Christians: If you were blind, would you accept a cure that used stem cells?

Question

Or would you stumble around waiting for someone to spit in your eye?

Since it matters to some of you where they came from, assume that these particular stem cells were from chopped up dead babies.

Answer 1

I would not accept a cure that used stem cells. I would, however accept the same cure that didn't use stem cells.

Answer 2

No, although improving people's lives is a good thing, it cannot be justified if it involves the destruction of human life. As a Catholic, although being blind would suck, it would also be one's ticket to heaven.

I actually just read an article on yahoo, that talked about an alternative to embryonic stem cell cures, that wouldn't destroy human life and seemed like it may even be better. Why don't people invest in that?

Answer 3

It wouldn't matter to any of them, and they know it.

They would find a way to justify it to themselves, such as "Well, some of those evil stem cell doctors had a hand in this cure, but that's just unfortunate. I'm sure the rest of the doctors involved were good Christians. I'll just pray the evil out of the cure and everything will be right with god."

(And then they'll go and demand that the cure for cancer being developed next door be stopped in its tracks immediately... at least until they got cancer)

Answer 4

As a Christian, I support most forms of stem cell research. I would never support "killing babies" for the purpose of stem cells, but using embryos which are kept in storage only eventually to die off or be discarded, I have no problem with.

Answer 5

Science has proved that adult stem cells, a donation of which don't hurt the donor, are very good. These are linked with cures. I'm not even opposed to cord blood banking. I just can't go with embryonic stem cells. I'm all for advancement in adult stem cell research, but leave those embryos alone. They haven't even cured anything.

Answer 6

It's funny you should mention this. Scientists are using an adults own stem cells to cure things like blindness. Not one baby waiting to be born was harmed in the cure. And Jesus spitting in the dirt to make the mud to cure the blind man was a LOT more productive than you waiting for an unborn baby to cure you. BAM!!

Answer 7

no, because it is through free will that man makes the decision to use stemcells in the way that he does. stem cell research is, for some, representative of an abuse of the gift of free will. God gave us free will, but we can do wrong by God using free will. stem cell research is arguably trying to be God in your own right, and this is 'discouraged' in several sections of Christian teaching. that's the basic and general Christian perspective as i understand it, though of course they're not united in this opinion. personally i think a lot of good can come of this research, as well as bad.

Answer 8

Stem cells can be harvested from places besides embryo's. They can be found in the spinal column. The only reason that embryonic cells are more popular is because they're a little more responsive then adult cells. I don't see how it would go against any religion to use cells taken from your own spinal column.

Answer 9

If stem cells would cure blindness, it shouldn't even matter who's dead baby it was.
Some good should come from everyone's death.

Answer 10

There are stem cells that can be used that arent from embryos or whatever it is thats so controversial... when a baby is born they can take stem cells from the umbilical cord i think.... basically if no unborn baby had to die for my eyesight yes i would use it