Jivin J’s Life Links 4-13-09
by JivinJ
We’re actually talking about pre-embryos here. Technically speaking, it’s not an actual embryo yet…
You’re talking about something that’s quite different from the “embryos” that you get from an IVF clinic, and very different from the kind that would be developed in a laboratory. Until a fertilized egg is implanted in the uterus my understanding is it’s not an embryo. It’s a blastocyst, or a pre-embryo.
He also argues for human cloning for research…
… you can get your embryonic stem cells by making them in a laboratory taking your skin cell and a donor egg, taking the nucleus out of that egg so you’ve rendered it genetically inert where essentially it has no DNA anymore. You put your skin cell where the nucleus of that egg used to be, then you hit it with some chemicals and magically enough it begins to act as if a conception has taken place. But no conception has ever taken place. This is essentially a fake embryo [emphasis added]. It’s not a unique genetic entity.
Reagan does have one thing right:
There’s a great deal of confusion and scientific illiteracy around this issue, and among politicians.
He also calls the Dickey Amendment “the next hurdle to get over.”
In the paper, Zhejiang University…and University College London… professors…found that in 2005 alone, China had more than 1.1 million excess male births.
Among Chinese aged below 20, the greatest gender imbalances were among one-to-four-year-olds, where there were 124 male to 100 female births, with 126 to 100 in rural areas, they found.
The gap was especially large in provinces where the one-child policy was strictly enforced and also in rural areas.
… support for abortion disqualified Ms. Kennedy and other Roman Catholics President Barack Obama had been seeking to appoint.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Proaborts never cease to amaze me with their semantic gymnastics. Here we have Ron Regan trying to use the technical semantic point about an unborn human being not being classified as an embryo until implantation as a justification for killing that human being.
How impressive is it to use arbitrary human developmental labeling protocol to justify killing young human beings?
I mean, what if we collectively decided to call all unborn humans “popcorn”? Would he then say “It’s okay to kill them because they’re just popcorn anyway?”
It’s really sad to see the moral depths to which this society has sunk, and using our own arbitrary labeling decisions to justify the slaughter of innocent human beings is just about the bottom of the barrel.
Reagan needs to include himself as being confused and scientifically illiterate.
A zygote is a single cell embryo, because once amphimixis is complete, the organs are literally forming at an incredible rate – 3-1/2 weeks to a heartbeat.
A blastocyst is an early stage multi-cell embryo.
An embryo is the organ formation stage of a human fetus.
And fetus in latin means offspring – meaning a human child.
Check out the embyroscopies at:
http://www.ehd.org/
As for his mentioning of “fertilized eggs” – here Ron, read this:
http://www.thrufire.com/blog/2009/03/fertilized-eggs-vs-zygotic-human-embryos/
Ron Reagan is no Ronald Reagan.
“According to the UK’s Telegraph, the Vatican has blocked Caroline Kennedy as the US ambassador to the Vatican”
Good news.
I thought that Obama had wanted to do the whole Team of Rivals thing? If so, it shouldn’t be a problem to at least appoint one pro-life politician, especially when that’s apparently in the description of the job being filled.
Is anyone keeping a list of NoBama’s broken promises, starting with “I will use matching government funds for my campaign”?
I heard the Vatican has rejected three would-be ambassadors. Not surprising since they’ve all be pro-aborts. I mean really, what is Obama thinking?
Quoth Alexandra:
I thought that Obama had wanted to do the whole Team of Rivals thing?
Good idea! He could also appoint an adviser who actually paid his/her taxes to go along with all of the ones who didn’t….
Seriously, I’m with Doyle. Obama ran to the middle to get elected, and every single action since then has been to the Hard Left. Which is exactly what those of us in the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy had been trying to tell you all….
Seriously, I’m with Doyle. Obama ran to the middle to get elected, and every single action since then has been to the Hard Left. Which is exactly what those of us in the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy had been trying to tell you all….
Who is the ‘you’ here? The majority of people at this site have been, like, majorly anti-Obama since just about the dawn of time.
Or is that me? A token rep for the minority of people at this site? I’m so confused. :P
I think he means “you” more in the sense of the Nation. Obviously that doesnt apply in this specific circumstances, but I believe thats what he is getting at. Frustration with the moderates who supported Obama.
I think the “moderates” are pretty happy with Obama.
Apparently teaching basic embryology has not been politically correct in the U.S. for several generations now. I blame the teachers rather than the pupils for the current show of ignorance that appears epidemic in our country.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
“According to the UK’s Telegraph, the Vatican has blocked Caroline Kennedy as the US ambassador to the Vatican”
Praise God, Jasper. But then, why would anyone want a job where they would basically be ignored by their own country? We are purportedly not even a “Christian Country (anymore) according to our President.
