Should creationists be able to benefit from technologies from evolutionary biology?

HI jokun I think the point of this thread is more like this. Should anyone who opposes the research that brings about a particular technology, be allowed to benefit from that technology? It has nothing to do with contributing to society in other ways, then benefitting from other peoples work just as they might benefit from yours.For example in your own case, how do you suppose these "blood fractions" that you are allowed to use, were first discovered to work? Probably years of research with whole blood transfusions followed by comparrisons with different kinds of blood fractions and other alternatives.
In short, blood fractions would not be available without whole blood transfusions being carried out first.
Would you deam it to be directly in violation of God's word for a physician to give whole blood transfusions?
If so then these "blood fractions" are a byproduct of sin and as such they should be shunned just as whole blood is.A further analogy would be a beneficial technology that was created by research that involved killing people. If you oppose killing people then you should not use that technology, no mattter if it would save your life or not.How about stem cell research? Would you use a treatment gained from this line of research if it was your only available cure? More to the point, should that cure even be offered to you if you had just spent the last 20 years of your life campaigning against stem cell research.I think that was more of the original question in this thread.PY

Contracycle.I fully agree. I think all technology should be available to all people, whether they deserve it or not. It would be morally wrong to deny a person or group of people, a particular medical treatment just because of their misguided attempts to prevent the technology from ever being perfected in the first place.PY

What possible reason can you have to say this?What evolutionist ever campaigned against the development of stun guns or their use in medical applications? How is it contrary to the 'beleifs' of an evolutionist to do so?Come to that who is to say that this idea wasn't actually invented by an evolutionist?
According to your own source.. A farmer first used this method of treatment. Do you have evidence of his personal beleifs?
I would also like to note that one of the authors of this piece comes from the department of microbiology at Michagan state University (a known bastion of anti-evolutionist thinking? I seriously doubt it.)Your third link is very interesting but still doesn't back up your argument.As to the first link, I can't find anything about spider bites or stun guns in it at all. Am I missing something?PY