I'm writing a debate paper and I need some help getting some more insight as to how people feel about this topic... (good. bad, indifferent?) Thanks and God Bless
What are the differences between moral justifications for “general abortion” vs. moral justification for embryonic stem cell research?
2007-11-05 01:58:03 · 8 answers · asked by krogerpharmtech 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Embryonic stem cell research has more moral justification because it is done to help further medical research. Also, those are not babies that are in the womb of a woman.
General Abortion, on the other hand, is mostly for the convenience of the mother. (Please note that this does not apply to cases of rape or incest, in which there is more moral justification, in my mind, for an abortion).
2007-11-05 02:03:28 · answer #1 · answered by ItsJustMe 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Human embryonic stem cells can be obtained from embryos obtained during in vitro fertilization. When IVF is performed, multiple eggs are fertilized and cultured for 2 to 3 days. Then some are implanted in the woman and others are frozen in case the first batch does not implant and develop. Those frozen ones are discarded when they are no longer needed.
They have never been implanted, they are going to be thrown away - it is just not the same as using tissue from an aborted fetus. In fact I don't know of a way to obtain embryonic stem cells from an aborted fetus.
2007-11-05 02:07:22 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
In all honesty I think abortion is wrong, but I also respect women enough to know that I don't have a say in what they do or don't do with their bodies. If they want to get an abortion, then that's their right. It's their body, they get to determine what happens to it.
Embryonic stem cell research, I am 100% for it. Just look at the possible discoveries. There is a dental group doing research and they said that if they were allowed to move forward with their part of the research, that within the next 15 years they would be able to give you a shot and you would grow an entirely new set of teeth.
Where is the down side to that? I am absolutely for that type of research.
2007-11-05 02:05:16 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
they could the two be switched over into any cellular interior the physique. Embryonic stem cells require an embryo to be distroyed with a view to reap them while iPS cells do no longer as they're grownup cells switched over into pleuripotent cells. - so iPS cells have not got the comparable professional-existence/anti abortion ethical subjects. the drawback is that folk who donate cells to analyze yet are against stem cellular analyze may be troubled that their cells would be switched over to stem cells without their permission inspite of the indisputable fact that this may be regulated if acceptable procedures are in place.
2016-10-03 09:38:43 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Embryonic stem cells have not cured any disease. The research on adult stem cells has been successful.
2007-11-05 02:11:39 · answer #5 · answered by twincrier 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
here's my take...so long as abortion is legal NOT harvesting the embryonic stem cells (of aborted fetuses) is wasteful.
2007-11-05 02:03:27 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
they r both bad
2007-11-05 02:05:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
both are immoral
2007-11-05 02:06:38 · answer #8 · answered by what? 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