Do you think stem cells taken from aborted fetus should be used to prolong life?

Question

It's my understanding that stem cells can be used to regenerate or even produce human organs and that they can be taken from fetuses. It just seems like common sense to get them from aborted fetuses then. I don't know why Bush would be against this when abortion is legal and the fetuses could be put to use instead of being disposed of. I wouldn't agree with cloning a person and taking his or her organs but using stem cells to help people get their 120 years which was promised in the bible would be great.

Answer 1

Absolutely. I'm not sure it's the aborted tissue that's any good but the spare embryos from IVF are perfect for such a task. We could have great breakthroughs in helping the people we already have on this planet if the bleeding heart right to lifer types could get over the fact that it's not a baby - it's some cells. Some really really awesome cells that can help existing people have a better quality of life rather than the whole "what it could have been" type thinking. I also don't know why people are so freaked out about cord blood - that stuff is pretty cool too.
I really really hope that someone with an ounce of sense gets into office to be able to see a real miracle emerge in the field of science.

Answer 2

I am for stem cell research, the same as I am for donating organs. I have 2 donor bones in my neck, and am very grateful for the second chance at a better quality life because of it. That is simply bones. Imagine how it would be to help people have a better quality of life from stem cells when they are fighting a terrible disease or condition. What if it was your child or parent or even you who desperately needed that help? It is horrid that someone would abort their child except for the most dire of circumstances, but at least with stem cells taken from the fetus, at least that tiny human being made a positive difference in the world instead of just being destroyed and discarded. So yes, I think stem cells should be harvested - and most stem cells would be from embryos that would not otherwise develop into babies as they have been freely donated and will otherwise be discarded. (I know lots who would disagree with me, but it is my opinion and I am entitled to it). This issue is being voted on in my state and people on both sides are pretty vocal about it at this time.

Answer 3

I read answers written so far, but by the most I am close to the one from 'prancingmonkey'. I agree with other as well, but there is a catch. I am not anti-human, so do not attack me too quickly. Humans with medicine in the first place have put aside natural selection, and to my opinion just look where we are today. The numbers of defected genomes are among us, maybe I would not exist now, if my ancestor line would die out because of natural selection. But this I cannot know now and maybe my genes are not 'perfect', but I will probably pass them on. I know a family where children and their children have genetic malfunctions (autistic child, cancer), and this will probably go on. I do not say, they should not exist (they are my boyfriend's relatives), cause I care for them, but I guess this is the result of by passing the nature. Now with this technique we will prolong lives of those who maybe already suffer and will probably suffer even more and further. Ok, I agree to some life will be improved and will live better on. But there are other aspects as well. What about population growth problem, what about those who cannot afford this, what about if it will be accessible only to the rich people, what about possible abuses, etc. In general I am not against it, but it makes me think and I cannot easily say 'yes'.

Answer 4

Actually, the majority of stem cells would be harvested from extraneous embryos that are created for in vitro fertilization, not aborted fetuses. And there are hundreds of thousands of those extra embryos, and they're all going to be thrown away if they aren't used for research. Frankly, if I was an extra embryo, I think I'd want to help cure Parkinsons instead of ending up in the laboratory dumpster. That's just me though.

Answer 5

I am in favor of using stem cells from an aborted fetus. Why waste the material if it can help find cures for diseases?

I am not in favor of the clone banks to create replacement parts. It is too costly. For you to avoid having to take anti-rejection medications for the rest of your life, you would need an identical genetic match or close enough your body can't tell the difference.

Answer 6

It is not reasonable to use stem cell advancements to prolong the lives of humans who are not able to participate and live meaningful generative lives, so it depends on who we are "saving" when we look at the ethics of it. The harvesting of these stem cells is another thing entirely, and you cant just take an aborted fetus and harvest under any circumstances. All that aside, GW has his head in his bum, knows NOTHING of ethics or science, and should be kept out of the debate for lack of the ability to wrap his brain around this complex issue.

Answer 7

anything that prolongs life if taken from waste organic material is good
and whats wrong with cloning ,what do you think the symbolic story of Adam and Eve implies.
that was the Anunaki creating a slave race to mine gold for them by cloning and genetic engineering

Answer 8

I am pro stem cell research, period. I think Bush set medicine back decades with his b.s.

Good Luck and Take Care

Answer 9

UGH! For the final time: HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELLS do no longer COME FROM ABORTED FETUSES! they arrive from extra embryos donated with consent by the sufferers of in vitro fertilization clinics. The donors are no longer compensated in any way (except the warmth fuzzy feeling they get from donating their extra embryos is a style of reimbursement). The embryos utilized in stem cellular study are 5 days positioned up concept. In a clearly happening being pregnant, it may be almost impossible to hit upon the being pregnant, much less terminate it with the intention to reap the embryo. the only resource of embryos for stem cellular study is artificially created embryos in a lab. the only criminal thank you to create human embryos in a lab is for use by couples in seek of in vitro fertilization. it is illegitimate to sell human embryos for any purpose. for that reason, the only thank you to get embryos for study is to get donated embryos by sufferers who're happy that they have as many toddlers as they want. Abortion and stem cellular study are no longer correlated in any way. the only people making a residing are scientists and docs. If the church has a project with stem cellular study, they could get to the resource and protest in vitro fertilization.

Answer 10

Bible SPECIFICALLY banns taking stem cells from aborted fetuses. It right there in the book of "I am a stupid sheep herder making sh1t up in my hut 12:3"

To pshdsa:
And 26 years ago you were a sperm in your father's sack. If your father would have chosen to masturbate instead of having sex with your mother -- would he be committing a murder?