Stem Cell Research: Are You For Or Against?
Displaying all 6 posts.
Post #1
1 reply
Jani wroteon July 11, 2007 at 4:06pm
This issue has been debated lately in the U.S. Government. What are your thoughts on the issue? Are you against stem cell research or for it?
If you are still somewhat clueless on the issue, I'll post some deeper explanation on the issue soon.
If you are still somewhat clueless on the issue, I'll post some deeper explanation on the issue soon.
Post #2
Damian replied to Jani's poston July 12, 2007 at 10:01am
for
arguments against seem to be purely religous and direced at the origin of the stem cells. Sure, i understand their concern and in some cases disgust and unease which they have every right to be. But the answer is simple, we can get stem cells from other sources if just given the time to do the research
Recent article i read stated we could rebuild a womens breast using stem cells from her fat is just one crazy suggestion!
arguments against seem to be purely religous and direced at the origin of the stem cells. Sure, i understand their concern and in some cases disgust and unease which they have every right to be. But the answer is simple, we can get stem cells from other sources if just given the time to do the research
Recent article i read stated we could rebuild a womens breast using stem cells from her fat is just one crazy suggestion!
Post #3
Emmanuel wroteon July 12, 2007 at 1:27pm
I think it is the ultimate hypocrisy for people to support capital punishment, challenge women's rights to choose, and to allow viable embryos to be WASTED out of self-righteousness and bigotry. How can anyone not realize how stupid this is!!!! Instead we subject animals to brutal procedures in laboratories to get results that are rarely directly applicable to human research. The best thing to do is to study human diseases in human stem cells, which is putting to use embryos that are going to be destroyed, and worse, are sitting in refrigerators wasting electricity and contributing to global warming when they will NEVER be used. Sickening, really.
Maintaining that adult stem cells is the only reasonable option is idiocy. Until we can research how "full stem cells" (ie pluripotent embryonic cells), it is silly to think we can learn how to manipulate cells that are at varying stages of differentiation, under the effects of multiple systems in the body.
Embryonic stem cells are being thrown away, and that is the saddest thing to me, that we would rather continue to destroy them than learn what we can.
HEY, ISN'T THAT A COMMON THEME WITH THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION!?!?! ignorance and destruction, errrr, "democracy"
Maintaining that adult stem cells is the only reasonable option is idiocy. Until we can research how "full stem cells" (ie pluripotent embryonic cells), it is silly to think we can learn how to manipulate cells that are at varying stages of differentiation, under the effects of multiple systems in the body.
Embryonic stem cells are being thrown away, and that is the saddest thing to me, that we would rather continue to destroy them than learn what we can.
HEY, ISN'T THAT A COMMON THEME WITH THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION!?!?! ignorance and destruction, errrr, "democracy"
Post #4
Jani wroteon July 16, 2007 at 2:20pm
POLL!!!!
Stem Cell Research: Are You For Or Against?
http://existentialquestion
Stem Cell Research: Are You For Or Against?
http://existentialquestion
Post #5
Laura wroteon July 24, 2007 at 3:08pm
For. Oh, the things they could do! They could help people who you know, are already alive. The embryo thing creeps me out a little, but it's not like they're popping out fetuses in order to slice em up and experiment on them. Just like abortion is fine as long as it's ended before 26 weeks (I read that's when the brain is developed enough to feel pain). Um, yes.
What are the arguments against anyways? That life begins at conception? If it can't live outside the womb, it's not alive. That stem cells might not work? Fuck, you gotta try, what the hell kind of thinking is that?!
What are the arguments against anyways? That life begins at conception? If it can't live outside the womb, it's not alive. That stem cells might not work? Fuck, you gotta try, what the hell kind of thinking is that?!
Post #6
Jani wroteon July 25, 2007 at 4:55am
For.
This argument is hails from science vs abortion. You'll notice that everyone who opposes stem cell research, 9 times out of ten, or more, are typically pro-life.
Stem cell research, with good funding and governmental/public support, has the capability of ridding the world of many ailments which deteriorate a person's life.
When take the concept wherein a scientist takes a small building block of life, a stem cell, and applies it to save someone's life, or atleast greatly extending their life which was shortened by their illness, isn't that being supportative of the human life, i.e. pro-life?
Ah yes, then again you're "taking a life to save another", or so they say, by using cells from an aborted fetus.
As was in an earlier reply, those fetuses aren't being aborted in the name of science. There's not much use for an aborted fetus after the abortion, is there? So how's about actually putting it into use for the sake of science and medicine?
It is somewhat ridiculous to call abortion murder. If an aborted fetus, through stem cell research, manager to save the life if another human being, doesn't it become a saviour then?
Catch-22. Abortion and stem cell research go hand in hand. If you are pro-life, you can't really support stem cell research. If you support stem cell research, it would be somewhat redundant to have a problem with killing fetuses. Can't have it both ways...
This argument is hails from science vs abortion. You'll notice that everyone who opposes stem cell research, 9 times out of ten, or more, are typically pro-life.
Stem cell research, with good funding and governmental/public support, has the capability of ridding the world of many ailments which deteriorate a person's life.
When take the concept wherein a scientist takes a small building block of life, a stem cell, and applies it to save someone's life, or atleast greatly extending their life which was shortened by their illness, isn't that being supportative of the human life, i.e. pro-life?
Ah yes, then again you're "taking a life to save another", or so they say, by using cells from an aborted fetus.
As was in an earlier reply, those fetuses aren't being aborted in the name of science. There's not much use for an aborted fetus after the abortion, is there? So how's about actually putting it into use for the sake of science and medicine?
It is somewhat ridiculous to call abortion murder. If an aborted fetus, through stem cell research, manager to save the life if another human being, doesn't it become a saviour then?
Catch-22. Abortion and stem cell research go hand in hand. If you are pro-life, you can't really support stem cell research. If you support stem cell research, it would be somewhat redundant to have a problem with killing fetuses. Can't have it both ways...