Possible Cures Within Reach
Stem cell research has been quite a controversial one. On one hand you have those who are in the Pro-Life camp who believe all life is sacred, even if that life is just a bunch of cells without a specific purpose encoded into it yet. On the other hand, you have the scientific community along with many who are suffering and waiting for a cure to a disease that could be found within these same cells. What one believes could mean the difference between life or death to one man or to forever kill a potential life of another.
A stem cell is a blank slate. When it is formed within the female, it has the possibility to become almost anything. It is not a heart, a brain, a nervous system, or any vital organ, but it has the potential to become any of these units. As it is not formed into being anything other than a blank cell, it does not have the ability to think, reason, feel, and is certainly not a viable life form although ironically it has the form to support a viable life.
The objectional part, for those on the Right To Life side is in order to obtain such cells, an embryo must be sacrificed. They are correct. These cells do not just appear out of thin air. These cells taken for experimental tests are from aborted fetus tissues and in some cases with the parental permission from a miscarried fetus. The cells do not come from the fetus of people who want to keep their babies to full term - these are the so-called "throw away" babies as the Pro-lifers term it.
Should there ever come a time when these cells can be obtained without having to use a fetus, perhaps the Pro-life camp would not object. However, the fear is that if this practice, as is, continues and is the norm then many fetuses would be created in order to sacrifice to the medical industry which could, arguably profit largely from this business. For those who fight for the life of the unborn, this serves as further proof of mankind's devaluation of humanity and life itself.
On the other hand, you have those who do not see the same objections. Not everyone views this embyronic stage as a viable human life, but only as a potential human life. Many would argue as long as even one child in the world does not have a loving home, no one should be forced to bring another one into the world if they cannot be responsible for their fate. A person in this camp may state, "If one values life so much, perhaps they should start putting a value on the life that has already been brought into our world."
Some religious people place a high value on the need for suffering. Things often change when it is they who are suffering or if it were one of their children. If the sacrifice of an otherwise trashed embyro could save a child dying from AIDS, cancer or suffering from life-long diabetes, would this not be more of a value of life than being concerned with the fate of an embryo that was heading for the hazardous waste bin?
Organ transplant programmes are always in need for donors, but that supply is often too short and many die waiting for hope. A stem cell could possibly be that organ which may save a life.
Blood supplies do lack from time to time and in some areas may be unsafe. However a blank cell could produce copious amounts of your own blood to replace your needs when necessary.
A child dying from bone cancer could have a fighting chance for life if a blank cell can replace the cancerous cells making the child whole again without as much dangerous chemo or radiation therapy.
These are all examples of lives that have already come into being that need to have a value placed upon them. The stem cells of embryos are waste products. Should the research be disallowed, these embryos will be medical waste and none of the existing people will have a shot for a better life.
Which is the lesser of two evils?
http://www.callendamornen.co.uk
A stem cell is a blank slate. When it is formed within the female, it has the possibility to become almost anything. It is not a heart, a brain, a nervous system, or any vital organ, but it has the potential to become any of these units. As it is not formed into being anything other than a blank cell, it does not have the ability to think, reason, feel, and is certainly not a viable life form although ironically it has the form to support a viable life.
The objectional part, for those on the Right To Life side is in order to obtain such cells, an embryo must be sacrificed. They are correct. These cells do not just appear out of thin air. These cells taken for experimental tests are from aborted fetus tissues and in some cases with the parental permission from a miscarried fetus. The cells do not come from the fetus of people who want to keep their babies to full term - these are the so-called "throw away" babies as the Pro-lifers term it.
Should there ever come a time when these cells can be obtained without having to use a fetus, perhaps the Pro-life camp would not object. However, the fear is that if this practice, as is, continues and is the norm then many fetuses would be created in order to sacrifice to the medical industry which could, arguably profit largely from this business. For those who fight for the life of the unborn, this serves as further proof of mankind's devaluation of humanity and life itself.
On the other hand, you have those who do not see the same objections. Not everyone views this embyronic stage as a viable human life, but only as a potential human life. Many would argue as long as even one child in the world does not have a loving home, no one should be forced to bring another one into the world if they cannot be responsible for their fate. A person in this camp may state, "If one values life so much, perhaps they should start putting a value on the life that has already been brought into our world."
Some religious people place a high value on the need for suffering. Things often change when it is they who are suffering or if it were one of their children. If the sacrifice of an otherwise trashed embyro could save a child dying from AIDS, cancer or suffering from life-long diabetes, would this not be more of a value of life than being concerned with the fate of an embryo that was heading for the hazardous waste bin?
Organ transplant programmes are always in need for donors, but that supply is often too short and many die waiting for hope. A stem cell could possibly be that organ which may save a life.
Blood supplies do lack from time to time and in some areas may be unsafe. However a blank cell could produce copious amounts of your own blood to replace your needs when necessary.
A child dying from bone cancer could have a fighting chance for life if a blank cell can replace the cancerous cells making the child whole again without as much dangerous chemo or radiation therapy.
These are all examples of lives that have already come into being that need to have a value placed upon them. The stem cells of embryos are waste products. Should the research be disallowed, these embryos will be medical waste and none of the existing people will have a shot for a better life.
Which is the lesser of two evils?
http://www.callendamornen.co.uk
posted by Callen Damornen at 7:19:00 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home