Et foster bedømmes videnskabeligt.

Et foster bedømmes videnskabeligt. enoch.ben.enoch
Et foster bedømmes videnskabeligt.

Ærede debattører og gode borgere. Dersom du skulle bedømme et foster og derfor et fosters "ret" til, at leve og blive født, hvad ville du så vælge, som et videnskabeligt kriterium for hvad et foster er?

Og, hvornår mener du, du ville tillade et foster, at ha` rettigheder?

Hvordan bedømmer du "videnskabeligt" et foster?

Venlig hilsen

Enoch

"...a single cell organism". Enoch
Et foster set ud fra et Katolsk synspunkt og troslære.

All human beings must begin their existence in the form of a single cell organism, the single cell embryo.

Since the existence of that single cell embryo is, in the first place, the "sine qua non" for most of these illicit procedures to be possible, it is only logical that the law should prohibit the creation of any single cell human organism by any technique.

The formation of human/animal chimeras should also be banned. These prohibitions should be mandatory and perpetual regardless of the purported motives for the use of the technology, whether it be biological research or for therapeutic purposes.

Up to the present, laws have failed to prevent research on the human embryo for various reasons. These include the rapid change in technology and science, the fact that in many cases the law does not apply to private industry, and because of numerous loopholes in the law resulting from inconsistency, or obfuscation, or actual deception in the use of technical terms on the part of those who draft the laws.

The following are some examples of semantic loopholes occurring in so-called ‘authoritative’ sources, which may subsequently be reflected in legislation.

In the scientific literature of human embryology the words ‘human embryo’ mean a human organism which starts as "one cell at fertilization or cloning", and which at maturity consists of billions of cells.

Yet, in 1978, Grobstein and McCormick stated that only a “pre-embryo” exists before implantation in the uterus.

As soon as the non-scientific neologism “pre-embryo” was introduced, the word ‘embryo’ with its moral and emotional overtones began to fade from the scene. More recently, research workers have stated that an embryo is merely “a fertilized oocyte.”

Researches like Irving Weissman and Michael West have labeled the product of fertilization or of somatic cell nuclear transfer cloning as just a “cell”, and an embryo at 5-7 days as “a ball of cells.”

The product of this research was incorrectly defined. At the same time, they try to justify the use of the technique of somatic cell nuclear transfer cloning as “therapeutic stem cell research.”

Here, the technique was incorrectly defined. The word ‘cloning’ with its pejorative overtones has disappeared.

“Therapeutic stem cell research” has been substituted. The aim is to get rid of words like ‘cloning’ and ‘embryo’ which make people ‘uncomfortable’.

The whole truth is that the immediate product of fertilization or cloning is a cell, but it is also "a single cell organism", a "human being", and a "human person".

In short, in order to prevent research on "human embryos" from occurring, in vitro fertilization by all methods must be generically prohibited in both public and private domains by law.

It is not enough simply to oppose abortion and research on human embryos.

If we are ever to succeed in outlawing "those two crimes against humanity", we must lay the axe to the root of the tree. We must vigorously and persistently oppose contraception (both surgical and chemical) and all forms of in vitro formation of human embryos, both by fertilization and by all cloning techniques.
Citat slut.

http://catholicinsight.com/online/bioethics/embryo.shtml

Venlig hilsen

Enoch

Jeg synes K....
at du skal tage og slappe helt af med det der,med fostere og det hele,jeg kan ikke tælle hvor mange indlæg du har lavet om netop dette emne,altså du kan ikke blive ved. Jeg har selv haft spontan abort i uge 7,og for mig var det,det samme som hvid det havde været i uge 19-20.Du vil måske finde nogle som er enige med dig,og selvfølgelig er der mange uenige,men det er ikke ensbetydende at du skal skrive et nyt indlæg hver gang. Men altså vil du ikke nok lade være med at skrive nogenlunde samme indlæg hele tiden,det er virkelig for meget og for latterligt at du bliver ved.....

Ikke "samme" indlæg. Enoch
Et forslag til dig.

Gå væk fra debatten vedr. Abort, dersom du ikke er interesseret og dersom du intet "nyt" har at tilføje.

Din holdning er jeg blevet klar over. Jeg respektere den, men fravælger den.

Enoch

"Gammel vittighed". Enoch
Har du intet personligt, at tilføje? Så er du ligesom ikke med i en debat.

Enoch

Ikke bare en vittighed "Monty Phyton"
Det er jo ikke bare en vittighed. Selvom jeg gerne indrømmer, at sangen er sjov, så rummer den jo også en kritik af bl.a. dit religiøse syn på forplantning.

Kan du ikke bare svare på sangens indhold, så har vi en debat. Mener du, at hver eneste sædcelle er hellig? Og kan man blive en katolik i det øjeblik, at ens far kommer?

Jeg synes...... ingen.........
at du skal få dig et liv med lidt mere indhold.

Hej, Odusseus. Enoch
http://www005.thinkquest.dk/sagaer/saga501.htm

Læs den og bliv klog. Så kan du også være med.

Enoch