Stem Cell Research: Yay or Nay?

[MorphineChild205]

What does everyone think about stem cell research? The reason I ask is because I'm doing a speech on it for college, and I'm greatly in favor of it. Does anyone care to share their thoughts?

Thanks.

[rockmanxpr]

I'm all for Stem Cells being used for "Spare Parts" for people with spinal diseases, etc etc. As for full Cloning, jeez I think the world has too many people to start with!

[The Metal Chick]

I'm also for it in terms of helping people with handicapping injuries and diseases. I wrote a paper on this topic last year, and quoted Petrucci's lyrics in it too It's a very interesting subject.

[MorphineChild205]

Originally Posted by The Metal Chick

I'm also for it in terms of helping people with handicapping injuries and diseases. I wrote a paper on this topic last year, and quoted Petrucci's lyrics in it too It's a very interesting subject.

Did you get an A on it?

[Hyoukinmono]

I don't have a problem with it, just as long as the stem cells come from conscious and consenting adults, not dead babies.

[underullospell]

Yes, I agree w/you all..

(And to me cloning is way tooo scary of a thought), so for the people that really need it, (not cloning) its a great idea. Its just nice to know that someday if you get hurt and lose a leg or arm ect. that there is a chance you don't have to live your life w/out.

[MorphineChild205]

Originally Posted by Hyoukinmono

I don't have a problem with it, just as long as the stem cells come from conscious and consenting adults, not dead babies.

That's defeating the point. The embryonic stem cell is like a universal cell - it can replace ANY cell in the body. Once the embryo stage has passed, certain cells are for certain things. For example, blood cells only work with the blood, liver cells with the liver, etc.

The embryonic stem cell is the cure-all. And since a stem cell is NOT a living being and CANNOT evolve into a human or animal, I don't see why anyone would NOT want the research to continue.

Oh well. I guess it's a science vs. morals thing in the end.

[kosh]

This is a very complex topic and not to be easily judged upon.
It raises most profound questions about man in a lot of ways. Not only science but moralism, religion and philosophy are questioned.
Generally I would give a yay, because I think the ability for scientific research is a gift that makes us what we are and this ability comes with the logic desire to use and explore it. Also stemm cell research can help many people in a lot of ways and maybe far more than so far is known, for we know there is still a greater part we don't know about the architecture of life. So stemm cells are inevitable if we want to go further.

On the other side the same intelligence that gave us the possibility to research, made us desire rules in order to protect human life. The most important rules we installed (at least on our industrialized islands in the world) are the human rights and every other law results from them. So here is a rather bad (maybe disgusting) example for it, but I think it works: You can't kill a person (not willing into it) in order to eat him, if you are starving in the desert. The human rights of both have to be respected.
(i know this is an extreme example, just take it as an image)

So here's "The Great Debate":
Can we sacrifice the right to live of others for our own sake?

Granted, we're talking about embrionic life, and this is where philosophy and religion or belief get into it.
Asking religiosly would be: "When does the soul enter the body?", but I ain't religious so I'll try philosophically: "When does human life begin?"
All this questions were asked in the discussion about abortion, but this topic didn't have the perspectives of stemm cell research.

Given, we decided that human life starts with birth and everything before is not to be called like that. Now the research can begin an thousands of people will be healed of their diseases and can persue their personal wealth again. Maybe in a few more years cancer could be healed and other all other deadly diseases. More and more stemm cells will be needed and man was free to raise breeding farms for embryos to supply the world with it.

This is not my opinion, but a perspective of what COULD be.

Still, I can't say what for me is just. What I can say is that we have to be helluva careful when we decide how to carry on with this. Given the possibilities of this research and its possible consequences for how human life is judged, this is the most important question man ever had to answer.

[The Metal Chick]

Originally Posted by MorphineChild205

Did you get an A on it?

As a matter of fact, I did

As for using babies, if I remember correctly, they were using babies that were going to be aborted or something like that, so its not like they are killing babies just for this. I don't want to get into an abortion debate, but that's just what I remember from my paper I did.

[Demonspell]

Yes...it's hard for me to be against it considering I am nonreligious and "don't fight progress" is my personal mantra. As for the song being alluded to in this topic, don't get me started...

[Hyoukinmono]

Originally Posted by MorphineChild205

Oh well. I guess it's a science vs. morals thing in the end.

If that's the choice, I'll always go with morals. Science, as valuable as it is, is unfortunately much too unstable, fleeting, short-sighted, and tentative to be a basis for anything that's very important.

But then, I'm one of those religious wackos, so what do I know!

[lord667]

I support stem cell research, cloning, designer babies, and so on. The moral arguments don't weigh heavily for me; as soon as we can clone people without Dolly-like health problems occurring, I say get on with it.

[anonymousnick2001]

Why? For what purpose?

[SodomizerOfMankind]

i eat fetus

[PoisonSeed]

Originally Posted by SodomizerOfMankind

i eat fetus

ROFL!!!!!!