Re: [asa] The unexpected burden of IVF

At 10:49 PM 9/6/2007, Jack wrote:

>"...I think that the tactic that Janice uses
>here is dishonest, and not behavior that I would
>expect from a fellow believer. Certainly,
>anything that I say on this forum, is fodder
>for discussion, but it is unbliblical to resort
>to the kind of skullduggery, that Janice resorts
>to here. Janice combined two quotes, on
>different topics, in different threads, into one
>paragraph. But what is reprehensible about
>what she does is that she follows this quote
>with: "... I was reading an issue of PCSF from
>Dec 06 on this
>topic.
><http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2006/PSCF12-06Peterson.pdf>http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2006/PSCF12-06Peterson.pdf
>You, should read it. One of the criteria he
>proposed was that a soul requires a body. In
>other words "ensoulment" could not occur in an
>embryo that is just a collection of cells, but
>would require some differentiation, some
>development of organs. And even though he did
>not mention it, I think that at the point that
>the neuro-axis is differentiated is probably as
>good a point as any to consider the embryo
>human. " ~ Jack" In fact this quote was from
>the "Worthy of response?" thread, and was not at
>all referring to using the existing
>embryo's. She implies that this quote was about
>the topic of using the existing embryo's by
>including my quote "on this topic", which was
>actually referring to an entirely different
>topic. How much longer is this list going to
>have to put up with this type of behavior? Many
>of us misbehave here at times, but Janice is the
>most prolific. Janice wrote: "..but if the
>embryos are there, and they are just going to be
>destroyed, why shouldnt we use them for stem
>cell research, even if one thinks that they are
>fully human? ... I was reading an issue of PCSF
>from Dec 06 on this
>topic.
><http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2006/PSCF12-06Peterson.pdf>http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2006/PSCF12-06Peterson.pdf
>You, should read it. One of the criteria he
>proposed was that a soul requires a body. In
>other words "ensoulment" could not occur in an
>embryo that is just a collection of cells, but
>would require some differentiation, some
>development of organs. And even though he did
>not mention it, I think that at the point that
>the neuro-axis is differentiated is probably as
>good a point as any to consider the embryo human. " ~ Jack

@@ Sorry for misunderstanding you. I thought
you were talking about the same thing in those
two posts, not "two different topics".

Since you object to my including what you said
here, along with the other quote:: "..Third, I
expect someone to mention Nazi medical
experiments with this comment, but if the embryos
are there, and they are just going to be
destroyed, why shouldnt we use them for stem cell
research, even if one thinks that they are fully
human?" ~ Jack <drsyme@cablespeed.com> [asa]
The unexpected burden of IVF Thu, 06 Sep 2007 12:57:26 -0400

I'll withdraw that one and only use this quote:

  "...I was reading an issue of PCSF from Dec 06
on this
topic.
<http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2006/PSCF12-06Peterson.pdf>http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2006/PSCF12-06Peterson.pdf
You, should read it. One of the criteria he
proposed was that a soul requires a body. In
other words "ensoulment" could not occur in an
embryo that is just a collection of cells, but
would require some differentiation, some
development of organs. And even though he did
not mention it, I think that at the point that
the neuro-axis is differentiated is probably as
good a point as any to consider the embryo
human. ~ Jack <drsyme@cablespeed.com> Thu, 06
Sep 2007 12:06:56 -0400 Re: [asa] Worthy of response?

Now I'll repeat my comment in response to
it: <quote> "Christians" who make that argument
- in order to be consistent - would have to be
prepared to say that since Jesus didn't have
(their definition of what they think is) a "body"
as an embryo , it would also be okay to use it for stem cell research.

How many of those who earn their living in the
abortion industry, the fertility industry, and
other "related" multi-billion dollar
industries, are people who believe in a God who
actually came in the flesh and dwelt among us?

I can confidently say, very few." </end quote>

Do you disagree?

~ Janice .... "I caution you in this way, dear
friends though I am well aware that your
conviction is as firm as my own; but I would fain
protect you in advance against certain beasts of
prey in human form. If you can you should avoid
all contact with these persons, much less give
them any sort of acceptance. … After all if
everything our Lord did was only an illusion then
these chains of mine must be illusory too! Also,
to what end have I given myself up to perish by
fire or sword or savage beasts? … Yet there are
some who in their blindness still reject him-or
rather are rejected by him … So what is the point
of my standing well in the opinion of a man who
blasphemes my Lord by denying that he ever bore a
real human body? In saying that, he denies
everything else about him; and the body he
himself is bearing must be nothing but a corpse.
My pen declines to write the names of these
infidels, and I would even wish to have them
erased from my memory altogether …" ~ Ignatius of Antioch (Ep. Smyr. 4-5)

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Sep 6 23:58:40 2007