Because adult stem cells are specific to where they are located, that makes embryonic stem cells like diamonds, and given the fact that they are harvested from eggs that are less than days old, meaning cells in a petry dish, fertilized by in vitro clinics and donated with the donors express concent, then why is it unethical for the government to fund research that could save millions of lives of humans that are already alive and suffering.
2007-04-12 11:04:23 · 7 answers · asked by leaann2006 3 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
It is not unethical. If you followed the beliefs of the religious right to their logical conclusion, men would be prohibited from "spilling seed" and women that had a period without getting pregnant would be punished for snuffing out potential lives.
2007-04-12 11:27:00 · answer #1 · answered by ewetaunt 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They consider it to be unethical because in order to get them you need an aborted fetus, Since abortion is not accepted by many people it is considered unethical. Also people feel that it might be taken advantage of and create "human harvesting."
However if the embryo will be aborted anyway why not give it a chance to improve another life. Also adults have stem cells too but they are much harder to come across and have a greater chance of being specialized already. They wont harm the person at all. There are other areas stem cells can be found as well such as placentas.
2007-04-12 20:35:55 · answer #2 · answered by karli 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Usually this problem is cast in very black and white terms. Either something is a person or it isn't.
I seriously doubt, though, that even the people who say this truly believe it.
Consider the unlikely scenario where you were in a burning fertility clinic and could only save either a baby or canister with 1,000,000 human fertilized eggs. Is there really a choice there?
Now reasonable people could discuss the varying degrees of respect and care that should be given at various stages of life. This is not the discourse that anyone is likely to hear on tv.
TV show producers like dog-fights. They like clearly defined sides and shouting would be a bonus.
2007-04-12 19:29:00 · answer #3 · answered by 2 meter man 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Every ethical system in the world condemns causing suffering to innocents. And as you point out in this case, embryonic stem cell research causes no suffering, but instead can work to alleviate it.
However, there are some extremist religious dogmas which make the assumption that blastocysts contain souls. And so the destruction of a blastocyst is akin to some kind of soul murder. Of course this opens to door to questions about chimerism in humans, methods of in vitro fertilization in which unused embros are destroyed, the absorption of one blastocyst (or even fetus) by its twin, spontaneous abortion and miscarraige and all sorts of other problems that would have to be addressed by said religious extremists.
2007-04-12 19:22:48 · answer #4 · answered by Dendronbat Crocoduck 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because a lot of people in this world consider all human life to be sacred, and inviolable, even if it an artificial, ultimately non-viable, embryo in a petri dish.
Many people draw a line in the proverbial sand, and say "before this date, the embryo should not be considered as an individual", and draw another line and say "if a person is incurable it is reasonable to allow euthanasia". What I, and many others, contend is that there is no line to be drawn. That life begins at conception, ends at death, and should not be violated.
2007-04-12 18:34:22 · answer #5 · answered by Labsci 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Embryonic research kills embryos...which is murder. scientists could be killing future Einsteins of Mozarts or Newtons. That is why it is unethical!
2007-04-12 18:13:39 · answer #6 · answered by Evil Genius 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
http://www.thedoctorwillseeyounow.com/articles/bioethics/stemcell_12/
This link gives the major reasons, including philosophical ones.
2007-04-12 18:17:05 · answer #7 · answered by Bryant M. 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