I was reading about mitochondrial donation this morning and the British debate about it merits, ethics, and potential dangers.
Essentially this procedure takes DNA from a multitude of people, for the most part three as far as I can tell, and create an embryo with that DNA.
This is supposed to help reduce, at the very least, mitochondrial diseases passed on to the fetus.
The opponents claim their opposition is based on safety, ethics, eugenics, bad medicine and religious reasons.
The obvious result of mitrochondrial donations |
I'm only going to comment on the religious aspect, for some odd reason besides the lack of time people actually read what I have to write.
My particular issue with people who oppose science on religious grounds is based on the fact that billions of people over the years pray for cures for their family members and friends who are beset with tragic diseases.
All of a sudden a potential cure comes around and many of those same people ignore it and dismiss it as black magic or voodoo or skullcrockery or whatever they decide to call it.
Couldn't that potential cure be God's answer to the prayer? Am I one of the few who see that? I can't be, can I?
On the other hand I find it so ironic that there are those who view science in such a way that it can only be described as a religious following itself.
One thing I hear that always blows my mind is a statement such as, "But that's science. It's scientific fact," when we know that science and scientists are wrong over and over and over again.
Even Steven Hawking, the alleged genius, has proven himself wrong about at least one pretty important theory which helped him rise up the ranks of alleged geniuses.
When can common sense get injected into any of these discussions?
I really need to apply that to "global warming," or "climate change." One minute of a common-sense conversation blows the entire theory of this "settled science."
NEVER in any of the discussions about climate change (and when we say this we are talking about man-made climate change or global warming) does the great fireball in the sky get mentioned.
That is unless someone who is skeptical of the "science" talks about it before quickly being denounced as a charlatan and a freak by the wealth redistributionists who created the hoax from the start.
The whole worry about climate change? That the Earth will be 1 degree warmer by 2050. That is these "scientists" claim the computers models suggest.
These computers, of course, are the same ones that can't tell us within one degree of accuracy what next week's temperatures are going to be.
7 days ago the weather report for my area for yesterday said the temperature was going to be 48 and it was going to rain. It was 31 and snowed 4 inches. That is a 17 DEGREE MISTAKE.
The "scientists," and Al Gore who should be jailed for life for stealing the nearly billion dollars of wealth he has accumulated helping market this fraudulent scheme, want me to believe what will happen in 2050? And then they want to tax me more and regulate the energy companies more so that I have to pay more in energy bills every month to "solve the problem?"
These people need to be out of our lives.
Anyway, so I can see while there are certainly skeptics of mitochondrial donation, if I simply take the weather as a reason for it. But at the same time we do have to realize that science has, of course, saved billions of lives as well.
But is staring at a potential cure and, therefore, a potential answer to one's prayer and ignoring it an affront to God?
I'm not a scientist or a religious person so I can remain objective and make silly commentary off on the side of the battlefield. But I am also pretty happy I am not on either side because the more of this stuff I read, hear and see the more my head swells to the point of potential explosion.
Done