Do you object to all stem cell research, or just to embryonic stem cell research? I find the idea of harvesting embryos for stem cells, even if they were going to be stored and then discarded, a slippery slope myself. And professing my own religion of miracles I am inclined to let the Almighty be almighty. There should be a role for the scientifically unexplained.
But what about the more modern approaches using, say, skin cells or fat cells from adults? Aye or nay?

Rick Warren has no credibility.
It only took a few seconds into Warren’s recent interview with Larry King for Warren to make a ‘bald faced lie.’ Takes considerable nerve considering the video proving his lies. Warren is getting hit on his lie by many, including Christian sites.
Although Warren publicly spoke out in support of Proposition 8 just weeks before the election, he lied during his interview on CNN. “During the whole Proposition 8 thing,” Warren insisted, “I never once went to a meeting, never once issued a statement, never – never once even gave an endorsement in the two years Prop. 8 was going.”
http://tinyurl.com/dmqhah
Here is an excerpt from his speech just weeks before the Prop. 8 vote:
“The election’s coming just in a couple of weeks, and I hope you’re praying about your vote. One of the propositions, of course, that I want to mention is Proposition 8, which is the proposition that had to be instituted because the courts threw out the will of the people. And a court of four guys actually voted to change a definition of marriage that has been going for 5,000 years.”
“Now let me say this really clearly: we support Proposition 8 — and if you believe what the Bible says about marriage, you need to support Proposition 8. I never support a candidate, but on moral issues I come out very clear.”
“So I urge you to support Proposition 8, and pass that word on. I’m going to be sending out a note to pastors on what I believe about this. But everybody knows what I believe about it.”
tinyurl . com / c5y7ks
Rick Warren endorses Prop 8 Calif. marriage amendment
Posted on Oct 27, 2008 | by Michael Foust – Baptist Press
LAKE FOREST, Calif. (BP)–Pastor Rick Warren has publicly endorsed a proposed California constitutional marriage amendment, giving supporters a boost in what is expected to be a close vote Nov. 4.
Church Executive Magazine – October 27, 2008
Rick Warren endorses Prop 8 California marriage amendment
Christocentric – Seeing the world through the eyes of Christ!
Rick Warren flip-flops on Prop 8! – Posted by Carlotta on April 8, 2009
“What little bit of respect I had for Rick Warren has completely disappeared. He now says he never had anything to do with any Prop 8 activism.”

