PS- For something loosely related to this subject, take the practice of human dissection
as an example with a happy ending.
While it took place a LONG time ago (1500's), human dissection used to be a taboo just like stem cells and genetic engineering is now. Surgeons would have to hire criminals to dig up bodies for them to dissect until the law finally gave in and make it easier for surgeons to get bodies.
The result? Our knowledge modern human anatomy.
edited 18th Mar '11 8:47:42 PM by Signed
"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."It's really that other religions tend to be against this religion [1]
.
Oh shit, I just have this sinking feeling that sometime in the future, people are going to add Bio Sock to their list of stupid reasons to oppose such scientific endeavors...
And I also noticed something upon typing this...they ALL belong to biology. Theres no issue concerning physics or chemistry AT ALL.
So it's less Religions halting scientific progress but more Religions halting biology progress...which is just as bad.
"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."That's not what the religious authority and masses thought back when it was still a taboo.
And genetic research doesn't harm anyone nowadays at all. And if it becomes an actual living being with sentience, it's just a test animal with human genetic information.
And no, I have no ethical issues with that either. We lock monkies, babies even, in cages all their life doing all sorts of sick stuff to them, and it's totally legal.
PS-I have little moral problems with animal testing. As long as it's done with a purpose.
edited 18th Mar '11 9:01:12 PM by Signed
"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."Dissection — most divisions of Christianity believe in resurrection upon the second coming. Acts that defile the body are frowned upon, for fear of adverse effects upon resurrection. They've softened on this in recent years under the logic that when people get buried they're just kind of decomposing and God's going to have to get His hands dirty putting dudes back together anyway. This has also softened their stance on cremation and various other things.
Hybrids, enhancements, etc. — If we are made in God's image, trying to drastically alter that is an act of severe disrespect, to say nothing of the sheer damage we could inflict upon ourselves in the process.
Stem cell research — You know the stance on abortion. Utilizing the stem cells would be tantamount to killing someone in order to dissect them. There has been argument about this given that the child would have been aborted anyway, but it usually comes down to the ends not justifying legitimizing the process like that.
edited 18th Mar '11 9:06:55 PM by Pykrete
Cause people are retarded. It's the answer to everything.
What else could be the reason that people listen to books that were probably made up and constantly changed throughout multiple centuries/millenniums to reflect the modern beliefs of the time.
Note: Sorry to religious tropers out there, just stating an opinion.
^^ Thx, I didn't know what the reasons against dissection actually was, I knew it was religious in nature, and that was it.
Oh yeah, and I should add, that in MY opinion...any religious laws bent on banning/restricting anything is the equivalent of...
People taking any Fairy Tale seriously and executing every old women in response. Or taking the Gingerbread Man seriously, and outlawing making ginger breadmen with legs in response.
It sounds silly, but for me, the idea of people taking fictional works seriously enough to involve it in politics is even worse. Like how the majority of people view scientology as.
"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."OP: At least on the stem-cell research thing, I believe the R Cs support it now that an alternative to using an embryo is viable, namely taking the stem cells of adults and using that instead. So on that count, Science Marches On .
The thing is, quite a lot of people believe the scriptures of their religion are true, for various definitions of "true".
edited 18th Mar '11 9:17:50 PM by Cojuanco
The stem cell one in particular is (hate to Godwin you, but this is the standpoint) similar to how much of our knowledge of hypothermia comes from concentration camps doing horrible experiments and we just kind of took it on a "use it or lose it" basis. But if we show a propensity to accept good results from unethical practices, that's basically sanctioning and in a way encouraging those unethical practices.
There are indeed no conflicts in this denomination with adult stem cells. I'd think there would be little with others as well.
edited 18th Mar '11 9:20:04 PM by Pykrete
@OP: With you all the way. Religion is just a bunch of old people who think they should have a monopoly on explaining the universe, so I suppose it was inevitable that they'd clamp down on those who choose to explore the world we live in instead of pray about it.
If I were to write some of the strange things that come under my eyes they would not be believed. ~Cora M. Strayer~Also, most societies, thankfully, still support something called ethics, and many believe that at least to some extent, the ends do not justify the means. Hence the opposition to cloning or human hybrids. In other words, the question is, is it worth doing something unethical For Science! if it may help people?
Another thing is that most abrahamic religions believe that there is a quality humans have that sets us apart from all other animals. They dislike people tampering with the boundaries.
Like Mendelian genetics. I suppose it's because religious people had both the education and the time necessary for scientific pursuits.
edited 18th Mar '11 9:27:09 PM by LoniJay
Be not afraid...![]()
Well, most Christians aren't opposed to science, and never have been. Do we operate in some ethical constraints? Sure, but so do most people, even the non-religious. The main problem is that there is a vocal minority that takes those ethical constraints, and deduces from that that Science is Bad.
edited 18th Mar '11 9:31:31 PM by Cojuanco
Which is why I potholed Adult Stem Cells Are Naturally Inferior, there was a lengthy debate in the thread I mentioned in my opening post.
It took us THIS MUCH TIME AND MONEY to make crappy adult stem cells become almost as competent as Embryonic stem cells, or maybe even weaker still, but imagine all that TIME AND MONEY spent on developing the Embryonic Stem cells to begin with. Imagine the progress!
But we have soo much in common...common ancestors (to an extent depending on the organism), and like many animals, we have a vertebrae...
edited 18th Mar '11 9:34:12 PM by Signed
"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."Also, on the abortion debacle, most pro-lifers (I am one of them) would argue that it falls under the bit that says "thou shall not murder/kill".
But then you delve into whether something is moral. Killing the poor would solve our poverty problem and bring progress, but it's certainly not the moral thing to do.
edited 18th Mar '11 9:34:39 PM by Cojuanco
Ah so it was you...anyways, for the benefit of those who weren't there.
tl;dr(and simplified for the sake of those who don't understand the mechanics): Imagine shaping a piece of clay into various shapes...Embryonic Stem Cell is the fresh and still wet clay. Adult Stem Cells are the already hardened and dried clay.
Embryonic stem cells have a lot more potentials to begin with, they can become many more things. Adult stem cells are much more restricted.
edited 18th Mar '11 9:38:41 PM by Signed
"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."I said simplified and tl;dr'd for the benefit of people who don't want to look way too into it. Do you honestly want me to do a wall of text? Because it takes seconds(I can COUNT them) to type a single character with this computer...
This is mostly about "why is religion so anti-science now?".
edited 18th Mar '11 9:41:47 PM by Signed
"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

To be honest...I was planning on making a thread debating Genetic Engineering and other similar areas of sciences such as Human Hybrid research * and certain parts of biotechnology. Except when I looked into it even further, I'm reminded of the abortion debates
, the stem cell thread we had a while ago, and cloning research *. And I realized that all of them have two things in common.
So I decided to make a thread that unifies all of them together and make this thread instead. Talk about the core of the problem that connects all of these issues. Religious opposition. Do you think abortion would be so divisive if certain major religions didn't oppose it so vehemently? Same goes for embryonic stem cell research, human hybrid research, and cloning research.
That said, here are some of the things I like to talk about....
I'm reeaally hoping this won't become a forest fire. Or atleast if it does, not in the first page atleast.
(and if you're wondering why I made this thread here, It Just Bugs Me! was nuked...)
edited 18th Mar '11 8:48:27 PM by Signed
"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."