Comments on: How Not to Save Embryos http://www.mahablog.com/2007/06/06/how-not-to-save-embryos/ Making the World Safe for Liberalism Sat, 20 Mar 2010 18:09:12 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: The Mahablog » Free to Be http://www.mahablog.com/2007/06/06/how-not-to-save-embryos/comment-page-1/#comment-373461 The Mahablog » Free to Be Sun, 04 Nov 2007 20:42:50 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=1837#comment-373461 [...] Anti-choice arguments insist that the “rights” of an embryo at any stage of development trump those of its mother. Those of us who are pro-choice think a woman’s well being and free will trump any honorary “rights” of an embryo or fetus prior to viability. Brushing rights aside, plenty of real-world examples show us that criminalizing abortion has a widespread, detrimental impact on the health of women, even women who don’t choose to terminate pregnancies. Indeed, an absolutist “right to life” position is detrimental to the health of embryos. That, to me, settles the argument. [...] [...] Anti-choice arguments insist that the “rights” of an embryo at any stage of development trump those of its mother. Those of us who are pro-choice think a woman’s well being and free will trump any honorary “rights” of an embryo or fetus prior to viability. Brushing rights aside, plenty of real-world examples show us that criminalizing abortion has a widespread, detrimental impact on the health of women, even women who don’t choose to terminate pregnancies. Indeed, an absolutist “right to life” position is detrimental to the health of embryos. That, to me, settles the argument. [...]

]]> By: The Mahablog » The Wisdom of Doubt, Part II http://www.mahablog.com/2007/06/06/how-not-to-save-embryos/comment-page-1/#comment-243760 The Mahablog » The Wisdom of Doubt, Part II Thu, 21 Jun 2007 13:13:13 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=1837#comment-243760 [...] There is something self-evidently screwy about “ethics” that value frozen blastocysts above children and adults suffering and dying from terrible disease. But “moral clarity” on the stem cell issue — born of a stubborn refusal to look at all facets of the issue honestly — results in myriad unfortunate side effects. As explained here, for example, thanks to morally clear policies doctors performing in vitro fertilization cannot research ways to reduce multiple births. And multiple births increase the risks for both babies and mothers. [...] [...] There is something self-evidently screwy about “ethics” that value frozen blastocysts above children and adults suffering and dying from terrible disease. But “moral clarity” on the stem cell issue — born of a stubborn refusal to look at all facets of the issue honestly — results in myriad unfortunate side effects. As explained here, for example, thanks to morally clear policies doctors performing in vitro fertilization cannot research ways to reduce multiple births. And multiple births increase the risks for both babies and mothers. [...]

]]> By: Plunderbund - » Embryonic research bans are causing birth defects http://www.mahablog.com/2007/06/06/how-not-to-save-embryos/comment-page-1/#comment-224684 Plunderbund - » Embryonic research bans are causing birth defects Thu, 07 Jun 2007 14:30:20 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=1837#comment-224684 [...] There was a terrific article in yesterday’s Washington Post that clearly lays out the evidence that federal bans on embryonic research - such as the stem cell research ban - are actually causing an increase in birth defects. (HT: Mahablog.) [...] [...] There was a terrific article in yesterday’s Washington Post that clearly lays out the evidence that federal bans on embryonic research – such as the stem cell research ban – are actually causing an increase in birth defects. (HT: Mahablog.) [...]

]]> By: maha http://www.mahablog.com/2007/06/06/how-not-to-save-embryos/comment-page-1/#comment-224562 maha Thu, 07 Jun 2007 01:22:12 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=1837#comment-224562 Point taken. Point taken.

]]> By: Swami http://www.mahablog.com/2007/06/06/how-not-to-save-embryos/comment-page-1/#comment-224560 Swami Thu, 07 Jun 2007 01:16:21 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/?p=1837#comment-224560 <i>But the human womb is designed to carry one baby at a time</i> Not to nit pick, but to point out the difficulty in expressing a concept without endorsing or furthering the cause of the flat-earthers. The human womb functions at its optimum carrying one baby at a time? But the human womb is designed to carry one baby at a time

Not to nit pick, but to point out the difficulty in expressing a concept without endorsing or furthering the cause of the flat-earthers. The human womb functions at its optimum carrying one baby at a time?

]]>