(For anyone who isn't aware of this: in-vitro fertilization works like this. You make a bunch of embryos, and freeze them. You use one or two to have kids, and discard the rest. All stem cell research does is use the stem cells from otherwise discarded embryos.)
2007-02-08 07:44:26 · 9 answers · asked by STFU Dude 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I am against both.You don't need to destroy embryos to get stem cells,there are many other sources which are just as good.
I admit that I am a little confused.In my country,it is legal for scientists to clone embryos,and kill them to harvest stem cells.Apparently,that's not wide spread,as people from the US keep saying that stem-cell research is only using discarded fetal material.
Ina ny case,I'm against stem-cell harvesting from any embryo or fetus.
2007-02-08 09:20:48 · answer #1 · answered by Serena 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Personally I don't think either is right. Most of the embryos that are frozen are never used and are eventually discarded, and they purposely implant more than will ever actually take. I think life begins at conception so these are real human beings that end up dying needlessly. People who can't have children naturally should adopt, there are plenty of kids out there who need parents.
Also there are a lot of studies out there that indicate that stem cells from healthy adults or from the umbilical cord are actually much more effective in treating disease. I am not at all against stem cell research, I just think it's horrible to murder babies in order to do it when there are better methods available anyway.
2007-02-08 07:58:04 · answer #2 · answered by Hamlette 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Most people don't realize that in-vitro involves creating many embryos which will merely be destroyed or certainly will never be given the chance to develop into human beings. They also often do not know that stem cell research is conducted on the embryos that are to be discarded.
They simply don't know the facts about it.
And YES most of these unused embryos are destroyed eventually.
2007-02-08 07:58:39 · answer #3 · answered by Phoenix, Wise Guru 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
You don't just "discard" the rest. Those embryos are kept frozen for possible repeat pregnancies. Have you not seen the several cases in the media of couples fighting over custody of frozen embryo?
Good try. But embryonic stem cell research is still morally wrong and scientifically wrong. You can get better results with cord blood AND even with human body fat.
2007-02-08 07:50:11 · answer #4 · answered by penhead72 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
ok...i was an in-vitro baby and my parents used the rest of the frozen embryos to get pregnant with my brothers...and for this reason i am against stem cell research. In the research they kill the embryo and through wat they dont use away. And by the way, Me and my family are Christians.
In-vitro is mainly used for couples who cant consive naturally but really want kids that are theirs biologically. So i think it is a really great procedure!!!
2007-02-08 08:58:23 · answer #5 · answered by *~*Haley*~* 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Both are okay to me. Stem cell research should be allowed. Many people's lives will be saved with the results coming from stem cells.
Same thing with cloning; if a person is dying of liver failure, just create a new liver, modeled from a healthy one with the same blood type, etc, and do transplant surgury. Easy...
But noooo, it's illegal and that's a ****** joke!!! I don't agree with cloning full human beings unless there's a very GOOD explantation but cloning organs or skin or whatever should be allowed.
2007-02-08 07:50:18 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
definite, I oppose it besides. the clarification i think of is because of the fact public help and utilising public funds demands public action. and then there is the "slippery slope" that began with birth control, then abortion, then manipulations like "in vitro", cloning and something concerning destruction of embryos. So in that experience, combating at abortion aids in combating different unethical practices. you additionally must comprehend, there is information in contact in information the approach. So scientists and church leaders have a definite legal accountability to protest. And my church leaders like bishops do protest the practices you pronounced. it would be extraordinary to hearken to extra nonetheless. yet you will no longer see the information interior the information very lots which keeps consciences uninformed. And who is going to protest in the event that they think of of it as the thank you to have toddlers and save lives. It sounds useful. wish that helps.
2016-11-02 22:06:13 · answer #7 · answered by hinch 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Neither one is acceptable in the Church Jesus Christ founded, the Holy Catholic Church - for exactly the reasons you stated.
2007-02-08 08:16:59 · answer #8 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
marketing and public image.
2007-02-08 07:55:25 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