“his worldwide apology tour” – the Republican talking points
Proverbs 28:13
“He who conceals his sins does not prosper,
but whoever confesses and renounces them finds mercy.”
America has much to apologize for – we were fortunate that the other countries did not rub Obama’s nose in the fact that the US did cause the financial crisis.
For London-based journalist A.A. Gill, it wasn’t Obama’s presence at an international conference “to save the endangered habitat of bankers and of real estate salesmen” that caught the public eye as much as a handshake with a British bobby.
“As the president stepped up to 10 Downing Street,” the headquarters of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Obama “leant over, made eye contact, said something courteous and shook the hand of the police officer standing guard,” reported Gill.
“There’s always a police officer there; he is a tourist logo in his ridiculous helmet… No one has ever shaken the hand of the policeman before, and like everyone who has his palm touched by Barack Obama, he was visibly transported and briefly forgot himself. He offered the hand to Gordon Brown, who was scuttling behind. It was ignored. It isn’t that Mr. Brown snubbed the police officer; he just didn’t see him. To a British politician, a police officer is as invisible as the railings.”
Gill’s point: “But the rest of us noticed. Because in this country that still feels the class system like a phantom limb, being overtly kind to servants is the very height of manners, the mark of true nobility.” Both the Obamas, Michelle and Barack, scored points for being “classlessly classy.”
From Turkey
Time for a historic decision
Did it really close the George W. Bush era? That is, did the Barrack Hussein Obama’s swing through London, Strasbourg, Prague, Ankara, Istanbul and of course Baghdad mark the end of the hegemonic and agonistic style of the Bush presidency and the opening of a new style based on engagement, cooperation, consensus seeking and partnership?
[hegemonic: domination]
[agonistic: argumentative, aggressive]
Turks were impressed with Obama making, excluding Canada, his first-ever presidential bilateral visit to Turkey, mostly delighted with his modest gestures throughout the trip, though some people were angered with some elements in his “open buffet” statements, the majority managed to find sufficient “food for thought” to fill their plates and felt comforted, yet, is it not too early to make such a comment?
What we were definitely convinced of was the demonstrated integrity of the character of Obama.
It was not easy, obviously, to stand side by side with the Turkish president and answer an American journalist’s question on alleged Armenian genocide issue saying he maintained his views on the issue but believed rather than creating obstructions everyone must help Turkey and Armenia proceed further towards normalizing their relations. It was a courageous statement.
It was irritating for many Turks, but it was just a statement of fact when later that day he told Parliament that although he knew that there were strong views in the Turkish legislature about the “terrible events of 1915″ and although “there has been a good deal of commentary about my views” the contentious issue was indeed one of “how the Turkish and Armenian people deal with the past. And the best way forward for the Turkish and Armenian people is a process that works through the past in a way that is honest, open and constructive.”
The message was indeed clear: Face your past. He was stressing that message while at the same time softening down possible reactions by recalling examples from some very bitter episodes of American history.”
Obama talked about the not that distance disgrace of the treatment of African-Americans.
By admitting error, it is much easier to get people to listen. It is called the art of negotiation – being a bully is not very effective.
One of many Obama achievements. Answering questions from Turkish university students at the Tophane-i Amire Hall in Istanbul:
Domestic Obama aces test by local students
by Çetin Cem Y?lmaz http://tinyurl.com/d67kn4
“His highly motivational speeches, heartfelt peace messages and ethnic minority background aside, the reason Barack Obama is popular lies in the fact that he is, or at least appears, very approachable.
At the end of the session, Obama took time to shake hands with the majority of the students, a scene a million miles from the previous U.S. president’s visit to Turkey. A few seconds before George W. Bush was shaking hands with the guests at the Galatasaray University in June 2004, his bodyguards were checking their palms for weapons.
Obama was not only different than Bush, but also different from most politicians the students knew. “This attitude is not something a Turk is used to,” said Denizcan Demirk?l?ç, who studies law at the Bahçe?ehir University:
“How many of the students in this hall ever got to sit this close to a politician?
You can stand 30 or 40 centimeters from the president of one of the greatest countries of the world, you ask him questions and shake hands with him.
Our politicians have a lot to learn from that.”
Yes, Obama touched some critical points while addressing the students, and the conflict between Israel and Palestine was one of them.
“In the Muslim world, the notion that somehow everything is the fault of the Israelis lacks balance because there are two sides to every question,” Obama said.
The president sent a similar message to Israel, saying, “You have to see from the perspective of the Palestinians.”
He may not have the power to change the world overnight, but Obama proved that he could overturn the American image in Turkish minds in a very short time.
Obama seemed to abandon the image of an untouchable U.S. president and renewed it with one that takes time to listen people.

well…Julie has cut and pasted. The conversation must be over.

MzEllen,
Julie’s “cut & paste” job merely gives proof of Warren’s flip-flops (aka lies) on the issue. Apart from snark, have youdisproves Warren’s blatant hypocrisy?
The “conversation” is over when the anti-equality side demonstrate that they lie overtly for convenience sake. When you have to resort to bearing false witness in order to ‘win’ battle, then you’ve already lost the war.

should read …
“Apart from snark, have you anything to add that disproves Warren’s blatant hypocrisy?”

“husband”, try telling Julie that. She is the one who flings accusations.
On Warren, I agree. I told my bf that every time Warren opens his mouth, I lose respect for him.
As for the other, I can predict the way it will go. Julie cuts and pastes, if I dare to disagree, she calls me a liar and slanderer, questions my salvation, cuts and pastes some more. I answer the false accusations and she ignores that answer and refuses to interact with her previous false accusation.
While it may feel “good” to Julie to “win” by simply calling the other side a liar (as you have just done), it does ZERO to convince those you accuse.
It may convince Julie that she’s right to say things like “MzEllen thinks that only liberals say evil things” – I know that I never said any such thing and don’t believe any such thing. Julie (like Warren) has loses even more of my respect.
If the way you “win” is to call names, why should I bother? Seriously.
So, if you want to lecture somebody, start there. You might lead me to think you can be impartial when it comes to lies – even Julie’s.

When you have to resort to bearing false witness in order to ‘win’ battle, then you’ve already lost the war.
Then I repeat: Julie has lost the war.

