What do you think of stem cell research?

Question

Do they really use just aborted fetuses? Do you think the private sector will do it if government doesn't subsidize it? Why are some people so opposed to it? Do you think there really is medical knowledge to be gained or is it a hoax?

Catnip, I agree with youl, but my husband and I got into this debate about it last night.

Answer 1

you are probably thinking of embryonic stem research which is different then regular stem cell research. no they do not use aborted fetuses. since embryonic stem cell research could not produce results most private companies have backed out of it. President Bush has given more money to stem cell research then any president before him. the people that do not want embryonic research because they do not want to go down the slipper slope of creating life to destroy it later. stem cell research have given over 27 valued medical uses so far. embryonic has produce no positive results . this month they have announced that they have found a way to reproduce embryonic stem cells. here is an article.

(s) BreakPoint Commentaries
BiotechnologyStem-Cell Breakthrough
By Chuck Colson
11/29/2007

Related Audio/Video Downloads


A Battle of Worldviews


Just before Thanksgiving, researchers in Wisconsin and Japan announced a breakthrough in stem-cell research. This time, it was good news for those of us who believe in the sanctity of human life.

The researchers announced that they had “successfully reprogrammed human skin cells into cells indistinguishable from embryonic stem cells.”

The announcement at the University of Wisconsin was accompanied by the usual hype: The research “has tremendous implications” for medicine, drugs, and “transplantation therapies.”

The unusual part was that the leader of the research team, James Thomson, told reporters that these cells would, over time, replace embryonic stem cells in research—and he is glad of it, because he had moral qualms.

Not surprisingly, it was the possible resolution to this controversy that captured the headlines. The Philadelphia Inquirer spoke for many when it said that the findings have the potential to end the “dreary wrangle” over embryonic stem-cell research.

The news from Wisconsin and Japan is good news, and it is a vindication of those who argued that the sacrifice of human embryos was unnecessary. But this struggle is far from over.

To understand why, you need to understand what motivated many supporters of embryonic stem-cell research.

The first was political. As one liberal pundit put it, “embryonic stem cells, of course, were supposed to cure America of its affection for the religious right.” For many politicians, embryonic stem-cell research was a “wedge issue.” Its goal was not to conquer disease but, instead, to put pro-life Americans on the defensive, depicting them as uncaring fanatics. There is no reason to think that our opponents are going to stop trying to use the stem-cell issue against us even after this announcement.

The second motivation is worldview: specifically, “scientism,” the belief that scientific investigation is the only means of knowledge—that scientists can get answers to everything, including philosophy and morality.

So embryonic stem-cell research, scientism insists, must be free from any “restraints” or “interference.” Scientists—not political leaders and certainly not morally concerned citizens—should determine what it is or is not permissible in the lab.

In addition, scientism, given its materialistic grounding, rejects any appeal to the sanctity of human life. The Christian worldview teaches that humans are made in the image of God. From conception to natural death, life is sacred. The worldview of scientism teaches something entirely different. In that view, we humans are merely an interesting and potentially useful collection of cells and genetic material.

Nothing that has happened in the past couple of weeks has reduced the influence of scientism. On the contrary, “Science” is being credited with finding a resolution to the issue—and they will be back.

The only reason this breakthrough happened is that Christians stood firm for the sanctity of human life. And remember that we have had a president on our side. I remember when I congratulated President Bush for his courage in vetoing an embryonic stem-cell research bill. His answer to me was, “I didn’t have any choice: It was a moral issue.” I was never prouder of the president. But we may not have pro-life leaders in office in the future. So we dare not let our guard down.

Today's BreakPoint Offer

Answer 2

Abortion may well be criminal although this is incorrect and evil and outright homicide to an harmless unborn toddler. think of approximately it that toddler will by no potential see sunlight hours or snort or experience a motorbike or savor having buddies or be attentive to the affection of a parent. This unborn toddler will by no potential be attentive to the failings that we take with none attention in our usual lifes. Plus that toddler is torn to products in the process the abortion this is between the procedures it quite is killed ripped limb from limb. So as a result i think of stem cellular study is faulty additionally. regardless of each and every little thing you have already led to the unborn toddler lots distress and discomfort and extra this is lifestyles from it so a minimum of pass away their unfavorable bodies on my own. Abortion and Stem cellular study are purely yet another considered one of mankind's vile and harsh and evil issues. I pray that God could have mercy on all of human beings who get abortions and function had abortions. i'm happy that those unfavorable infants will stay with him and heaven continuously. i could no longer make it there myself who's acquainted with yet a minimum of they'd. in order that which you be attentive to no toddler is an twist of destiny all of them come right here with a purpose yet some by no potential have the possibility to fulfill there purpose using cruelty of mankind. sooner or later it is going to come to pass that we are going to ought to account for the failings we've achieved and provided that we are relatively sorry and regretful for those issues do we be forgiven. i be attentive to that there are some who will see this in yet in any different case than me jointly with atheist and human beings of non-christian or maybe some christian religions yet this is great contained in the top of time it ought to come to pass that what i think is faulty yet i do no longer care because of the fact i'm happy for now. properly there you have my opinion.

Answer 3

I think that if it truly can help someone, it should be allowed. Even if it is aborted fetuses. If it can help a person walk, see, whatever to have a better life, it can't be totally bad.