anon950526 Post 156

Is there any impact due to this?

Obviously, some of you dont have kids. The life of a child is worth so much more than any adult. You got to live. What if that embryo happened to be you? Would you then feel that it is OK to conduct this research?

I am a mother of two, soon to be three. I don't care about any of that just long as my kids at least get a chance at living and there is a God. I had a 50 percent chance of having babies because of a huge benign tumor that grew on my left ovary and killed my left fallopian tube.

I prayed for my babies and got them every time. Besides that, everybody has their

I watched this gruesome abortion video and the lady was 12 weeks along. You could see the child trying to fight for its life. Murder is murder. Helping to save other people or not -- that's like you seeing a man trying to rape a woman and you shoot him dead. It's the same if you were trying to save her life but you get persecuted and convicted for taking matters into your own hands. I am sorry for those people who are sick and have sick babies. I know what it is like to lose loved ones over untreatable diseases. Im against embryo research and I'm not thinking about me. It is about a baby. Sure, it isnt completely formed, but it's still a child, or at least will grow into one, I wish harm on nobody. There is no harm meant and Im not trying to make someone mad. Im just trying to throw some new views into the situation.

Stem cell research can only benefit society and advance us as a species. If your argument is religious, the you are not thinking. You are letting your emotions and beliefs speak for you, not your logic or common sense. A bunch of cells is not a baby, and helping the living is not against "God's will". This is a good thing and it will continue regardless of religious views, because it makes sense.

I'm still kind of learning about this topic, but abortion is something I feel strongly against, but if a baby was taken from it's mother with the mother's okay and they were trying to save people's lives, I would be completely okay with that.

I believe that God does not exist, and that stem cell research is truly phenomenal. This research should not be controversial, nor should it be banned; it is helping the living.

Most of the people who say that stem cell research is bad are religious, but people living in the real world and believe in this thing called 'science' actually make a difference. Religion has only held back society and science. I wonder how many religious people would get angry if they knew that I was a homosexual, atheist physicist who believes in evolution and the big bang theory.

I am writing a persuasive essay on whether stem cell research should be legal or not (even though it already is in the U.S.). I was never a really religious person and stuck mainly to things that I knew for sure were happening. The thing is, most of the stem cells they are using for research are going to be discarded anyway. No one is claiming them, no one is caring about them, and they are just going to be thrown away. It is better for them to be used for a greater cause than just being thrown away and losing the chance to create treatments and cures for cancer and neurodegenerative diseases.

Without trying to offend anyone, please don't

bring God into this, like if you're going to simply take the stem cells and create babies with them. The cells could be considered early life, but you lose cells every day and no one gives it a second thought. I am thirteen years old and sorry if you believe that I am wrong.

This is a terrible thing. Stem cell research is just an excuse for making us Americans pay for other peoples' abortions. This stem cell research crap may have fooled my friends who claim abortion is when the baby isn't fully developed and that it's murder to kill a baby after it's born. What's the difference? Abortion is murder.

This country is so corrupt it will probably start killing the elderly and calling it abortion, or calling every day murder of people abortion. Well, I have had enough of this crap Obama is trying to trick us with. God says life is precious and an undeveloped baby is made of many cells and cells are alive. Think about that, America. Not only that, but abortion is unnecessary. If a girl gets raped, she can put the baby up for adoption instead of murdering the baby. Studies show many women who had abortions regret it.

So what you are all arguing about is if god exists and whats his plan for us, and why or why should we not use pre-embryo stem cells. It's completely your own opinion, but when does life start for a baby -- when the sperm reaches the egg or when you hear his heartbeat?

I, for one, say we should not use embryo stem cells because they are a living being. Also for all of you who say its gods plan for us, who created god? He could not just have created himself out of nowhere. These are just my thoughts. But these are all still questions we do not know the answer to.

I've been researching this Stem Cell subject for a long time, and I'm so amazed at everyone's stories from the news and sites on how stem cells has helped them recover from so many types of sicknesses and diseases. Even cancer can be cured by this type of treatment.

One big factor is that it's not a drug but it will just treat your body in a nice and natural way. Stem cell therapy is nice but I found this Laminine on the market. People keep on talking about it, saying it's the new science breakthrough and that I should give a try. It's not a literal stem cell but it is a stem cell enhancer, and safer than the usual way of Stem Cell Therapy.

