Bad day for war proponents

[Tramspotter]

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

Why am I reminded of a drunk guy stand on a street corner evangalizing?

I don't know I thought it very germain that the very kind of experimentation that loose medical ethics and poor forsight that science can bring are past thier infant stages and the race for the ultimate cure is being played more like a grudge match rugby game with crooked refs where everyone in the stands wants to see some carnage no one cares who wins but which team and player can show the most fragrant foul thus increasing thier noteriety and funding for next year.

Being dismissive of blind faith when it comes to religion and morality yet giving the same to burnt out body mechanics and career biochemists many of whom coulden't hack the riggors of medschool but put in a ****pile of time and wanted to come away with some degree and a decent standard of living... Do you honestly believe nothing stupid or untorid can be done in the name of science?

Or is science somehow the epitome of enlightenmentm, pure discovery beautiful in all its forms? Is Greek Reason paired with raw Science an aceptable religion within moral relavitism?

Are you so hard core that there isn't even the posibility of too far? This obviously isnt even close for you. And on the face of it it isn't but it is a milestone in that even amoung the scientific comunity human and animal geneomes were not meddled with together on a genetic level.

So let me get this strait altering human genetics with animals for gene therapy on tissue alone would be ok but creating a conception level cure for various ailments is not? (The latter could be broadly applied to this given case)

Or how about
creating pigs/cows/sheep with alterd genes so their organs can be accepted by humans? Is that ok; but making genetic level alterations using a given percentage of animal and human DNA and doing the same is that not ok?

I would assume cloning a human for research and not going past the third trimester is ok but growing a population of docile very controlable hybrid man beasts not ok? What if they are already doing it in Oslo? Our economy would colapse under the strain of a new more powerful IKEA that would benifit from such a workforce.

There are a host more realistic concerns that have plagued biomedical ethicists conserning making unusual out of the box advancements and the intermidiate and long term costs of both failures and sucesses. Do you honestly think they tout the failures when whoring for more money and fame? Often the problem in science is not in actuality funding or even the technology but should it even be done in the first place.

Anyway
So how does being a gung ho supporter of pure science and apparently not considering any of the concerns brought up make one any better than the much villified knuckle dragging, bible thumpers who oppose various research purely on moral grounds?

It seems you still miss my point if your are willing to lable me a drunken heriticical blasphemer of science in order to dodge it. But I could be wrong.