Science and Religion Three-Way Blog

I can think of very few medical endeavors which possessed half the potential of a developed understanding of stem cells and their applications. Having said that, it is possible that stem cells are useless, though more likely their uses are somewhat less than advertised. Even if stem cells can only do a fraction of what is currently thought, it would be useful to millions of people worldwide. It is for this reason that I feel institutions, both public and private, should be fully committed to the research and utilization of stem cells.

Having read the opinions of the various authors, I am forced to agree with the author of the Newsweek article as well as with some of the opinions of members of the President’s special council. Unfortunately, I only roughly agree with these opinions. Both stressed the enormous potential of stem cells as a just reasoning for continued study, with which I agree. I do feel that these authors are being a bit optimistic as far as the ethical considerations are concerned. Both seem to feel that humanity will exploit this technology only to a certain point, beyond which will be ethically out of bounds. This idea is misled in my opinion.

Certainly there are major ethical questions involved in such an endeavor; I myself am quite unconcerned by these questions. Not being religious, I do not believe there is any higher moral authority that what humans allow themselves to accomplish. Additionally, I do not consider a blastocyst to be a human being; as such I am not troubled by the research being done on them, or their destruction. Regarding an ethical divide, I do not believe there should be one. Furthermore, such a divide would be temporary, in the end (though it may take decades or centuries) all barriers to this, and any other research, will break down. Some researchers obviously believe in such a line, while, others do not. Eventually this advancement and all of it offspring including cloning and genetic engineering, will become prevalent.

The government of the United Sates is solely responsible to its citizens. It must not consider the religious implications of such research. The argument that destroying a blastocyst is destroying a human is a poor one. The status quo does not consider these to be human. As a point of fact, a second trimester fetus is apparently not considered a human, though I am not sure I agree with that. The US should pass no law hindering this research. Rather, the government must move to aid institutions which hold the promise of aiding millions of Americans through the cures which may be possible with stem cells. I am sure that many in the scientific and medical community would side with my opinion. I am equally sure that many people who are stereotypically referred to as the “religious right” (Pat Robertson comes to mind) would like to hang me. The first time that the church admitted that the Earth was not the center of the universe was in 1994,; I do not look to them for answers on what is right and wrong.

Dr. Oppenheimer said it best, “barriers for freedom of inquiry. There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors.” In this example, hundreds of millions of people would have a better life if the technology is developed. I cannot turn my back on these people in favor of some religiously oriented ethical dilemma.

# posted by yankee96 @ 12:50 PM