PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “RELIGION AND SCIENCE”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 757 records · Page 42Linked to original sources
PubMed2001

[Worldviews and philosophical basis of human cloning].

The article presents three standpoints on the question of moral permissibility of human cloning and shows the philosophical principles of it. 1. The moral consent to human cloning with the purposes of reproduction and therapy. The followers of human cloning refer to materialistic anthropology also to subjectivistic, relativistic and utilitarian ethics. 2. Those, who are adverse to human cloning with the purpose of reproduction, but they acquiesce to the so-called therapeutic cloning. They reject that human embryos and foetuses are individuals who come under protection of law. 3. Those, who reject human cloning for the purposes of reproduction and therapy alike. They assent to a personalistic anthropology and Christian ethics. A human being was created by God and human life begins at the moment of insemination. All three groups use various argumentation. The arguments for and against cloning are extracted from biology as well as psychology, philosophy, law and religion. The author of the article takes the last standpoint, but she does not see such arguments, that might convince the opposite parties to a suit.

Bioethics↗
PubMed2001

[Moral aspects of human cloning and relations between humans].

It is usually assumed that there is a strong logical relationship between traditional worldviews and attitudes towards human cloning. I argue that the association is contingent, which can be seen in the analysis of arguments of such leading bioethicists as G. J. Annas, H. Jonas, and J. A. Robertson. Traditional worldviews lack conceptual resources that would enable them to provide normative conclusions about cloning. It is therefore mistake to look to these traditional worldviews in search for moral instruction. Instead, one should appeal to knowledge of psychological and social aspects of human life, and in particular to the process of emotional ties which form relations between humans.

Bioethics↗
PubMed2001

[The miracle of creation and dilemmas of reconstruction].

The advancements of genetics and embryology, together with the potentialities of genetic engineering allow for such deep interference in the biological nature of the human species as was never possible before. Reproductive cloning of the human being constitutes one of these potentialities. Among the numerous arguments against artificial reproduction is the one that holds that in this way man assumes the role of God ("playing God" argument). Yet the fact is that man appears here rather in the role of a constructor than the creator, since he only imitates natural processes. His "creative dreams" come true most fully when he attempts to determinate nature qualitatively, as it is in the case of cloning.

Bioethical Issues↗
PubMed2001

Face of God.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Humans↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Refusals and delay of immunization within southwest Alberta. Understanding alternative beliefs and religious perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Immunization is a necessary component of well child services within public health. Despite the documented effectiveness of vaccines, some parents choose to refuse or delay immunization for their children. Adherence to different beliefs has affected immunization coverage in one Regional Health Authority in Southwest Alberta. METHODS: This qualitative study involved exploratory, descriptive open-ended interviews with a sample of 47. The sample included people of Dutch ethnic background, Hutterites, and parents and practitioners who engage in alternative health beliefs and practices. RESULTS: Major findings include: 1) among the Dutch, most noted their decision to refuse to immunize was based on religious beliefs; 2) the Hutterites' decision not to immunize was due to their experiences with adverse reactions but was further supported by their use of alternative health; and, 3) the alternative health group are more concerned with the safety of vaccines with regard to the short- and long-term effects on their children's health. DISCUSSION: All three groups conveyed a common concern of child health and safety. Educational initiatives need to be implemented to allay parents' fears. Community development activities with individuals of the groups included here who support immunization will increase acceptance of immunization.

Adult↗