. Unfair trade practices initiated by our government are the cause of our jobs leaving and the demise of the Middle Class in America not some Terrorist plot. Political Parties have been using fear in an attempt to maintain power in this country. Americans do the math you are more likely to do yourself bodily harm than to be harmed by a Terrorist. America is a Land of Opportunity and hopes where people live in Freedom. America is not a land were people will be governed by Fear.

Michael C. Boetjer
Captain U. S. Army
Double Blue Star Father
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
zimmcomm says:
pakaal,
SCNT is human cloning. That is the bottom line of what is most wrong about this amendment. SCNT is DEFINED by the scientific community as CLONING. It is not a "first step". It is what it is - making a genetic copy of an organism, in this case, a human being.
The amendment makes its own definition of cloning - it's not a human clone unless you implant or attempt to implant it into a human uterus.
As far as an analysis being just what one side thinks the amendment is - again, it is what it is. The amendment specifically grants constitutional protection to the scientific community to manufacture human life for the purpose of research. And the biotech industry ALONE is spending millions of dollars to make that happen.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
pakaal says:
By the way VoteNoOn2, your link to "analysis" was actually a link to partisan and biased commentary on what one side THINKS the amendment is - not helpful. Posting a link that only supports one side of an issue is a little confusing - unless of course it's your intention to mislead, in which case it's outright deception.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
pakaal says:
Some religions say a child only becomes a human at the time of birth, but Christians argue it begins at that magic moment when sperm and egg meet. Could someone tell me where in the Bible it says "a human soul enters the womb at conception"?
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
pakaal says:
VoteNoOn2, as far as SCNT goes, yes, it CAN be used as a first step in human cloning but it is currently used in therapeutic cloning and in embryonic stem cell research. That much is true.

Fortunately, Amendment 2 specifically takes human cloning completely off the table, by saying in Section One - specifically - "No person may clone or attempt to clone a human being."

If you want to pose a "slippery slope" argument against the amendment, that's fine, you can argue that future amendments could open the door for human cloning. But as the amendment currently stands, the ONLY use provided by law for SCNT would be for stem cell research, and cloning humans is specifically forbidden.

reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
pepinella says:
The United States alone has already destroyed over forty-eight million human beings since 1973, under the guise of "women's right to choose". Now we want to create a lucrative opportunity for women to earn money by using their bodies and the lives of their unborn children through embryonic harvesting. As a woman I am ashamed of what we have done in the name of "equality, right-to-choose, and sexual freedom." God help us all.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
zimmcomm says:
sashay03,
I have a 24 year old daughter who is wheelchair bound with a spinal cord injury and she is completely against using human embryos for research. One reason is that adult stem cells show much more promise without the ethical and moral concerns. Embryonic stem cell research shows less promise and is more costly. Why not spend research dollars on something that has more chance of showing results sooner? Right now all this research is legal in Missouri but not being done because the research companies are holding it hostage until they get guarentees that no laws or regulations will be passed to "prevent, restrict, obstruct, or discourage any stem cell research or stem cell therapies" (again, right out of the amendment wording).
reply
2/6