English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Why would we not do stem cell research when there are 2.1 million abortions per year? I mean seriously, you know how many lives we could possibly save! Ridiculous!

Don't take me the wrong way I do think it's wrong if we are intentionally killing embryos to get the stem cells. But if there are 2.1 million abortions per year, than why would we not use those stem cells for the research?

Oh yes, 2.1 million are only the REPORTED cases. Who knows how many unreported abortions there are.

2007-11-20 08:54:50 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

6 answers

I think part of the reason is that most conservatives don't like using dead things to help treat diseases, but you do make a valid point. Why not do some good when it comes to abortions. It is hypocritical for Republicans who are for abortions, but are against stem-cell research.

2007-11-20 09:02:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

We have never intentionally killed embryos to get stem cells. EVER.
We don't even use aborted fetuses the majority of the time. Its more and more common to get them from saved umbilical cords, donated marrow, and other sources now, especially since the government keeps turning down stem cell funding.

2007-11-20 09:00:13 · answer #2 · answered by kt_b_blue 3 · 2 0

I'm not against it. I have no problem using tissue from aborted embryos for research, nor with cloning embryos for such resoearch. Most abortions, though are not performed early enough to yield the most desireable pluripotent stem cells.

2007-11-20 09:01:11 · answer #3 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 0 0

I agree that the research could possibly do a lot of good, but it is a slippery slope you propose going down. If an amazing cure comes form the use of stems cells, think about the possiblity of the sources and clones, ect......

2007-11-20 08:59:34 · answer #4 · answered by booman17 7 · 1 1

Embryonic Stem cell research is not illegal. I just don't think the government should pay for it.

2007-11-20 08:59:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

I wouldn't/ It is a potential budgetary miracle.

2007-11-20 09:14:24 · answer #6 · answered by Professor Sheed 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers