whats your opinion on stem cell technologie and research?

is stem cell technologie really wrong? there are thousands of fetus' getting aborted everyday why not put them to good use? The people that want to argue that making it legal encourages abortions please don't because if a woman is considering killing her child through abortion she really shouldn't become a mother because the child will probably grow up unwanted and twisted anyway.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If abortion is considered murder then women who have miscarrages should be convicted of varying degrees of manslaughter. Sound ridiculous? I agree, but logically, it makes sense to me.

As far as I am concerned, I do not see anything wrong with women getting pregnant for the purpose of selling their fetuses. I do not agree with it for my household, but who am I to tell others what is right for them?

- KitNyx

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I don't know :bugeye: there is something wrong about that though it just doesn't seem right though to get pregnant just to sell your futore kid seems rather calous and just plain wrong imoral i guess

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It maybe immoral in my eyes. It maybe immoral in your eyes. In a country that cherishes personal freedom it is not the role of government to police moral issues. It is the job of government to insure the rights of the people are not infringed upon by others. It is the role of government to insure the rights of the minority are not stepped on by the majority. This is what I believe.

- KitNyx

 

I disagree KitNyx. It is the government’s role to discuses and decided on what behaviours and actions are moral and lawful behaviour in the country. And I think science needs a platform to decide what type of research should be carried out. (one of the first I would nominate for such discussion would be military research).

I don’t know much about such research, but a couple of questions spring to mind. Is it not much easier to use day old foetus made in the lab from donated eggs and sperm, which are a major by-product of IVF treatment. (I am aware that there are social science research projects looking into the link between IVF treatment and Stem cell production)
Secondly what role could the umbilical cord play in minimising the use of foetus for stem cell research, and should they be stored for future use (stem cell cryopreservation). Why isn’t the placenta offered as a suitable source? These are technical ones. But an ethical one would be what rights does the father have over how the aborted foetus is used?

I find the idea of using eggs from aborted foetuses for infertility treatment more freaky. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3031800.stm

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

yes but what about the right of the child when you kill the child your ignoring its rights

 

I’m not sure that women are ignoring the rights of the foetuses when she has an abortion. I think, from the studies I’ve read, that many do try to balance their own ‘rights’ with the rights and imagined desirers of their foetuses as potential children, but priorities have to be made.

 

what priorities?

 

To name two factors which I assume will fight for priory is the; mother’s health (physical and mental) and the foetus’s health (mental or physical abnormality which would result in a seriously handicap, and/or severe physical pain).

It would also be interesting to research if those who choose abortion after prenatal testing for congenital abnormities (down’s syndrome) are more likely to agree to research use of the foetus and it’s cells.

 

Its a perfectly valid technology and if there is anything morally wrong with it we can get around that.

 

It comes down to this...who's rights take precedence: the right of the woman who has full standing as a person, or the rights of the fetus who is only a potential person?

I categorize this the same as someone who wants to sell their organs. In the near future with cloning getting advanced as it is, even a drop of blood could be considered a potential person. If someone wanted to make a quick $40,000, sell a kidney. I am partial to my body parts, but I have no problem if someone else wants to do it (especially if it can save lives of people who are a benefit to society).

As for the role of government, I agree that it is the governments job to create and enforce laws that are necessary for the well being of the society. However, I believe that the government should not make frivilous laws. For example, the issue at hand - abortion. How does it infringe upon my neighbors rights if someone in my household goes out and gets an abortion? As far as I can see it does not. If my neighbor is a pious christian, so be it. I did not force them to forfiet their place in heaven by getting an abortion. I decided that it was right for me not them. Abortion is not murder because there is no one to be missed. I have taken nothing from anyone. Where have I then infringed upon the rights of others?

An extreme example (mentioned above), if someone in my household wanted to make an extra $5,000 a year by getting pregnant then selling the fetus, how does that infringe on anyone's rights? Why then is this wrong? Is it wrong because the Bible tells us so? First off, we are a country that believes in religious freedom and not everone believes in the Bible. Second, I have tried to find a reference to abortion in the Bible, all I could find was a passage that roughly stated read that women who have miscarriages or lose a baby must pay their husbands a fine. This does not sound to me as it is saying abortion is murder.

I would like to make one other point. When a woman has her menstral cycle, her body is ineffect aborting the unfertilized egg. This egg is a potential person, yet the womans natural cycle destroys it. Each egg lost in this manner already contains most of the code that would have made it into a completely unique individual. Each egg that is lost in this manner could have been the next Einstein, the next Gandi, or the next Mother Theresa. Is this murder? No.

- KitNyx

 

Hay,

I would agree with your stand point on governments, but also extend it, in the form that a government must set in place a system for carrying out their decisions. The government, by democratic process, can not just decide that abortions should be legal, it must also lay out what type of abortion (at what stage and by what means), and for what reasons should be considered legal.

