The stem cell research controversy is one of the major headlines in bioscience and has been discussed and debated numerous times throughout the last decade or so. It became a major issue in 1997/1998 and continued to the 2000’s where George W. Bush joined to the problem by vetoing the first bid that was brought forward by Congress to lift funding restrictions on human embryonic stem cell research. Bush stated after the veto that, “would support the taking of innocent human life in the hope of finding medical benefits for others” and also he stated “It crosses a moral boundary that our decent society needs to respect”. Bush was also supported by children that he said, “began his or her life as a frozen embryo that was created for in vitro fertilization (in vitro means the technique of performing an experiment in a controlled environment outside of a living organism) but remained unused after the fertility treatments were complete… These boys and girls are not spare parts”. Later on that year, Bush signed a bill to ban the creation of human fetuses for the sole purpose of harvesting organs. Soon after, the House proposed another bill that they had hoped him to sign to promote efforts to conduct stem cell research without destroying human embryos. Bush had called it “an important piece of legislation”, but several politics said that it would distract attention from his veto for the funding for human embryonic stem cell research. Researchers and officials say that about 400 000 frozen embryos are stored at several U.S. fertility clinics with the vast majority await removal because couples that have produced these embryos do not want to raise them and also don’t want another person(s) to raise their biological child. One problem that I think is an issue in the stem cell debate is the destruction of the stem cells and how it’s practically the same thing as destroying a human being. I don’t believe that researchers and scientists should continue using embryonic stem cells for research because we are obviously not finding a cure for human diseases yet although for animals we are, it’s just not right to destroy a human being if we cannot find treatments for major diseases within a decade or so.
Stem cell research has been a heated and highly controversial debate for over a decade, which explains why there have been so many articles on the issue. Like all debates, the issue is based on two different arguments: the scientific evolution and the political war against that evolution. The debate proves itself to be so controversial that is both supported and opposed by many different people, organizations, and religions. There are many “emotional images [that] have been wielded” in an attempt to persuade one side to convert to the other (Hirsen). The stem cell research debate, accompanied by different rhetoric used to argue dissimilar points, comes to life in two articles and a speech: “Should Human Cloning Be Allowed? Yes, Don’t Impede Medical Progress” by Virginia Postrel; “Should Human Cloning Be Allowed? No, It’s a Moral Monstrosity” by Eric Cohen and William Kristol; and “Remarks by Ron Reagan, Jr., to the 2004 Democratic National Convention” by Ron Reagan, Jr. Ethos, pathos, and logos are the main categories differentiating the two arguments.
Stem cell research has always been a widely debated topic in 'social and political forums' ever since the case of Roe vs. Wade in 1973. In that case the Supreme Court gave women the right to have an abortion whether or not they have a medical reason to. Whereas beforehand 'they needed a medical reason'. This "sparked controversy" over stem cell research with aborted fetuses. For many of those in favor of using fetal tissue for research it has too much "potential" in the future of medicine in terms of providing cures for diseases and "". Those against fetal tissue research believe it unethical to take one human life in order to preserve another.
For the past few years stem cell research has been a widely debated topic; however, former President Clinton?s stance?allowing federal money to be spent on tightly controlled stem cell research?lead to intense debates over federal funding for stem cell research. There are four ways of obtaining stem cells, which are taken from embryos that are approximately one week old. They are using unwanted embryos from fertility clinics, embryos from aborted fetuses, cloned embryos, and embryos created for research purposes. Stem cells can also be taken out of adult bone marrow, but scientists do not think that adult stem cells hold as much medical potential. Conservatives are against federal funding for stem cell research because they feel that by doing such the government would be contributing to ?murder.? This idea is rooted in the religious beliefs, which include the belief that life begins at conception, held by conservatives. However, liberals support federal funding for the research of embryos because they question whether embryos are full human beings and believe the research could expedite potential medical breakthroughs.
“Federal Funds Should Not Be Used for Research That Destroys Embryos.” Stem Cells. Jacqueline Langwith. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. Opposing Viewpoints.
Stem cell research is a heavily debated topic that can stir trouble in even the tightest of Thanksgiving tables. The use cells found in the cells of embryos to replicate dead or dying cells is a truly baffling thought. To many, stem cell research has the potential to be Holy Grail of modern medicine. To many others, it is ultimately an unethical concept regardless of its capabilities. Due to how divided people are on the topic of stem cell research, its legality and acceptance are different everywhere. According to Utilitarianism, stem cell research should be permitted due to the amount of people it can save, however according to the Divine Command of Christianity, the means of collecting said stem cells are immoral and forbidden.
Couples experiencing infertility issues now have a number of options at their disposal from in-vitro fertilization to intrauterine insemination or going as far as using a surrogate and donor eggs or donor sperm. Technology has made it possible for someone to experience the joy of parenthood regardless of whether they can naturally conceive children. All of these procedures come with their own ethical questions and pros and cons. One of the biggest moral dilemmas is what to do with the left-over embryos still in storage when a family has decided they have had enough children. Most couples see this ethical quandary because they recognize that the embryos are whole human beings and do not think it is morally right to dispose
...g stem cells destroys potential life, the benefit to the greater good greatly outweighs the destruction of potential life. In a perfect world with an unlimited amount of stem cells all diseases and illnesses could be cured. Those working in the medical world can greatly improve the quality of human life using stem cells. With stem cells, people will live longer, healthier, lives. Many diseases would be completely eliminated. However, only when scientists and doctors fully understand how to implement the embryonic stem cell, can all this happen. When the doctors and scientists have all of the lines they need, then they can cease destroying embryos to obtain the stem cells they require (More Ethical Stem Cells). The biological world and the field of stem cells specifically, require the support of the federal government as well as the people to make all this possible.
