Wednesday, December 07, 2005

 

Stem Cell Research

Stem Cell Research

Journal Entry #6

Just to put myself into a general category, I would say that I most closely associate with the conservative side of the stem cell issue, such as a group like Focus on the Family. Just as a basic guideline, I would say that the taking of life for the advancement of science is unacceptable; therefore, the dividing line would be drawn before embryonic stem cell research or SCNT therapeutic cloning. The only method of research I find suitable is that of adult stem cells, as no human life is lost. Additionally, this method has already produced results, which shows promise for the future as we improve this technology. As we discussed in class, I know that embryonic stem cells could provide a wider range of final products from just one source (an embryo), and SCNT could produce an exact match, but where do we draw the line after we start playing God?

I do not believe that researchers will refrain from crossing my personal line, as we have already advanced stem cell research and SCNT around the world. However, I also do not expect them to draw the line in the same place as me. Me views are not necessarily the views of everyone, and I can clearly see the benefits of furthering this scientific knowledge; it simply worries me to know that we are marching ahead without much concern of morality or our ethical path. Eventually, stem cell research and SCNT will be funded, and even though Bush is smart to stand his ground on the issue in order to maintain support from conservative Christians, it’s only a matter of time until we are cloning cells and producing organs. On my side of the line would be the conservative Christians, but the strongest voice by far currently are those in support of new stem cell technology. Selected states such as California are already funding local research, and these patches of support will gradually grow until the entire country is ready to advance technological healing.

I draw the line at adult stem cell research because I believe in the conservation of human life and the rights of the individual. It is not up to us to determine which embryos live and which die, even if we are healing someone else in the process. As we discussed in class, an embryo has a potential to become a full fledged human life with talents and intelligence to contribute to the world; to take this gift away is a crime in the utmost sense. Also, I am most afraid of the “slippery slope,” and what a technology such as SCNT will lead to in the future. There is no way of knowing what will happen once we open up the door to cloning and creating human life as we please. What could be next? Will we birth babies to simply harvest their organs and use them for healing, justifying it under the name of science? There is an extreme amount of subjective morality to deal with, and if the ethics aren’t addressed there is potential for great harm to the human race and our nation.


# posted by gth624 @ 8:07 PM
Comments:
I don't believe in the "slippery slope" argument you have put forth and I question your faith in humanity's ability to properly weigh every argument. It's not as if the flood gates of the law will be opened if we allow for stem cell research to take place. We will figure things out as they come along.
# posted by Blogger MountieHockey13 : 12:46 PM
 
I find that there is a strange dichotomy in your analysis of drawing the line. You seem willing to draw the line for stem cell research, but to have no line in establish what a human being is. A blastocyst is 5 days old, it has no arms, brain, heart, blood, skin, toes, eyes, or anything else. Since it has no brain, there is no understanding by the embryo of pain, reasoning, survival, etc. I can understand the pro-life arguments that a 1st or 2nd trimester fetus is a human, as it possesses some of the qualities listed above, but I cannot buy the belief that a 5 day old collection of undeveloped cells is a human being endowed with the same rights as an adult.
# posted by Blogger yankee96 : 1:05 PM
 
I would have to agree with yankee96 in the fact that you do not specify when human life begins. Do you believe that it is at conception, or at the blastocyst stage when the embryo is destroyed? I understand that this is your personal view, but I do not see how see how you can quite exactly call it playing God. If researchers were eventually able to develop a cure from embryonic stem cells, would you still find it unacceptable for them to use an embryo even if it had the potential not to just save one life but many more?
# posted by Blogger sarah matthews : 8:45 PM
 
Though I agree that embryos should not be used for stem cell research, I think gth624 went too far in exaggerating that we may one day just birth babies to harvest them. I don't think many people would be willing to go through all of that just to have a baby that would die.
I believe that a person is produced at conception. From the Christian standpoint, this is when life begins. As a matter of fact, the Bible says that God knew us before we were conceived (Psalm 139). If you are not Christians, I don't expect you to accept this; this is just to tell you that Christians have a definite point in the Bible that tells us when life begins.
I am a little afraid of the "slippery slope." People can justify anything that they want to; I just hope that we will realize where we are going before we get there and wish we could go back.
# posted by Blogger Zikomo : 1:42 AM
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

eXTReMe Tracker