Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: July 21, 2025, 12:58 pm
Atheist Forums › Science › Life Sciences v
Churches oppose three-person baby plan

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Thread Modes
Churches oppose three-person baby plan
Nope Offline
Member
***
Religious Views: Atheist
Posts: 2344
Threads: 79
Joined: November 18, 2014
Reputation: 42
#6
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan
January 30, 2015 at 7:02 pm (This post was last modified: January 30, 2015 at 7:04 pm by Nope.)
I had never heard of the this either but it sounds promising.The church's reasoning doesn't make sense to me. Why would saving an individual's life be unethical? Are there some side effects that the article doesn't mention or is this just a case of religious people being terrified of progress?

From the article:

Quote:But a group of scientists has urged MPs to approve the procedure - intended to stop deadly mitochondrial diseases.
(January 30, 2015 at 6:59 pm)zebo-the-fat Wrote:
(January 30, 2015 at 6:54 pm)Losty Wrote: Did you just answer my question with a question?

Yes

No? Maybe?
Find
Reply


Atheist Forums › Science › Life Sciences v
Churches oppose three-person baby plan

Messages In This Thread
Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by zebo-the-fat - January 30, 2015 at 6:45 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Losty - January 30, 2015 at 6:48 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Losty - February 3, 2015 at 9:14 am
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by zebo-the-fat - January 30, 2015 at 6:52 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Losty - January 30, 2015 at 6:54 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by zebo-the-fat - January 30, 2015 at 6:59 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Losty - January 30, 2015 at 7:08 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Nope - January 30, 2015 at 7:18 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Nope - January 30, 2015 at 7:02 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by vorlon13 - January 30, 2015 at 7:10 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Losty - January 30, 2015 at 7:13 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Cyberman - January 30, 2015 at 7:25 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Losty - January 30, 2015 at 7:30 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Losty - January 30, 2015 at 7:27 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Lucanus - January 30, 2015 at 7:34 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Nine - January 30, 2015 at 7:51 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by vorlon13 - January 30, 2015 at 8:10 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by c172 - January 30, 2015 at 8:18 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by vorlon13 - January 30, 2015 at 8:19 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Cyberman - January 30, 2015 at 8:22 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Minimalist - January 30, 2015 at 9:06 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Regina - February 2, 2015 at 11:23 am
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by FreeTony - February 2, 2015 at 11:43 am
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Aisha - February 3, 2015 at 6:44 am
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Radco - February 3, 2015 at 8:15 am
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Aisha - February 3, 2015 at 8:17 am
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by zebo-the-fat - February 3, 2015 at 2:12 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by zebo-the-fat - February 3, 2015 at 2:22 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by JesusHChrist - February 3, 2015 at 2:30 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by vorlon13 - February 3, 2015 at 2:30 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by Losty - February 3, 2015 at 2:45 pm
RE: Churches oppose three-person baby plan - by vorlon13 - February 3, 2015 at 2:50 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  On the consciousness of a new born baby Macoleco 8 1745 April 7, 2022 at 7:22 am
Last Post: brewer
  The HIV plan brewer 2 468 February 7, 2019 at 2:22 pm
Last Post: LastPoet
  Human baby gene editing is here? brewer 9 1717 November 29, 2018 at 12:50 pm
Last Post: Anomalocaris
  "The first person to live to [200, 300, 500, 1000] has already been born" Heat 218 26713 December 14, 2015 at 9:18 pm
Last Post: Excited Penguin
  Baby raccoons IATIA 7 2093 November 23, 2015 at 12:28 am
Last Post: bennyboy
  Next-Gen Test Tube Baby Born pineapplebunnybounce 4 2724 July 12, 2013 at 4:46 pm
Last Post: pineapplebunnybounce
  ‘Adventurous’ Woman Needed as Surrogate for Neanderthal Baby TaraJo 25 9897 January 29, 2013 at 2:40 am
Last Post: Cinjin
  About a baby gamerguy86 6 2499 June 23, 2012 at 8:23 pm
Last Post: gamerguy86
  All part of gods great plan. Zen Badger 15 5416 February 11, 2012 at 9:19 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Orangutan helping out a baby bird. downbeatplumb 13 4615 June 19, 2011 at 12:59 am
Last Post: Minimalist



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)