Stepping in front of a bus, or in other words, allowing yourself to be in a dangerous position when there is a safer option is apparently testing god which I've been told is bad. So restricting medical research is allowing yourself to be in a dangerous position when the safer option is to remove restrictions to allow new technology. Why isn't this considered testing god?
2007-02-02 14:07:13 · 12 answers · asked by Desiree J 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
If you step in front a bus, you'll get run over.
2007-02-02 14:10:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
well, as regards medicine, you should really take a look at the medical history regarding my family.
The medical thinking of the 50's caused my mother to have serious problems when they thought it would be a good idea to use x-rays to try and remove a non life threatening birthmark. Net result? damaged the normal growth of her hips and legs. Then, in the 60's, they installed and early IUD. Later, they could not find it to remove it. Net result, 40 years later it had migrated into her bladder. After years of agonizing pain, they finally found it and removed it.
My brother, was born with birth defects after a new scientific drug for morning sickness was given to my mother. Net result? He was born with congenital glaucoma,which if the pediatrician would have noticed his eyes bugging out from the pressure could have treated it without him going blind.
Later he was in and accident where he almost lost his arm. The surgeons did a great job of saving it. Except where they put the steel pins across the main arteries supplying the arms blood. Woop! Lost the arm anyway. But wait, it gets better, the bone graft they took from his undamaged left thumb was not only wasted, but they left the incision open to the air, thus causing bone death to his left hand as well.
My sister, who had a little problem with her thyroid? Well the doctors decided to destroy her thyroid altogether, and put her on a lifetime regimen of meds that make her sick all the time. Ditto with my older brother.
Needless to say, anyone who blindly trusts the judment of medical science, and willingly allows themselve to used as a guinea pig, is just plain old reckless.
On the other hand, thanks to groups like the JW's we now have safe alternatives to the blood tranfusions that are still being foisted on all of us even though the medical community regards blood as a hazardous material.
2007-02-02 22:12:36 · answer #2 · answered by Tim 47 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't know of any religion that objects to medical research. But there have to be some guidelines on how it is conducted.
For instance, to test the effectiveness of a medicine, they will have two groups - one gets the medicine and the other a sugar pill. Then the results are compared. But it would be wrong to do this is the group NOT getting the medicine is going to die from lack of medicine. Same with any other type of research that would require injuring or killing to get test results.
When you regulate medical or other research, it is not like stepping in front of a bus. You are not preventing abuse, injury or death when you step in front of a bus. You are (or are at least trying) when you regulate research.
2007-02-02 22:17:48 · answer #3 · answered by dewcoons 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Our bodies are all going to fail anyway. Your comparison doesnt make sense because you are comparing apples to oranges. Putting yourself in real imminent danger is quite different from abstaining from medicine in favor of letting nature run its coarse. Your body and health are going to fail as you get older, that is a fact of life that everyone has to live with.
Restricting medical research is done out of care for ethics, not to test God in any way.
2007-02-02 22:27:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
"stepping in front of a bus", yes i think thats bad because u can hurt yourself, many say thats a way of teasing god, but to me ,not only u tease god , but u may suffer from it
and dealing with this things, u have to use yourmind and common sense which are god given, for example, u want a job and is scheduled for a job interview, the logical thing to do is go and have that interview, teasing god can be "not going to that interview and say- if this job is for me then it will be mine no mater what i do"
that is , one, teasing god , and not using your brain , and second it can hurt u by not having that job that u want because it is common sense that if u dont attend that interview then u wont have that job
about the medical research, i think the princple there isthe same as what i have discussed
hello, are u american? im filipino and i enjoy testing my bible skills and i enjoy and like american questions
have anice day
2007-02-02 22:17:02 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Oh Honey don't stand in front of a bus. That is not good. As far as medical research, I am not against it, as long as it is not at the expense of someone Else's right. We have to respect all people not just the sick.
2007-02-02 22:12:57 · answer #6 · answered by angel 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It's not the research that is dangerous, it's what people will do with the information that is the problem. There are some seriously disgusting people out there in power who want to use medical research for their own advantages.
2007-02-02 22:12:26 · answer #7 · answered by arewethereyet 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
It is wrong to test God. God does not need us to prove that God exists. Technology is fine as long as it does not kill the innocent as certain stem cell research would do.
2007-02-02 22:12:31 · answer #8 · answered by Mary W 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Talking about stepping in front of a bus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KiAvmzcZbg
2007-02-02 22:18:05 · answer #9 · answered by Apeman 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Who says it's safer? There's no guarantee that such medical research will come up with anything better.
Just sayin'.
2007-02-02 22:13:02 · answer #10 · answered by drshorty 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
not really
some medical research is unethical, Hitler had some evil medical experiments he did to Jews
similarly... not all medical experiments on humans are ethical.. they aint lab rats
2007-02-02 22:14:15 · answer #11 · answered by whirlingmerc 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