I gave it a try and in just a few weeks I felt its proven power that I also recommend it to everyone out there.

How is that clump of cells considered a newborn? Those cells aren't a newborn because there's still a chance that once you implant those embryos they don't hold, so it's not a child. They don't take these people's cells then say, nope you can't have your child -- we're going to use them for someone else. They're leftovers. No one is going to use them and they are going to get discarded. If you consider it a human how is it humane to let it sit there frozen forever, discarded and unloved? People throwing god around are ignorant. Not everyone believes in your "creator" and don't throw it in my face. Believe in your beliefs, but don't force mine.

@post 52: If there is no God, who do you think made the universe? Your dad didn't make it, I didn't make, you didn't make, nor did any person. Only an eternal being must have made the universe.

Look. What none of you guys are realizing is that embryonic stem cell research doesn't focus solely on embryos.

I'm a student getting my masters degree in pediatric nursing, so you guys can't say I don't know this. But maybe if you did some research instead of arguing that everyone except yourself is wrong, you would realize there are valid points to both sides.

Embryonic stem cell research also focuses on umbilical cords and placentas, which does no harm to the baby whatsoever. Now none of you can say that's "murder" or against your religion because I'm Roman Catholic, which is one of the main religions against stem cell research and I am personally all for it.

Now if embryos

Enough about manipulating death and being religiously wrong. Enough said, simple as that.

A novel called "Living Proof" just came out in stores this week that explores the life and death issue of embryonic stem cell research for the first time as a story. It's getting a lot of buzz online and pertains directly to this discussion.

Most say stem cell research is bad because scientists are trying to pay God, but that's a bunch of crap. Like what others have said, God created us, knowing that one day we would come up with this knowledge to maybe find cures. Somebody else stated that we are ungrateful because we want to use this research, but that's not entirely true, because we are grateful for this new research to cure people like me. Yes I said me. I'm a 16 year old diabetic. I may not suffer as much as others with other diseases, but I have.

Also, this same person said that we should be the ones serving overseas. Well, if you've paid attention, we can't because

Anyway, most don't know what it's like to stick a big needle into their own skin every day, but I do. They also don't know what its like to wake up very weak due to a low blood sugar, or to throw up because you get ketones due to not having any more insulin going through their body.

Lastly, most of you probably aren't scared to go to bed, knowing that you might not wake up because you went low, with no one knowing and died. Yes, I know diabetes isn't the worse disease out there, but it's not easy either. I don't really like abortion, but at least the fetus could help cure many people, and not just get thrown away.

In a way, the government not allowing stem cell research, and the people against it can be considered murderers too, because they are standing in the way of curing people, which could save their lives. This is how our country is going downhill, not the other way around.

Finally, you say how a human life is so important, and yes it is, but who's to say that an animal's life isn't? People abuse animals, use them to test new products, that most people use, but I don't see you caring about that. Yes, some people do, but most don't give a crap. And I mean, didn't God create animals too, so shouldn't they be just as important as humans?

Yeah, so that's all I have to say. Hopefully this will make people use their brains a little more, because the people who are against it only really seem to care about themselves, not the people who are actually suffering!

The controversy surrounding the morality of stem cell research is centered around the creation, usage, and destruction of the human embryos. Currently, the limits of technological advancement require the destruction of the human embryo in creating the human embryonic stem cell. Various groups view an embryo as an early-aged human life. As a result, they are concerned with the rights and status of the embryo, and often go so far as to equate such research with murder because of the embryos destruction. However, despite scientific evidence suggesting that the early-stage embryos being used are not early-aged human life, the importance of these embryonic stem cells and their contribution to scientific advancement is tremendous.

Stem cells are cells in the human

John Stuart Mills principle of Utilitarianism also supports the morality of stem cell research. Utilitarianism states that an actions moral worth is determined solely by its contribution to the happiness of all parties involved. The phrase the greatest good for the greatest number of people is often used to describe this principle. But more precisely, the true morality of such research is exhibited in the concept of Negative Utilitarianism. Negative Utilitarianism requires us to promote the least amount of harm, or prevent the greatest amount of suffering for the greatest number of people.