President Bush's limited federal funding of research relying on the destruction of human embryos violates federal statutory law. Christians have grieved for many years over the assault on unborn human life set loose upon our nation by the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision. Even that decision, however, did not affect all areas of law where lawmakers seek to protect developing human life. Because they are not covered by the Court's theory of reproductive privacy, human embryos outside the womb may be fully protected by law - and at least nine states have acted to protect these embryos from lethal experiments. In some states, destructive experimentation on human embryos is a felony.
Embryonic stem cell research is wrong. When using embryos in research, the embryo is manipulated to be anything scientists need it to be. But, scientists dispute the fact that the parts of the embryo they use could also grow into a fetus. When harvesting the stem cells of an embryo, the destruction of the blastocysts, “the blastula of the mammalian embryo, consisting of an inner cell mass, a cavity, and an outer layer, the trophoblast” (Dictionary.com), must occur. This kills the embryo because taking away the stem cells strips the organism of the ability to develop. The use of live embryos in research is wrong because it takes an innocent life.
Lanza, Tyler. "The Stem Cell Research Controversy." Stem Cell History. N.p., January 5, 2011. Web. 16 Feb 2012.
Embryonic stem cell research occurs when stem cells from fertilized embryos are used as research for treating abnormalities and diseases among humans, by dissecting them and therefore killing the human soul in the embryo. It permanently destroys a living human embryo, sacrificing that precious life worth so much more than people realize. Nobody should be a human sacrifice. Every human life is precious, and from the second of conception, that embryo is a living human being. What is even more heartbreaking is that embryonic stem cell research isn’t necessary, yet it is still conducted. The reason why it isn’t necessary isn’t only because it is unethical, but also because conducting research on adult or cord stem cells, have the same effect as the embryonic stem cells. The difference between conducting research on adult stem cells and embryonic stem cells is that one doesn’t result in the death of an innocent and voiceless life. In every way, embryonic stem cell research is horrible and unethical and no human life should be sacrificed, for in fact, human life begins at the moment of conception. There are other options to find a cure for diseases and disabilities- like using adult stem cell research. Also, scientists have found that another way to conduct stem cell research without killing embryonic infants; which is by using immobilized cord stem cells. Doctors take the immobilized cord stem cells from the umbilical cord after the baby is born, and those stem cells can be used in the same way embryonic stem cells are used. Except when immobilized cord stem cells or adult stem cells are taken, no human life is killed in the process. And whenever there is the option to choose between sacrificing innocent human life and trying to prese...
What if there was a cure for cancer or a treatment for spinal injuries? Would you support the research? What if there was a way that you could repair damaged nerves. Some believe that stem cells may hold the answers to some of these questions. What are stem cells and why should you or I even care about them? Some believe that they are a miracle treatment waiting to happen while others believe that stem cells are highly immoral. Why does so much controversy surround the issue? Why is the conversation of stem cells feared by some and praised by others? To some stem cells are the medical hopes for the future, something for us to hang on to as we do battle with major diseases that include cancer, Parkston’s disease and spinal injuries. To others stem cell researchers are murderers who are trying to play God’s hand. A many have pledged their support to stem cell research including a few well known celebrities. Reeves’, who was best known for his role in the early Superman movies, and J. Fox two well-known celebrities, have pledged to stem cell research, both have created a private fund for the research of stem cells. This celebrity however has not swayed everyone to support stem cell researches cause. Just as there are supporters of stem cells there are those who believe that the use of stem cells is immoral. Since the first stem cells were separated there have been doctors, religious groups and even some political figure head have shown their opposition for stem cell research. Even with the knowledge and promise that stem cells show many of those who truly oppose stem cells have not changed their mind. The question is are their reasons good enough to halt the research of stem cell or are they just holding back what will soon be inevi...
These embryos have already been created and can either be destroyed or used for research, destroying them would simply be a waste of resources. And if we were to truly stick to the fact that “humans should not be messing with human life”, then we really shouldn't be performing any surgeries or anything of that nature. Because we are technically messing with life, and playing God in a way. If an elderly needed a new heart to survive, would you deny him/her because “we shouldn't be messing with human life”? You have to make the decision if doing embryonic stem cell research is worth all the advances that it could potentially bring. Also, something that could potentially become a human does not have to be treated as if it actually were a person. The embryo has no morals, personal feelings, beliefs, desires, expectations, aims, it doesn't even know its alive. The embryo is just another part of your body until it has developed enough to survive on its own. It is the woman’s property in a way, if she chooses to abort the baby and give the embryo to science for research, then its her choice. Same as if you want to sell one of your kidneys, it is your body, and your
Stem cell research should not be allowed because it is unethical. Embryonic stem cells which are on stem cells from human embryos are a reason some people believe that Stem cell research is unethical. Since the only way that scientists know they can get embryonic stem cells is from human embryos, they use 5-14 day fertilized embryos to get those stem cells. Religious groups and anti-abortion groups believe that a living person is being destroyed to do research and they believe that it is a crime against humanity " Destruction of human life cannot be justified, even if the aim is to save other human life" (Bioethical). People are argue that the destruction of human embryos is not necessary because they can use other stem cells like Adult stem
Current research to cure disabling diseases such as Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, and spinal cord injuries are at an all-time high. With influential speakers to encourage these movements to end these diseases, many see the value in finding a cure. This brings up the discussion of whether or not embryonic stem cells research should be allowed. The process would be extracting stem cells from a five to seven-day old embryo, and then used to develop tissues that can be used to cure certain diseases. Some view the issue with this process to be that the extraction of stem cells kills the embryo, which goes against the pro-life perspective (14.8.1) That the agree in using embryonic stem cells in research want to save lives as well, just from