Bush is hindering the advancement of our species.

[Adron]

Actually, you know what, cloning and genetically engineering is a marvelous idea. We'll breed a race of super-humans that will all have genetically identical ("perfect") DNA that will, as a side effect, create a race of super-humans that all have weaknesses to the same diseases. In addition, it's likely that such super-humans will speed up the natural selection of bacteria and virii, causing a race of super-diseases to compete with the super-humans, which will eventually end up killing everyone else.

Such super-humans would probably cause natural selection among bacteria and virii, but if anything they'll create more bacteria and virii that attack that one weakness common to the clones.

Americans are already letting natural selection create super-diseases. They allow antibiotic supplements to be fed to livestock, exposing bacteria to low doses of the things that normally kills them. Antibiotic resistance is going to be a huge problem in the future.

Natural-born humans will be unable to survive in the world.

Only the natural-born will survive the mutant virus that attacks the weakness of the clones

[Mephisto]

Actually, you know what, cloning and genetically engineering is a marvelous idea. We'll breed a race of super-humans that will all have genetically identical ("perfect") DNA that will, as a side effect, create a race of super-humans that all have weaknesses to the same diseases. In addition, it's likely that such super-humans will speed up the natural selection of bacteria and virii, causing a race of super-diseases to compete with the super-humans, which will eventually end up killing everyone else. The human race will no longer be able to survive without genetic engineering to create immunities to these diseases. Natural-born humans will be unable to survive in the world. Eventually, humanity will confront a massive crisis, which will hinder genetic engineering. If genetic engineering fails, the human race will perish.

I agree; without genetic variation in a species, one form of a virus could have the potential of killing us all.

[CrAz3D]

Wow, this sounds so much mroe advanced than my redneck idears...I just wanted to fucking kill all the retards!



Cloning is wrong because then people aren't unique & then people have no value & then life becomes pointless.



You are an idiot & just like to get everyone all excited.

[Deception]

Back on track: Bush is against stem cell research because it involves cloning human embrios to extract the stem cells, which he thinks he killing a baby or something.

[Stealth]

Back on track: Bush is against stem cell research because it involves cloning human embrios to extract the stem cells, which he thinks he killing a baby or something.

Deception, your second thread that I have read on this forum is created in very similar tone to the first one: a troll. This time I'm going to play along, though, because I like political discussions.

George W. Bush is clearly not a stupid man. He has degrees from Harvard and Yale, and he has no problem running the country, even in wartime. The reason you perceive him as stupid is because of his speaking style:

1. He speaks very directly. To me this is not a trait of stupidity, but of logic. Where John Kerry would spout a paragraph of nuanced bullshit, Bush can sum his viewpoint up in a concise sentence or two. The AP test graders would love it.

2. He has made mistakes in his speech in the past. This is hardly a measure of stupidity. Plenty of people who have no public speaking skills whatsoever are incredibly intelligent; for example your stereotypical engineer. To top it all off, his verbal mistakes have been much fewer and further between since 9/11.

Next, I'm hardly a redneck. I was born, raised and currently reside in one of the nation's most liberal cities, Madison, Wisconsin. In fact, the UW here controls some of the last remaining embryonic stem cell lines. Your stereotyping Republicans as rednecks is just as stupid as Hismajesty's stereotyping liberals as smelly tree-hugging hippies. I know some very intelligent liberals and I know some very stupid explosive ones. The stupid ones are more fun to debate, and their attitudes towards Bush often mirror yours. If you can't make your case without making fun of the person you're debating against, then you have no case.

Now, let me try to assuage your tearful, bleeding heart.

I cannot understand why anyone in their right mind would allow a primitive way of understanding the universe to hinder the advancement of the entire species.

I don't understand how embryonic stem-cell research is the key to the advancement of the species. But, more importantly, what exactly IS the "advancement of the species" ? From what I understand (and I am no expert in the subject) human embryonic stem cells are not the only type of stem cells that can be used to perform genetic research. They are, however, the only type that the Bush administration objects to, and they object on their belief that a fetus is a child. To believe that this type of research is the single key to the "advancement of the species" is ludicrous.