What are the U.S. Ambassador’s duties?
But then, why would anyone want a job where they would basically be ignored by their own country? We are purportedly not even a “Christian Country (anymore) according to our President.
We’re not a Jewish Nation, but I don’t think anyone would say that the ambassador to Israel is ignored by his own country. There are Jewish Americans living here and there is important…stuff involved in dealing with Israel regardless of of the fact that we as a nation are not Jewish.
I don’t really see how the US being a Christian Country or not has any bearing on the desirability of being an ambassador to the Vatican.
Alexandra,
Maybe I’m looking at it from a uniquely Catholic perspective, I don’t know what to say, really. Again, I don’t know what a U.S. ambassador to the Vatican does.
Surely Barry can find a pro life Catholic to appoint! He’s showing a blatant disregard for the Vatican and the Catholic faith. I’m glad the Vatican isnt giving in though.
And although this doesnt have anything to do with abortion its just another example of Barry’s extreme left wing agenda. Nothing being challenged by the main stream media either.
http://www.allamericanblogger.com/6886/hr-1388-or-the-obama-youth-brigade-bill-update/
Joanne,
Apparently the senate passed the bill today. I have to wonder if they read it first and how WE are going to pay for it at an estimated cost of over $5 billion.
Joanne: he probably could, but he’s so radically pro abortion and wearing the ‘abortion is a fundamental right and no one should be punished with a baby’ glasses that he can’t seem to **find** one.
I think I’d prefer the Ambassador to the Vatican be a Catholic in GOOD STANDING.
I’m pretty sure the Vatican doesn’t require the ambassador to be Catholic — just to be relatively in line with Catholic views, at least in public.
Janet,
It’s not just the cost of the bill….. its what the bill represents that is so scary.
Compulsary work for youth and churches are not included! Hitler brainwashed people by starting when they were young. So much easier than when people are older and less likely to be deceived.
Liz,
I agree, Barry is so pro abortion he cant think of anything else, and for sure the candidate should be a Catholic in good standing which means pro life.
Someone should explain to Barry what pro life means since the concept is so completely opposed to what he believes in.
Janet,
An ambassador is to serve as the official representative of their country. So, in the case above Caroline Kennedy would represent the US at the Vatican.
Since the question of embryos has arisen, it reminds me that I needed to ask, just because I am a little fuzzy regarding early, early stages of pregnancy:
Could someone explain the difference between fertilization and conception? They, in all honesty, sound the same, but people tend to substitute one word for another and that has left me confused.
I might be able to join your conversation about embryos if I only knew for sure… :(.
Vannah I was kind of wondering the same thing….
Knowledge is power
Vatican has blocked Caroline Kennedy as the US ambassador to the Vatican
very good! WE all knew this would happen!
The US ambassador to the Vatican is ambassador to the Vatican State.
According to CNA :
“The Holy See has always set a very simple standard: the person should not be in opposition to fundamental teachings of the Church that belong to our common shared humanity. He or she may not believe in Catholic dogma if he or she is not a Catholic, but we could not accept someone who is in favor of abortion, or (human) cloning or same-sex unions equated to marriage,” the official said.
Mr. Obama’s predicament underscores a deeper problem the Vatican has with the Democratic Party and its anti-life positions on abortion.
It is likely that this position will remain unfilled. The Vatican is likely not going to accept anyone who is in favour of abortion. This could be a major embarrassment to Obama.
This could be a major embarrassment to Obama.
Posted by: angel at April 13, 2009 5:46 PM
It wouldnt have to be an embarrassment. He only has to pick someone who is PRO LIFE.
Apparently Barry has never heard of the term.
More thoughts on the subject of appointing a U.S. Ambassador the the Vatican –
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/obama_vatican_picks/2009/04/02/199160.html
Vatican Unhappy with Obama Ambassador Picks
Thursday, April 2, 2009 6:55 PM
By: Edward Pentin
According to Massimo Franco, author of “Parallel Empires,” a recently published book on U.S.-Vatican relations, the Obama administration has put forward three candidates for consideration but each of them have been deemed insufficiently pro-life by the Vatican.
One of the few conditions the Vatican places on diplomats accredited to the Holy See is that they hold pro-life views in line with Church teaching.
Franco says the administration is now looking for a professional diplomat rather than a political appointee because finding an authentically pro-life candidate within the Democratic Party is proving impossible. The task is further hampered by the administration’s desire to reward individuals who gave donations to Obama’s campaign.
Since the U.S. opened formal diplomatic relations with the Vatican 25 years ago under President Reagan, all ambassadors have been political appointees and pro-life Catholics of varying degrees, even under the Clinton administration.
However, in view of the absence of qualified Catholic candidates, insiders say another option could be for the administration to choose a non-Catholic pro-life candidate rather than a Catholic whose record on pro-life issues is at odds with Church teaching.
