reading lesson for the day

I usually try to avoid politics on weekends, but you must read Iowahawk's satire.

(Headsup Anchoress)

-----------------------
the dirty little secretis that the press always hypes and gives lots of publicity over 'embryonic stem cells" while those from adult stem cells, which work, are cheaper, already are curing folks, and are better DNA matches, get only mild publicity and often the source of the cells isn't identified, link...

but since embryonic stem cells aren't better for treating disease, why the push? the answer: it is about cloning

ironically, sci fi and movies already have pointed this out, that having your own clone to give you "young" organs would let you live longer.

so now we have a question; should we "clone" Neanderthals?

"I think there would be no question that if you cloned a Neanderthal, that individual would be recognized as having human rights under the Constitution and international treaties," says Lori Andrews, a professor at Chicago-Kent College of Law. The law does not define what a human being is, but legal scholars are debating questions of human rights in cases involving genetic engineering. "This is a species-altering event," says Andrews, "it changes the way we are creating a new generation." How much does a human genome need to be changed before the individual created from it is no longer considered human?

yes, and since the UK Bishops already said that chimera with a preponderance of human genes should be given rights to life and treated as if they were human, this raises a question: Who will adopt and raise such 'clones"?

Frankenstein is not dead, he's just into genetic engineering..