Explaining my comment again.

After spending a day on this thread [never suggesting that no one else did], and actually coming closer to resolving the issue in my mind that was bothering me as a result of some of the wonderful posts, your comment sounded like it was a waste of time to me. It was quite deflating and sounded negative so I made a light comment with a lol at the end (tone), not quite knowing how to take it and I stated that.

This thread is obviously important or it would not be continuing, I've done all the explaining I'm going to, and don't think the thread should be used in this manner.

paula

When I wrote about invitro fertilization - it was to point out inconsistency and hypocrisy.

For the people who support invitro fertilization - where thousands of excess embryos are created - and yet do not support letting the parents donate the excess cells for research. I find this hypocritical.

yes, i got that - i agree with you, which was why i referenced you - i hope that that came through on my post. did it not?

Boann,

I reread your post - my error! My comprehension is not what it used to be. Sorry about that!

Best, Jean

A person does not have to be religious to live a moral life and be a person of conscience.

JeanB

He was no longer and had not been prime minister for a long time and sorry I feel anyone with his political views and living his life (for most of it) in the public did not for one second indicate he was a private person much the opposite he lived life fully and never backed down from any fight and I believe this in one he could have helped with and why are we back to personally naming people when opinons are all we need, replys do not not have to be directed to the person I'm sure anyone still reading this thread knows your views and mine are just different, and thats the only mention of me I"m addressing in your post thanks for your time guys

This is a good discussion. It's also a discussion that touches on some very strong personal and individual beliefs which can take some posting across the guidelines in regards to "limiting the discussion of religious or political conversations/debates". While we allow discussion to a point on these topics, there is a limit to them.

That said, there is zero tolerance for posts which can be perceived as a personal attack of another member or flaming.

If you feel that your post might not limit the discussion of the above, don't hesitate to contact a moderator or administrator for thoughts on that.

Also, don't hesitate to PM with the more detailed responses.

Further, in discussions like this, there might be those that we disagree with STRONGLY. Don't hesitate to put another member on ignore (if temporarily) if you feel that their posting is bringing about very strong personal reactions.

If the entire subject causes a strong personal reaction, it might be best not to post until the reactions subside as the reactions felt might come across in posting and cause another to feel attacked/flamed.

I appreciate ALL members involved in this discussion, and request that you consider all of the above when posting from this point.

Best to all,

KD