Obama - let Scientists Make Human- Animal Hybirds


#1

obama Administration Wants to Allow Scientists to Make Human-Animal Hybrids

lifenews.com/2016/08/04/obama-administration-wants-to-allow-scientists-to-make-human-animal-hybrids/

I think this is horrific and wonder if we can find who the Scientists are and write letters or try and change this politically. What might you all think?


#2

I too think this sounds horrific, but a letter to those already bent on conducting such experiments isn’t going to change anything (other than how often they take out the rubbish), moral people need to be elected. If Clinton gets in, I think America is just about done for, if Trump gets in, I think it’s not good but at least there is a chance.

“For the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.”


#3

Accuracy is apparently not a strong suit of Life News. The images and description are misleadiing. Also, the new rules are proposed by NIH scientists, not by President Obama.

Not that I approve of this kind of research, but here is a more accurate description in Nature, one of the world’s leading science publications:

nature.com/news/us-agency-to-lift-ban-on-funding-human-animal-hybrids-1.20379

From the link:

The new rules shorten the developmental window during which human cells can be introduced into non-human primate embryos, disallowing it before the stage of development in which the central nervous system begins to form. This is intended to limit the number of human cells that would make up the chimaera’s brain. They also prohibit breeding animals that contain human cells, so as to prevent a human-like embryo from growing in a non-human womb or the birth of an animal that is more humanized than its parents.


#4

By the way, the headline of this thread is altered (and wilfully manipulated) from the original article. This is against forum rules on threads of news articles.


#5

I found this the funniest thread of the day. I especially like that funny photo shop picture they put on the article, as well as the opening line: “The Obama administration today announced it has flung the door wide open to scientists making grisly human-animal hybrids.”

Okay, here is a Catholic article (pdf) from a more reliable source on the subject:

ncbcenter.org/files/7614/6887/5793/MSOB128_Human_Organs_from_Pigs.pdf

It is important to remember that this topic by its very nature is changing rapidly, so the ethic might also need constant revision. In theory though, there is nothing wrong with using organs grown in animals for transplant.


#6

Thank you, Al-M.

And “misleading” is the understatement of the year.

The photo they used for this story is a cropped pic of a silicone and fiberglass sculpture positioned on a hi-fi speaker, called “The Listener,” created in 2012 by controversial artist, Patricia Piccinini, who was awarded the Artist Award by the Melbourne Art Foundation’s Awards for the Visual Arts in 2014.

Note how the fastidious editors give no information or photo/art credit under the photo.

Could it be they wanted to trick gullible readers into thinking that this is a real “grisly human-animal hybrid” – as it says, directly under the photo–created by “the Obama Administration”?

I believe this is what is called hateful propaganda.

And what we in the biz call very irresponsible journalism.

.


#7

You’re welcome, DaddyGirl.

The photo they used for this story is a cropped pic of a silicone and fiberglass sculpture positioned on a hi-fi speaker, called “The Listener,” created in 2012 by controversial artist, Patricia Piccinini, who was awarded the Artist Award by the Melbourne Art Foundation’s Awards for the Visual Arts in 2014.

Thanks for the info. I was already wondering where that spookily well done presentation came from.

Note how the fastidious editors give no information or photo/art credit under the photo.

No surprises there.

Could it be they wanted to trick gullible readers into thinking that this is a real “grisly human-animal hybrid” – as it says, directly under the photo–created by “the Obama Administration”?

I believe this is what is called hateful propaganda.

And what we in the biz call very irresponsible journalism.
.

Unfortunately, fundamentalist Christians have engaged in hateful propaganda for ages. No good representation of my religion.

As for being misleading, atheists have an apt term for this:

Lying for Jesus

That says it all.


#8

There was a BBC fiction serial called Firstborn that has this as its theme.I think it is on youtube


#9

Apart from any inaccuracies in reportage, we expect too much of the President.

It is not in his or her enumerated powers to stop things we dislike by a snap of the fingers. That would be dictatorship or tyranny.

The place to stop something like this is in the legislative halls. Which is why no-one should skip this election. Even if you can’t stand either head candidate, go in there and cast a vote in the other races. The whole HR is in play, as well as the Senate.

With all the rot we are seeing at the head of governance, it is even more desperately needed that the body should be strong.

ICXC NIKA


#10

That article has caused Life News to lose a lot of credibility with me. It used to be one of my go-to sites for reference material for my profile arguments, but now all my adversaries are going to point to this article and take all the wind out of my sails. :frowning:


#11

Thank you for this excellent read!


#12

Indeed. The NIH may be nominally part of the executive branch of the government, but this kind of proposals and decisions is made by scientists. I would not be surprised if President Obama does not even know about it at this point, since it is still just a proposal put forth to be discussed within the scientific community.


#13

I never knew that term! It’s apt.

Unfortunately, they are able to influence so many–non-fundamental types, too–when posted on sites like this.
Yet it usually only takes a one-minute google search to get a more factual version of the story, but so often many readers won’t or can’t take a minute to check :shrug:.

I’m surprised people post from this publication…IMO it’s akin to quoting *The National Enquirer *.

Methinks Jesus would not like this so much.

.


#14

the article lifenews article references is here:

npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/08/04/488387729/nih-plans-to-lift-ban-on-research-funds-for-part-human-part-animal-embryos

This is disgusting and no, its NOT fiction. We have human embryos being destroyed for research, so this is not too far off for going further into a black hole.


#15

I think people support this research on very tenuous grounds. I’m disappointed more Catholics aren’t alarmed by it. There are seriously no moral reservations about attempting chimera brains? I’m not so concerned about lungs and such, but brains? Not to mention, I thought this research entailed embryonic destruction too.


#16

I don’t think anyone is saying the announcement by The National Institute of Health to lift the ban is fiction.
The idea of it does give some the heebie-jeebies, as per the really good article posted above from The National Catholic Bioethics Center.

But that doesn’t mean a publication should mislead it’s readers about it.

.


#17

It is essential that - when either writing an article or posting/sharing on social media - we avoid false and inflammatory information. It does absolutely nothing to help the cause (pro-life or political) and makes the writer/poster look either stupid or dishonest.

One of my favorite examples of this is the much-shared photo of Hillary Clinton supposedly shaking hands with Osama bin Laden AFTER 9/11. (The original image was actually an entry in a Photoshop contest.) The number of folks who shared the photo, and who seemed to actually accept it at face value, was disturbing. (It is also emblematic of why we’ve ended up with the two presidential candidates we have this year.)

The pro-life argument is strong enough on its own that the sort of foolishness as appeared on LifeSite is unnecessary.

That all said, the slippery slope argument comes quickly to mind; I don’t think one more layer of “government officials” overseeing research will prevent abuse. The utilitarian philosophy that underlies this sort of experimentation is chilling.


#18

Attempting chimera brains? You must have missed my post above:


#19

I did not miss it. And you’re right, it’s more correct to say that ethicists are concerned we simply don’t know where the cells will go. patheos.com/blogs/thetoolshed/2016/08/crossing-the-line-growing-a-human-fetus-in-a-pig/

I actually remember my roommate in college being concerned about this research six years ago. She was in the Vet track program.

EDIT: I think it a little naïve to think scientists wouldn’t eventually wish to pursue chimera brains, though. I’m sorry I have such a dim view.


#20

I share your view. That’s why we need regulations.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.