The debate raging around that type of research comes down to the basic argument as to whether life begins at birth or at conception. Typical conservatives believe it begins at conception, while typical liberals believe it begins at birth. If it begins at conception, a human embryo is a child and therefore you are taking a life. If it begins at birth, the embryo is no more than a piece of medical waste.

So, Pot, meet Kettle: if you truly want intelligent posts and good responses from the very intelligent constituents of this forum, I would suggest not beginning your threads by calling a good chunk of them stupid rednecks, and spinning the question like a front page story in the New York Times. Intelligent thread openers will receive intelligent responses, especially on this forum.

[Yegg]

Deception. The concept of using cloning as a helper to living humans involves killing other human life forms. Cloning uses a living human embyro, and kills it (for a "good cause", which would involve helping another). This is much like abortion in a way. Abortion is the process of killing a living human organism. So is cloning. Many scientists and experts however don't want to believe this and/or have different opinions of if they embyro is really alive or not. Also, you can clone 10 humans and none of them may look alike. There DNA would be %100 identical, but their outside appearance would be different (there is a chance that they can resemble or become identical).

[hismajesty]

Back on track: Bush is against stem cell research because it involves cloning human embrios to extract the stem cells, which he thinks he killing a baby or something.

* hismajesty[yL] would like to note that Bush was the first president to ever use government funds to support stem cell research

[Yegg]

Back on track: Bush is against stem cell research because it involves cloning human embrios to extract the stem cells, which he thinks he killing a baby or something.

* hismajesty[yL] would like to note that Bush was the first president to ever use government funds to support stem cell research

So?

[CrAz3D]

So?...Why do you ask/say that?

hismajesty is countering Deception's nonsensical posts with truths, WHOO for truths!

[Joe[x86]]

I don't know if anyone said this yet, because I only read the first post (Sorry!), but by dismantling an embryo (sp?) you're killing somebody. Think about how glad you should be that you weren't one of them.

[hismajesty]

Back on track: Bush is against stem cell research because it involves cloning human embrios to extract the stem cells, which he thinks he killing a baby or something.

* hismajesty[yL] would like to note that Bush was the first president to ever use government funds to support stem cell research

So?

Bush obviously beleives that there is at least some future in stem cell research and is thus allowing at least some government funding to go to it - even though it's against his religion and the viewpoints of his party.

[Arta]

1. He speaks very directly. To me this is not a trait of stupidity, but of logic. Where John Kerry would spout a paragraph of nuanced bullshit, Bush can sum his viewpoint up in a concise sentence or two. The AP test graders would love it.

2. He has made mistakes in his speech in the past. This is hardly a measure of stupidity. Plenty of people who have no public speaking skills whatsoever are incredibly intelligent; for example your stereotypical engineer. To top it all off, his verbal mistakes have been much fewer and further between since 9/11.

Err.... no. Sorry. You're talking about his speeches, and not about him. When he's not prepared by his staff, he comes off like an idiot. Don't you remember him standing at a conference with nothing to say for several minutes after being asked by a reporter what his biggest mistake was?

The guy is not analytical or logical, so far as I can see. I've never seen any anything indicative of that.

[hismajesty]

You've got it backwards Arta. I remember watching a news report talking about his interview with Matt Lauer - they were saying how Bush is much better at speaking when he's just talking normally amongst people, when he's not reciting something pre-written, but when he does it himself. It's well known that Bush suffers from dyslexia, so obviously reading a speech is not something that he's going to be strong at.

[Stealth]

His performance in the latter two debates was quite good. These were most certainly not speechwritten.

I don't know what happened in the first debate, though. That was hideous.

[Arta]

True enough, he was ok in the latter debates. You can still be prepared for a debate though - they may not know the actual questions, but they do know what topics are likely to be raised, and they can prepare for that. I think the first debate is more indicative of his intellect, but then again, I would

This is why I would like to see actual debate in debates, and not just the candidates stating their opinions. The candidates should argue!