Since science has established that are embryos not yet human, any harm inflicted on them does not weigh in on the moral worth of the action. However, the development of treatments that could potentially cure conditions such as Parkinsons disease and Alzheimers would weigh in on its moral worth. As a result, the prevention of suffering made possible by stem cell research and its potential medical advancements far outweigh any harm inflicted on the embryos, even if the embryos were given moral standing. Thus, by means of Negative Utilitarianism, the morality of stem cell research cannot be called into question.

This is modern day fascism. You shouldn't choose what life has more importance. Speaking as a veteran, people like this make me regret serving an ungrateful country, full of morally degraded people. These people who believe in this should have been the ones overseas. Then tell me how easy it is to choose one life over the other. Those people make me sick, and will be the downfall of this country.

Fundamentalists never fail to amaze me with their ability to only read half the story. The embryos used in stem cell research would be discarded anyway - stem cell research isn't denying them a chance at life, they had no chance at life in the first place. It isn't the same thing as abortion.

And I hope the fundies who are making comments along the lines of "We suffer because God wills it" never take antibiotics when they are sick - surely that would be messing with God's plan for you to die from a disease that modern science can easily cure?

Any opponent to stem cell research on the grounds of all this embryo is a human life crap is nothing but a ignorant idiotic hypocrite and the same goes for anti abortionists.

Why claim to give a crap at all about so called life when none of you seem to give a crap about the starving millions in underdeveloped countries, the starving on the street, those on death row etc.? What about those lives? Aren't they more convincing examples of 'life' than a pile of embryonic goo? Are they not deserving of all the fuss you make over the value of human life?

You people seem more concerned with spouting your ignorant, selfish beliefs and halting progress that could one

Is there any difference between you people in regards to this and those that shared the same beliefs that used to carry out witch hunts all those many years ago? one has to wonder.

i think that stem cell affords advancements to the medical industry. people should stop trying to use the phrase "who are we to play god". if that is the case then don't take medication to relieve pain because under those conditions would that also be playing god?

Remember that some stem cells are taken from the umbilical cord and adult tissue, not just embryos. You wouldn't call it murder if the cells were taken from an inanimate piece of flesh, would you?

I have been reading comments and "playing god" is stupid. Getting and giving shots are playing god implants and anything like that is playing god. you're not letting what happens happen. I read about a wife with four kids with Cystic Fibrosis. finding a cure for that would be playing god. That would be taking his power to save a child.

I think it's all right. People are going to abort fetuses no matter what you say or how you feel. You can say it's wrong and waste it or you can use it to support something new and know you helped to save a life. Would you honestly say that because of what you think you should throw away something that could help people just because its from something not even alive yet?

O.K. so it might be alive, but at an older age in the pregnancy. And people are right: if someone you love was dying, you would not just sit there and watch and say, oh well, too bad for you. You would try to help no matter what the cost.

I don't know what is so bad about trying to save life. Stem cell research has advanced into the stages of using actual cells from adults, (Somatic cells) and this is pushing research today. Take some time and do the "current" research about stem cells and educate yourselves.

As far as the religious perspective goes I am a Christian and "God" gave me the cells in my body and if those cells that "God" gave have a way of saving my life, then that is his will. Helping your body heal is not playing God, it is using what God gave you!

I'm curious; What defines something as "live"? When does life begin? Well, does it not begin at fertilization when the cells go through meiosis? And the DNA is replicated? Well here's what I have to say.

Again, what defines something as a "Live" human? Is it size? Level of development? Environment?

Degree of dependency?

If it's based on size, then isn't that size-ism? Does that mean our society is saying that the unborn aren't human because they aren't as big as us? Yes, an unborn baby isn't as big as a toddler, but a toddler isn't as big as a full grown adult. So does that mean that they toddler isn't human either? Or in any way less human

Level of development: Some argue that since the unborn aren't fully developed yet, they aren't human. I'm 15 and I'm not fully developed; does that mean I'm not human? No. I'm still growing. Development doesn't stop at birth. It starts at conception.

