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 …show more content…
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 preserve it, we must always go with the option of refraining from …show more content…
Thompson of he University of Wisconsin and John D. Gearhart of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine discovered how to seclude stem cells in humans, therefore creating a totally new way to research cures and other remedies in the medical and scientific fields, and also making a huge impact on ethics as well. Shortly after this mind-blowing discovery was made, nationwide and individual state governments were forced to decide on funding for this new branch of science. After some experimenting, in 2000 researchers found that they preferred working with embryonic stem cells to adult stem cells (HSCR). This is when true controversy rose, bringing in opinions and objections from individual people and from the Catholic Church. The Church itself believes that embryonic stem cell research is wrong, and that human life should never be taken away, even if it should be for the benefit of the entire human race. They do not believe in sacrificing human life, and they believe that at the moment of conception the embryo is a living human being, and should not be killed. They believe that death should only come naturally at the hands of God (Taylor, CC). The opinions of many non-Catholics are also similar to the Catholic Church’s opinion; many people do not approve of the innocent and premature death of embryos. But some believe that embryonic stem cell research is the way to go; they may believe this because
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.
...ns of a morally questionable nature. It is necessary that our practices remain ethical and that we uphold the value of a human life, as this is the cornerstone of human society. Embryonic stem cell research is one such operation that forces scientists, policy makers, and the larger society to define what constitutes a human life and to find an answer to the crucial question: Is it morally acceptable to violate the rights of a human life for the for the sake of medical progress?
The conflict surrounding stem cell research is, with ethical consideration, whether it is a good or bad. The majority of Americans are advocates due to the possibilities of medical advancement, thus saving thousands of lives. Those in opposition believe that it is against
While many support embryonic stem cell research, some people oppose it say that it is an unethical practice. According to these people, embryonic stem cells require murdering a baby, human life is defined by rational beings, those capable of rational thought or a consciousness. In order to be rational one must have a consciousness, the ability to have thoughts and feel pain, to begin with. “For a fertilized egg, there is no consciousness and also no history of consciousness” (Stem). If abortions are allowed within the United States, why shouldn’t embryonic stem cell research be? Another claim against embryonic stem cell research is that it devalues human lives. “Some argue that researching embryonic stem cells will lead us into cloning technology” (Embryonic). While embryonic cloning is a possibility, we already possess the capabilities to clone so cloning is an invalid argument. The final argument against embryonic stem cell research is that there are alternatives, like adult stem cells. While adult stem cells may be utilized, they won’t be as effective. Embryonic stem cells are not only efficient but also renewable. They can be grown in a culture where as adult stem cells are extremely rare, if there are any. They can only be found in mature tissue. Isolating these extremely rare cells is challenging and has a high failure rate if not harvested correctly. “One major difference between adult and embryonic stem cells is their different abilities in the number and type of differentiated cell types they can become” (Stem). Using adult stem cells we might never understand our development from conception ...
As technology stem cell research intensifies, so does the controversy about whether such scientific progress is moral. In the past millennium to today the present stem cell research has become a controversial topic across the world. Stem cells are unspecialized cells that have unique regenerative abilities, allowing them to divide into specialized cell types. Understanding why these processes occur is essential to curing disease. Critics of stem cell research argue that the extraction of embryonic stem cells involves destroying an early embryo, equating the act of killing a human. Although stem cell research is a highly controversial topic, it is compulsory to continue stem cell research within ethical boundaries for the benefit of mankind.
I think that stem cell research has advanced in so many ways, with all the discoveries being made, and the new possibilities being explored. Although it still remains unethical because embryonic cells are one of the sources of stem cells. Why is somebody else’s life more valuable than someone else? Just because an embryo cannot talk, doesn’t mean, its life has any less value than a normal human being.
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.
The controversy behind the stem cell research has been raging since the first experiments. The United States Congress banned federally supported human-embryo research in 1996, forcing scientists to solicit funding from private sponsors. Since stem cells are harvested from aborted fetuses, the ethical issues surrounding abortion act as a stigma in the public’s view. However, in September of last year, the National Bioethics Advisory Commission concluded that harvesting stem cells from discarded embryos is morally akin to removing organs from dead people for transplant. Stem cell research continues to be very controversial, yet prevalent in the scientific community.
The study of stem cells have brought about many recent ethical questions and been a topic in many recent ethical debates. What is all the talk about? What exactly is stem cell research and why does it raise so many ethical questions?
Within the past few years, scientist have made several breakthroughs with human stem cells. These breakthroughs have catapulted the issue of stem cell research into the middle of a national debate. Most people have no problem with the research itself, however the source of the stem cells (adult or human embryos) used in research is the primary cause of the debate. Some people feel that destroying an embryo is comparable to murder, even if the research it promotes may help people with serious illnesses. Other believe that an embryo is not a person and therefore research on an embryo is the same as research on any other group of cells.
It doesn’t imply that all research with human embryonic stem cells is impermissible, it can be permissible to benefit from moral wrongs; like benefiting from the organs of murder or drunken driving victims to save a transplant patient. I think that embryos are partial members of the moral community. Viewing the embryo as a person rules out not only stem-cell research, but all fertility treatments that involve the creation/discarding of excess embryos. But if its immoral to sacrifice embryos for the sake of curing or treating devastating diseases, it is also immoral to sacrifice them for the sake of treating infertility. I think giving parents the opportunity to have a child through the use of embryos is a noble and moral cause. In a sense, the embryos are never truly destroyed, as they will live as part of someone else or their own
At the ethical heart of the matter is a question about using a human fetus for scientific (read "medical") research. For significant research to happen, the fetus must be "alive." After the research has begun (meaning removal of stem cells), the fetus is "dead." Thus, while there has been scientific research on human beings as long as anyone can remember, this research arguably leads directly to the death of the human involved. In many respects, the ethical issues are the same as those discussed for abortion; though, in this case, the living fetus involved may be created by the scientist himself/herself by fertilizing reserved human eggs with human sperm. However the fetus has been created, the ethical issue centers upon the question of whether a human fetus is a human being and is, thus, covered by the principle of not taking human life.
Embryonic stem cell research is, perhaps, one of the most divisive ethical issues of the millennium. These cells are thought by many to hold the cures for such diseases as diabetes, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, heart disease and even cancer. Some researchers believe that these cells could heal spinal cord injuries, allowing a once paralyzed man to walk again. Despite the numerous potential benefits, the issue is exceedingly controversial and has sparked much debate, primarily over one sole reason: embryonic stem cell research causes the destruction of an embryo. This debate can be epitomized into two questions: when does human life begin and what makes an organism human. The answers to these questions are usually opinionated and not backed
Stem cell research should be allowed on adults but not on humans. Only allowed on humans who are willing to be a part of the stem cell research but no one should be used against their own will. Embryos should not be used for embryonic stem cell research. An embryo being used for their stem cells and then discarded devalues that human life. This follows along the same unethical issue as abortion. When stem cells are removed from human embryos, a unique individual dies. However, if abortion is legal in the state that this research is conducted than research may be conducted on only aborted fetuses. That would be an...
Stem cell research is one of the most controversial topics, people oppose it because they think that the destruction of an embryo is the same as abortion. They believe that the embryo constitutes life because it has the potential to fully develop into a human being. I personally think that life begins when the baby takes its first breath out of the womb. Once a baby is aborted, it is going to be deposed of. So, if it is going to be wasted, then why not use the stem cells from the embryos to help people? Also, it is important to do research on embryonic stem cells because it increases our knowledge on how cancer and birth defects form. Plus, these cells are undifferentiated, allowing them to be used in all parts of the body, giving them the