wow…just. wow. Evidently you can not understand me being against the creation of the embryos, since I explained that I was agaionst it and why and you still fail to comprehend this.
You are misinterpriting what I am saying and what word “and” means in logic. While they are full of cellualr activity, bunch of undiffrerentiated stem cells are akin to a sea sponge in its level of awareness and is less structured than a jelly fish or a fern (that one actualy has tisues). And while it has a potential to become a human being, you can pretty much make that out of any bit of human tissue(see Dolly, the sheep)
I’m also not far in my definition of nervous system’s functionality. Three major functions (sensory, integrative and motor) of nervous system do add up to exactly what I said - ability to promptly react to stimuli (as opposed to something like an secretion system that works a little slower).
So all and all I’m not sure what you are saying about what I’ve said, but I sense a disagreement 
I think i covered logic back in 9th grade thanks. I misinterpreted your understanding of a nervous system, i read in a hurry. my mistake.
but i think your misunderstanding my point. Humanity is judged by the fact that we are human. What defines being human? What makes us all the same species? It can’t be judged on a level of awareness or complexicity. Thats like saying a Doctor is more human then a person who is braindead because of his level of awareness.
How do you define what is a level of awareness that constitutes being human or complexicity for that matter; being able to think? Being able to breathe? being able to move around? And if its the ability to think, how would you know that it thought its first thought? Is it that first action potential of a neuron? When it develops a nervous system? These are shades of grey that can’t be easily defined, and changes from fetus to fetus. Its too easy to argue about when anyone thinks that its human. So where can one put a finger down and say here, here is when this is a human being, where can it be undisputed that this is a human. this is why we can’t and probably won’t agree on this answer. Even in society, how can we be able to agree in one spot.
so i do understand your arguement. but do you get mine? Genetically these cells are defined as human. They have the genetic makeup of one, how can you not call it human? What do you call it? Its a human embryo, then its a human fetus, then its a human baby. It remains a human the whole time. Its a human at the time it becomes diploid. There is no way you can’t argue this.
Side note: Dolly the sheep was not grown from tissue of another sheep, its nuclues from an utter cell was inserted into an egg cell. It was NOT made out of tissue like a starfish. Tissue does not spontaneously grow from an adult into another. Besides thats cloning and another debate.
in the end i guess its really not worth defining it. Everyone sees the world differently, but considering that these embryo’s are being discarded, it does make sense that they be used to something more useful.
But once they ARE created, why are you against them being used for research instead of being thrown out?
This would be like saying you’re against wasting money on new NASA ships, so all of our existing space shuttles and such should be thrown out.
that’s fine…you can be against them all you want…I don’t give a shit, that’s an entirely different debate…this is a question of what to do with those that would be thrown out.
Yes, I understand your argument and I agree with it from a “warm and fuzzy” stand point based on the fact that it is ,without a doubt, a human speciemen at every point from a diploid. But my “lets advance the science” outlook graduates the importance of that human life, at which point is it more important, than that of a gold fish, lab mouse or an ape? Some people would argue that at every point it is more valuable, but to me, if centrifuging some undifferentiated stem cells can save some monkey a hassle of getting a spinal tap - go for it.
In the case of the ones that are already there, then yes, do something with them. wast not. But as far as creating more, I do not condone that.
That is an entirely different debate.
OK, back to course 2 math:
P->Q
P
Q
P is the creation of embryos that are being thrown away.
Q is the use of spare embryos for research.
P is true, Bush ordered Q to be false.
Bush fails 11th grade math.
huh
^There are embryos that get thrown away. That is not being debated here. It is simply a fact. If they are just getting thrown away anyhow, nobody would argue against using them to benefit mankind. Even you stated that the part you disagree with is that embryos that 39/40 will be killed are created in the first place.
So…
Bush is allowing embryos to be created only to be thrown away but blocked their being put to good use. Seems kind of dumb. If it’s immoral he should veto their original creation. That’s where morality comes in. But that’s too hard to do politically so he just fakes morality farther downstream where it’s easier.
I was joking by the “huh” remark.
Oh… Yeah, uh, I knew that…
lol…you silly goose
I think some of you guys may be misinterpreting this. the veto isnt stopping stem cell research, the veto is stopping the expansion of federal funding for the research. meaning hes not allocating more of our tax money for this research. now im all for medical breakthroughs, but not with my tax money. the healthcare industry is banking BIGTIME in this country at our expense and can definatly afford to pay for stem cell research. and can probably afford to spend more than the govt would even be willing to allocate out of the federal coffers. but unfortunatly the healthcare industry would rather research drugs that “cure” health people and then blitzkrieg your television screen and magazine/newspaper pages to ask your doctor about the new “miracle drug” that will magically make your horrible life on this planet a little bit better. so i say fuck any federal funding of medical research, my healthcare payments already dwarf a mortgage payment.
i think this should be taken one step further. i dont blame the people that voted for Bush. i blame the party that couldnt find a better option that Bush.
wait bush already took are nations greatest surplus and put us in a huge deficit that will take years to come out of,why not throw some money to stem cell research.(can i mention the war too)