Equally I don’t think that ‘stem cell research’ can be labelled a ‘valid’ technology without question who it is valid for, and under what circumstances. In trying to answer KitNyx’s question of how does it infringe on anyone’s rights one should keep in mind that ‘the pursuit of science’ has infringed a lot of peoples rights without them know anything about it.

If a person is offered money to become pregnant and abort their foetus to be used for research, then I think it does matter to others (not just their neighbour) how much money is offered (and what the difference is between the money the ‘mother’ will get as apposed to the amount which the foetus will be sold for, similar to the cases with egg donation for IVF and also the issue of developing nations being used as a source of eggs), the health considerations for the ‘mother’, and if the national health service should be responsible for them, what role the ‘father’ will have and can have (monetary and emotionally). As far as I can see, as with abortion, a system must be set in place, which can then be argued to be valid or not.

I’m not sure I agree that an egg is a potential person.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

After seeing thousands of abondened childern roam the streets begging for mere scraps for food wearing next to nothing in winters I tend to lean towards stem cell research because so many of them wished they could have not been born in the first place.

 

true true
it is so sad. it feels like you want to to do something about but you just can't

 

What the media and the president avoid at all costs is the reality of stem cells- they are shoveled into a furnace after a certain period of time if not used. So what does it matter if they are burned, or if they are used to find miracle cures for deadly diseases? If you are opposed to SCR, then you should also have a thing against organ transplants. The whole situation is silly really. A few religious types are just using the issue to get money and elected into office. Just wait until you develop a disease for which SCR is required. I think you would change your mind real quick.

 

"I would agree with your stand point on governments, but also extend it, in the form that a government must set in place a system for carrying out their decisions. The government, by democratic process, can not just decide that abortions should be legal, it must also lay out what type of abortion (at what stage and by what means), and for what reasons should be considered legal.

Equally I don’t think that ‘stem cell research’ can be labelled a ‘valid’ technology without question who it is valid for, and under what circumstances. In trying to answer KitNyx’s question of how does it infringe on anyone’s rights one should keep in mind that ‘the pursuit of science’ has infringed a lot of peoples rights without them know anything about it." - weebee

Why? Why must the government lay down the law on every aspect in our lives? Soon, there will be no more choices left for us to make...we will have to do as we are told. I agree that in a monarchy, dictatorship, or any number of forms of government not based on the freedom of the people, it is acceptable to snatch these little freedoms away from the people, but not in America. I'm sorry, let me rephrase that...not in an ideal America.

I still do not understand how my choice to have an abortion infringes upon your rights. Should we compare to see whether thruout history science or religion has stepped on more toes, killed more people, or infringed upon more rights? Yet, I believe in freedom of religion...

- KitNyx

 

Hi KitNyx,

Personally if I were going to have an abortion, the only thing I would want to have to decide is whether to have the abortion. At the point that I wanted the abortion I would not want to be given the total choice of what type of abortion I wanted or at what stage I wanted it. These might be viewed as medical questions, but I think they have such a large social and cultural part that medical boards is not the place to decide them. For example take the question of how ‘young’ should the foetus be for abortion. It might seem like a science question, but relies a lot on what our society thinks is alive (brain development, nerve connection, movement).

I would also want there to be the offer of a support network, and counselling. I would not want to be harassed on my way to the clinic. I don’t think of these as my rights, but rather it’s the way I want my life to be, and I think it is the governments job and mine to inform it that it should produce such a system.

Part of why I find it difficult to talk about rights, is that in the UK (where I am) the legal system is different and does not depend on the ‘rights’ of a person, but on the medical necessity of it, and I understand that historically pro-abortion used this to push it through quicker in the UK.

Rereading your post, I should make it clear that I take abortion as a different issue from that of stem cell research. Stem cell research calls for the production of research material, and abortion is a technology used in its production. It’s not the abortion issue that I have a problem with in stem cell research. But rather the question of where the foetuses are coming from, who’s making money from them, and if both the mother and farther have given informed consent to list a few.

cheers

Ps, The us government has been laying down the law for abortions since the 1800’s, can they really give up now

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Why must the goverment define everything for us? I would prefer to have all of the decisions you mentioned be available to me.

- KitNyx

 

The Government makes so many decisions for us because though you seem to think you are able to make all of the necessary decisions for yourself, most people just can't handle it. Some people can't decide what to eat for breakfast much less make a life altering decision. Many people have even lost their ability content in there cocoon of security it’s so easy to have some one make all those hard decisions for you no stress no thought. So much easier to float on through life doing whatever they tell you to do. People don't just get used to having little choice in things but enjoy it. It’s kind of pathetic really.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

What most people do not know- and what the media does not care about is the fact that stem cells, if not used are incinerated. So what is the difference if they are used to cure someone, and promote life, or if they are burned in a hospital incinerator? I would always prefer that they be used to help people, maybe you will need this someday, and it will make a huge difference in your life. Wait until you have kids or some debilitating injury that can be cured by SC research. Most religious leaders use this issue to raise more money for their cause, and do not care about the consequences.