QF Razor vs. Thhhunder

Discussion in 'Cigar Lounge Debator's League' started by FromTheSouth, Apr 25, 2010.

  1. FromTheSouth

    FromTheSouth You don't want it with me.

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    768
    Likes Received:
    843
    Me, TM, and Tastycles will judge

    Razor will affirm.

    Resolved: The subject matter researched in medical science should not be subject to state control.
     
    #1
  2. Baller

    Baller WZCW Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    523
    Likes Received:
    144
    I will not be able to post until Thursday as I am out of town.

    Can't really debate on my phone.
     
    #2
    Super Crazy likes this.
  3. FromTheSouth

    FromTheSouth You don't want it with me.

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    768
    Likes Received:
    843
    Razor, go ahead. Your opponent is Thhhunder.
     
    #3
  4. Razor

    Razor crafts entire Worlds out of Words

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    Messages:
    549
    Likes Received:
    465
    Scientific research is there to further the learning of mankind. It is not to be limited by social or federal ties. The only people scientists have to report to are the citizens of the world at large.

    Now, that covers stuff like geographers, astronomers, and physicists. But what about the medical doctors? They are regularly bound by legal procedure and forced into certain ethical bounds by the state. Should these bounds proceed into research?

    I argue no, they shouldn't. Doctors are already bound by very stringent moral rules. The Hippocratic Oath, a Ethics Review for every death, and hefty fines/penalties for any wrongdoing are already in place for day to day activity.The moral question is covered.

    Why else would research by regulated? Because it departs into questions that national lawmakers don't want answered? That it proceeds into murky moral territory? Those are not grounds enough to stretch out regulations, because it makes a fatal mistake. It fails to trust our doctors to act ethically.

    If we can trust our doctors with our hearts, our minds, and our bodies, then why can't we trust them with a few petri dishes and some bacteria? If we trust surgeons to perform heart transplants, why can't we trust their research counterparts, whom are overseen by the same ethics boards, to act reasonably and responsibly? Once you take out the question of trust, the only area left is individual sensibility. And that is an area that no one should regulate from.
     
    #4
    Remix likes this.
  5. FromTheSouth

    FromTheSouth You don't want it with me.

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    768
    Likes Received:
    843
    Razor wins. Baller at least let me know he would have trouble.
     
    #5
  6. Baller

    Baller WZCW Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    Messages:
    523
    Likes Received:
    144
    I thought I was replaced by Thhhunder.
     
    #6

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"