I’am going to bypass Julie’s “the United States is evil and I love Obama” job and answer Tiny Tim’s question about stem cells.
I can only speak for myself, but I (along with George Bush) have absolutely no objection to federal funding for research involving pluripotent stem cells that were not obtained from new lines of embryos.
President Obama rescinded two executive orders. One of them lifted the ban on federal funding for the destruction of human embryos for the purpose of medical research.
The other order that President Obama rescinded involved stem cells that were not obtained through the desctruction of human life.
President Bush made an E.O. that encouraged research on pluripotent cells (stem cells) that were “by ethically responsible tech-
niques so that the potential of pluripotent stem cells can be explored without violating human dignity or demeaning human life. President Obama rescinded this order.
President Bush ordered that “The Secretary of Health and Human Services (Secretary) shall conduct and support research on the isolation, derivation, production, and testing of stem cells that are capable of producing all or almost all of the cell types of the developing body and may result in improved understanding of or treatments for diseases and other adverse health conditions, but are derived without creating a human embryo for research purposes or destroying, dis-carding, or subjecting to harm a human embryo or fetus. President Obama rescinded this order.
Bush also “prioritizes research with the greatest potential for clinical benefit; and “rename[d] the ‘‘Human Embryonic Stem Cell Registry’’ the ‘‘Human Pluripotent Stem Cell Registry;’’. Again, this is second E.O. that Obama rescinded.
From President Bush’s executive order:
the purposes of this order are (i) to direct the Department of Health and Human Services, including the National Institutes of Health, to intensify peer reviewed research that may result in improved understanding of or treatments for diseases and other adverse health conditions, and (ii) to promote the derivation of human pluripotent stem cell lines from a variety of alternative sources while clearly meeting the standard set forth in section 1(a) of this order;
ALSO: Mr. Bush believes:
(b) it is critical to establish moral and ethical boundaries to allow the Nation to move forward vigorously with medical research, while also maintaining the highest ethical standards and respecting human life and human dignity;
Mr. Obama rescinded this.
My question: why was it important for President Obama to rescind an order that supported and continued funding for stem cells derived from morally unchallenged sources? Especially when the most promising research is coming from those sources, not from embryos? My opinion (and I bleieve the fact that it’s an opinion will not stop Julie from labeling the opinion a “lie” or “slander”) is that it is important to “normalize” the destruction of human life.

I have a theory that MzEllen and Julie are the same commenter.

Tiny Tim…yes. Our beliefs have soooo much in common… (lol)
Others (ironically including Julie) have also had the (wrong) theory that Michele and I are the same commenter. If you google “mzellen” you’ll get to my personal blog.

My opinion is that it is important to “normalize” the destruction of human life.
This is intriguing but … to what end? What’s the purpose of that?
Tim, you crack me up.

Normalizing the destruction of human life cheapens it in the eyes of a society that favors death.

a society that favors death.
Our society favors death? Don’t let me put words in your mouth. You think our society favors death?

Moonshadow, what percentage of pregnancies end before the child has a chance to be born?
What percentage of pregnancies that happen to involve a Down Syndrome diagnosis end in abortion?
When a person outlives his/her usefulness, do we embrace the aging as valuable human beings, or do we store them in “retirement homes”?
Do we currently have a society that favors death? Not of the young, healthy and beautiful. But for those whose death would benefit?
The unborn, the leftovers, the old, crippled, the sick, those with disabilities?
Let me quote , newest president of the Episcopal Divinity School, “The Rev. Dr. Katherine Ragsdale”:
“And when a woman becomes pregnant within a loving, supportive, respectful relationship; has every option open to her; decides she does not wish to bear a child; and has access to a safe, affordable abortion – there is not a tragedy in sight — only blessing. The ability to enjoy God’s good gift of sexuality without compromising one’s education, life’s work, or ability to put to use God’s gifts and call is simply blessing.
“These are the two things I want you, please, to remember – abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Let me hear you say it: abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done.”

Do we currently have a society that favors death?
No, of course not. All I see is people struggling to live … and live well. Especially this blog’s principal author.

“Moonshadow, what percentage of pregnancies end before the child has a chance to be born?”
I’m not Moonshadow, but what I remember from my college physiology classes is that about 40-45% of all pregnancies, that is, where the egg has been fertilized and implanted in the placenta, end in spontaneous abortion. They don’t “take,” but the woman is unaware of this in most cases.

“a society that favors death”
ridiculous.

Having written two books on Rick Warren, I invite you to consider an opposing view:
Rick Warren’s Global Peace Plan vs. Scriptural Teachings on Peace
Who’s Driving the Purpose Driven Church?”
both books, published by Southwest Radio Church (swrc.com)
in book and now available in DVD.
Youtube offers Parts I and II of James Sundquist’s speeches on Rick Warren at Southwest Radio Church Prophecy Conference:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQOQnVx9n24