The most common argument in this category is the baby can't think, or feel pain, or even know that they exist. I beg to differ. There was an article published in a newspaper that said a doctor was performing an abortion, and on the screen, you could see the baby trying to get away from the tool trying to pull it out. In another, there was a case where the baby stuck its hand out and held onto the doctor's finger. Look it up.

We say that they can't feel pain, so they aren't human. But what about those with Sepa disease? They are born unable to feel pain; can we go and kill them too? They can't feel pain so they aren't human, so it's okay, right? Wrong.

Environment: Most common argument: The unborn baby isn't in the world yet, it's in the mother's body, and it doesn't even breathe air. This argument seems to be saying that the unborn child isn't human because it's in a different environment then we are. But, since when does where we are, determine who we are? In our day to day lives, we change our environment multiple times. But it doesn't change who we are as a person, unless you have a multiple personality disorder.

So here's a question; How does the eight-inch trip down the birth canal change who you are as a blob of tissue, into a valued human being with rights? Truth be told, it doesn't. Another argument is the unborn baby is in the mother's body, which is her body, so the mother should be able to do what ever she wants with that baby. So what's the difference between a baby the day before it's born, and one day after?

A day before: Not fully developed; dependent on the mother; in the mother's body -- her property.

A day after: Not fully developed; dependent on the mother; in the mother's house -- her property

What makes it okay to kill the one but not the other?

There was a case where a man went and murdered a pregnant woman and was charged with double murder. In that case, the government and court are considering that fetus is a life with value. However, in the same time, something like 32 abortions were performed under the protection of the law. How come those babies don't get the same justification? Is it because they aren't wanted? If an orphan was murdered, would no one care because they weren't wanted? Of course not. It's absurd to me the double standard in our society.

Degree of Dependency: Arguments are that if the unborn baby is still dependent on the mother, and can't survive on their own yet, they aren't human. Even a one week old baby is still dependent on the mother. It will be for a while.

Once again, I'm 15 and I can't survive on my own. I depend on my parents. I depend on my government and school system, I depend on my friends. I'm dependent. But do I not have value and rights?

What about those who depend on medical instruments? And life support?

Parents depend on others to provide them with jobs, food and money, with places for their children to go to get an education. Our classrooms are getting smaller and smaller due to the number of abortions each year. But again, does this affect a person's humanity in some way because they depend on someone? You're going through a divorce and you need someone to lean on; you're depending on them. Oh, yeah, sorry for the bad timing, but oh geez this is tough, you're not human, so we're going to have to kill you. No, I don't think so.

What about those on welfare? Can we kill them too because they depend on the government to provide them with money? I don't think so. We are all dependent on someone to a degree. But who goes around saying that those who depend on someone are less human or not human at all? No one. Why? Because it's hypocritical and illogical. But somehow, our society is able to accept this argument when it comes to unborn children. The faces of tomorrow. We are the people are today, and we're killing tomorrow's people.

So if we use these arguments to allow the killing of the unborn, then we should be allowed to kill: Any child; those on welfare; those with medical tools and medications; those with mental disabilities. They aren't what people consider "the norm"- are very dependent, usually have a difference in size, aren't developed as much as those who are not disabled, and depending on the case, their environment may be different then ours. And so on and so forth.

Of course not. We would never dream of doing that. It upsets many many people even using those cases as examples. So it should be clear that the unborn are human, as well as those with developmental disabilities, differences, different circumstances- welfare, etc., and the sick.

For people who don't understand, here is what I'm saying. I am pro choice- that women should have choices to do what they want in life from the unimportant (what flavor of ice cream I want) to the extremely important (what career I want to pursue) but should not have the "right" to make a choice about another person's life. You don't get to decide who lives or dies.

I do not believe we should use stem cells. If we can cure all diseases and grow back body parts then we will evidently live a very, very, very long time. This could potentially result in an overpopulation problem which we are currently starting to experience.

Humans were not meant to live forever, and maybe you should ask yourself: do you really want to live forever?

To those people who say that it's okay for scientists to do stem cell research, yes it's okay for them to do research to improve other people's lives without using stupid, dangerous chemicals on the cells. Some aspects of stem cell research, is not just against religious values, but also against our morals in general.

Thank you anon332, for trying to knock some sense into these people, who think that science always does good things. Wake up!