“There may be room for such an appointment and it could be a good choice,” said Franco, “but at the moment I can’t imagine it happening.”
The post of U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See has been vacant since Jan. 19, when Harvard law professor Mary Ann Glendon left the position. Commentators say that unless an appointment is made by mid-April, the Obama administration could face the embarrassing possibility of having no ambassador in place when the president visits Italy in July for the G8 summit. That would make any encounter between Pope Benedict XVI and President Obama not impossible but unlikely.
Even Bill Clinton had the decency to appoint a pro-lifer as ambassador to the Vatican..
“Knowledge is power.”
Agreed, AK Krystal! :)
Oh, and I hope that your health is doing better. I’ll pray for you. :).
Vannah. Fertilization is the actual process of the sperm entering the egg while conception refers to the point where the male and female pronuclei fuse.
Here’s a chart to help:
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4584/2354/1600/fertilization.jpg
Thanks, Lauren. :).
Jasper 6:45PM
I never thought I would say this but I’m beginning to miss Bill Clinton.
IMPORTANT:
Yet another pro-abort liar exposed!
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h702UpSGq2AIfQKoN_karkJtZ5hQD97HRK6G4
Even Bill Clinton had the decency to appoint a pro-lifer as ambassador to the Vatican..
Posted by: Jasper at April 13, 2009 6:45 PM
Exactly what I was going to say! Clinton was almost as pro abort as Barry, yet even he did the right thing here.
And are we really expected to believe there are no qualified pro life Catholics? Or just no pro life Catholics who are Democrats?
Why can’t Barry pick a Republican then?
I realize the terms “pro life” and “Democrat” seldom go together.
Haven’t read all the comments yet….
1. He’s right that, technically, the children killed in embryo research are pre-embryos or blastocysts rather than embryos. (At least he isn’t saying “unfertilized embryos.”)
2. He is wrong that they are at all different from IVF embryos. That is why “unwanted” IVF embryos can be used for embryo research. They are at the same developmental stage. I don’t know why they are trying so hard to make this distinction; isn’t “wantedness” the only distinction they need in order to kill an unborn child?
3. The fact that a child is not a unique genetic entity doesn’t make it permissible to experiment on him or her. Otherwise, we could freely experiment on anyone who had an identical twin.
4. It’s not a “fake” embryo, because under the right circumstances, it would become a human being, and then no one could deny it was a real human being. In fact, this almost makes me want to clone my husband and carry the baby to term, just to prove that clones are real people. (Although, I suppose for immune reasons cloning myself would work better….)
5. Go Vatican.
Edit to #4:
It’s not a “fake” embryo, because under the right circumstances, it would become an infant, and then no one could deny it was a real infant.
(The cloned zygote is already a human being)
YCW, identical twins are not completely identical in their DNA. There are some things that are different (missing bits of DNA code for example) making them largely identical but not entirely identical.
Copy number variation is one reason and mutation is another.
Every person is truly a unique individual even if they share most DNA. Identical twins I know do not have the same likes or personalities nor do they have the same temperament or weakness of character. And from a Christian perspective, we believe that each person has a unique God-given purpose for being alive at this time in history.
YCW,
“1. He’s right that, technically, the children killed in embryo research are pre-embryos”
Just a slight clarification that a there is no such thing as a pre-embryo. As Princeton biologist and pro-choicer and pro-ESCR Lee Silver admits in his book “Remaking Eden”
“I’ll let you in on a secret. The term pre-embryo has been embraced wholeheartedly by IVF practitioners for reasons that are political, not scientific. The new term is used to provide the illusion that there is something profoundly different between what we nonmedical biologists still call a six-day-old embryo and what we and everyone else call a sixteen-day-old embryo.
The term pre-embryo is useful in the political arena where decisions are made about whether to allow early embryo (now called pre-embryo) experimentation as well as in the confines of a doctor’s office, where it can be used to allay moral concerns that might be expressed by IVF patients. “Don’t worry,” a doctor might say, “it’s only pre-embryos that we’re manipulating or freezing. They won’t turn into real human embryos until after we’ve put them back into your body.”
I thought that technically, the child was a blastocyst until implantation? Would the zygote be considered an embryo as well? I thought pre-embryo was used to refer to the pre-implantation stages of human life. I don’t think the term “pre-embryo” has to be dehumanizing, any more than pre-teen (though I agree that it is being used in that way).
Angel: true. And the same would be true of a cloned human being. But in that sense, not all of our own bodies even have the same genetic code.
YCW,
“I thought that technically, the child was a blastocyst until implantation?”
Yes, that is my understanding as well. The first stage is zygote, and you are a blastocyst just before implantation, until which time you become an embryo until around 8 weeks, I think.