Would you be for embryonic stem cell research if no abortions were used?

Question

Since unwanted embryos from fertility clinics are used to start the lines, would it be against your ethics? Or are you OK with throwing away unused embryos at fertility clinics?

fertility clinics create several embryos, because they are not always successful the first time around. They also implant several embryos, since not all of them take. Like the woman who had seven babies, because it was 'god's will' (which it wasn't, since she went to a fertility clinic) most couples choose to 'reduce' their pregnancy, ie: have several abortions at once to bring it down to a manageable number. if they are successful, those additional embryos are discarded.

gag order was placed on embryonic stem cell research in the mid 90s. Just because you suppress the evidence, doesn't mean that it isn't there. Of course, nobody cared in the 90s about it, since it wasn't politicized...as well it shouldn't.

Answer 1

I hate all the double standards is our government. Abortion is legal - but you can't use the refuse? Ethically, I'm against abortion. But not being allowed to use the aborted fetus because of ethical reasons doesn't really make sense to me - the unethical act has already been done, why not use the waste for something potentially positive?

Your added details bring this question to a whole different level - it is no longer about ethics, it's about playing god. And I think as science exponentially improves (as it has been for the last century) there will be much more controversy about what is right and what is wrong, and an ever changing definition of our morals.

Answer 2

When they talk about embryonic stem cell research they are not talking about using a formed fetus. They are talking about when the first cells are forming and they are just that cells. There is no form there are no little fingers or toes only a tiny mass of cells that have no shape or form.
You also can not preform an abortion on a woman to remove one baby and leave another. When an abortion is done everything gets sucked out so how would they be able to pick and choose.
When people use the word embryo they picture a tiny little form of a baby and when women are artificially inseminated or are implanted with a fertilized ovum it is a tiny pin point dot of cells. There is no baby shape and there is no brain , no lungs , no heart beat , no little fingers and toes, no little nose or ears , just a tiny mass of cells that are just begining to divide and it is not even an embryo it is called a zygote which is a fertilized egg. It is not called an embryo until it has implanted in the uterus lining so not one of those fertilized eggs are embryos that are held frozen if they have been fertilzed they are zygotes. from implantation until the 8th week of pregnancy it is then called an embryo and from the 9 week on a fetus. a fetus in not considered viable until it is capable of living outside of the mothers womb.
Since an embryo has to have been implanted to be called an embryo they cant be throwing embryos aways since they havent been implanted.

Answer 3

There is no abortion involved in embryonic stem cell research.

The embryos used are the ones that are sitting in freezers, waiting for selfish people to decide whether or not they want to implant them in their uteri and give birth to them. The ones that aren't selected are tossed away like garbage anyway, so why not use them for a more noble purpose - saving someone's life?

An abortion, as conservatives like to point out, does NOT leave an embryo intact; therefore, no stem cells could be extracted for use in research.

It is the "extra" embryos, the ones that all the loving Mommies and Daddies out there would otherwise authorize incineration for, that are used for this purpose.

Answer 4

I agree that it's inconsistent to be against abortion and yet favor the creation of embryos for destruction in either in vitro fertilization or embryonic stem cell research.

I think the stem-cell debate has educated a lot of people about how in vitro fertilization works. Some of these people are now against that too.

Answer 5

Since they have to fertilize the embryo to harvest the stem cells, they have actually made a baby in its very first stages of life.

So to kill said baby to harvest stem cells is essentually an abortion, since they "abort" the growth and life of the baby.

These same stem cells can be gathered from adult cadavers and are thought to be even better and more valuable to the research being conducted, since they are already mature and often the very stem cells they need are readily available from said cadaver.

So why the big to-do over stem cells from babies?

Because the abortion coalition knows that if the right to life coalition wins the battle, they loose a large amount of ground in their fight to keep abortion legal.

So what's the difference in throwing unfertilized embryos away?

Essentially, the lab is ovulating. A woman's body "throws away" unfertilized embryos once a month, so there is no difference in my way of looking at it.

Answer 6

My question would be "Why in the world would fertility clinics be creating unused and unwanted embryos?"

And yes this would still be a moral problem because life begins at conception.

Answer 7

Geez....

That's tough, too.

Isn't there another way?

What about skin cells?

If it came down to it and they were going to destroy the embryos, I would rather see them used, HOWEVER again, this could turn into another instance of abuse. That's just not acceptable.

EDIT:

Now, that's an idea I agree with. Paul talked about stem cells from the umbilical cord. That's a great idea!

Answer 8

I am not AGAINST stem cell research. What I AM against is 'government' funding. There are 2 ways the government funds anything - deficit spending and tax revenue and both of them are already too high.
Last, but actually more important is, there is NO constitutional authorization for Congress to fund ANY scientific research.

Answer 9

I am not ok with throwing any embryos away, killing them, or providing economic incentive to clinics for creating more "unwanteds".

Answer 10

No, I would not be for it.

I am against clinics that have frozen embryos. That is appalling. The embryos ought to be buried and not subject to dehumanizing "scientific research."