Religion is a vessel of our hopes, fears and a face of the unexplained. Without religion, science would grow like a cancer, and without science the other way around. Balance is what is needed.

For those who believe in God, it would not be that with stem cells we are playing God. The man or woman will live because God had willed it.

For those who don't, embryos are lives. A full life. Of course, this is only my opinion.

The world makes us what we are. It influences our choices and our minds. Everything around us at every moment is changing us.

In short, the world makes us what we are, but we make the world as how it is.

Science without religion is blasphemous. Religion without science is idiocy.

I believe stem cell research is definitely a good thing for people that are sick. I don't think people should be allowed to use a fetus for the research, but embryonic research is ethical. The embryo isn't yet developing human characteristics the way a fetus is.

I will begin by saying that I am a 14 year old girl of undecided religious beliefs. I have read many of these comments, and I have a few ideas which may help/clear up some misconceptions.

As of now, I do not officially believe in God. I do, however, understand many religions and I have accepted religious beliefs and ideas, especially those pertaining to abortion and stem cell research. Here are some of my views on the subject. I have tried to incorporate all the different positions on the subject:

1. Embryos are not fetuses and stem cell research is not the same as abortion. Fetuses are developed forms in which the cells have begun to specialize. Embryos are clusters

2. If an embryo is not used, it can be donated, either to research or to another parent, or it can be thrown away. Based on the dilemmas that seem to be arising, i am assuming that no one is of the belief that throwing away the embryos is in the best interest of anyone. That leaves donation to a parent or donation to research. If the decision is made to donate to another parent, then I think that is fine. If that idea is declined, then I don't see why a group of cells shouldn't be used to potentially help others. If a leftover embryo is just going to be thrown away, then why would the people throwing it away care if it were used. Remember, an embryo does not have even the most remote form of a brain or a heart.

3. If the argument is about whether or not the embryo has a soul, I cannot help. I do not believe that a random grouping of cells has a soul. I do not even necessarily believe in souls.

4. In this article, it says that the most common argument against stem cells is the belief in man not manipulating human life. I cannot say whether or not this is actually the big argument, but for those people who do believe that i will ask, "Have you been vaccinated? Have you ever taken any medicine for an illness? Is this not manipulating life?". If one believes that Man should not be allowed to manipulate life, then they should also believe that medicines and known cures should not be used. if a person gets pneumonia, should the doctors just let them die because they don't believe in manipulating life? Isn't that murder?

As for manipulating the embryo, I can only repeat that I do not personally believe that a group of unspecialized cells should be treated as humans.

5. I do not believe that stem cell research should be used for cloning. As for "creating another you" in case you get diseases later in life, watch or read "My Sister's Keeper".

6. As for the ethics, there are generally five ethical approaches: utilitarian-whatever does the most good and the least harm, Rights-whatever considers the rights of everyone involved, Fairness of Justice-treats all equally and proportionally, Common good-the values of Confucianism or putting the group before the individual, and Virtue-what will make me more of the person i want to be? If using an organism that is displaying the characteristics of life, but that is not developed into a fetus will help others, I don't see how it contradicts any of the ethical approaches.

6. If I decidedly believed in God, I would say, "God made us. I believe he made us for a reason. He gave us prayer and life. He also gave us doctors and medicine. we should use them".

7. For those who say "if your loved one was dying, then your view would change" you are correct. Their view would change, but do we really want a society where people make official decisions based on the health status of their loved ones, when they are stressed and not thinking clearly?

These are the things I have come up with. I didn't mean to offend anyone with my statements, and if I did, I am sorry.

Yeah, they are not using a fetus. they are using an embryo, which there is a huge difference.

Number one, they are not using a fetus; which i agree is human. The embryos used for stem cell research are four to five days old and have no specialized tissues, no nervous system, or heart. Each embryo contains about one-hundred cells, the cells of which are still undifferentiated (meaning that the cell has not decided what it is going to be).

For those of you saying that we are playing god. Is not God's greatest gift the gift of life? After IVF a woman has limited choices what to do with her leftover embryos. She may donate to another couple, donate to research, keep the embryos for maybe future implantation, or she may discard them.

Originally posted here:
What is Stem Cell Research? (with pictures) - wisegeek.com