The advertisements above do not necessarily reflect the views of this blog, its authors, or host.

War (on Stem Cells): What is It Good For?

You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “War (on Stem Cells): What is It Good For?”.

4 comments to War (on Stem Cells): What is It Good For?

  • irishjazz

    If I recall the lyric:

    “The only thing it’s good for is the undertaker”

    With apologies to atheist sensibilities… “Good God y’all.”

  • Just because an egg is fertilized does not mean it is a child. A fertilized egg has just as much chance of implanting in the uterus after sex as not. If all fertilized eggs are children what about all of these eggs that just failed to implant. This would mean there are just as many children dying every day as there are being born every single day. What about those thousands upon thousands of children? Should women be subject to strict and invasive testing after all acts of sex so as to save as many “children” as we can? Oh, I should keep my mouth shut. I might give the religious right some ideas.
    I know this is an argument from consequences but it just goes to show that these religious types don’t even think.

  • DLC

    Something tells me Slate is rapidly approaching Huffington Post in terms of posting nonsense.

  • The Blind Watchmaker

    I for one am grateful for this reversal. Back in November, we in Michigan got to vote on a proposal to allow funding for stem cell research. It was a nasty battle. Churches were unconstitutionally handing out “2 Goes 2 Far” signs that littered the landscape. Fortunately, reason won out and 2 passed. Now, this brings us further into the current century.

Leave a Reply