stem cell research

[daughter]

Members--

There is a myriad of issues surrounding this topic. One of them is defining where life begins and assigning protective rights for newly defined personhood. If an embryo is give personhood status, how will that affect a woman's reproductive rights? Will an embryo's rights supersede its mother's?

Peace,

daughter

 

[Laurel]

Will an embryo's rights supersede its mother's?

It's a complex issue, but the implications of that question scare me.

 

[Moridin187]

I have rather controversial views on this subject...

When it comes to abortion, I think it's wrong, but I also think it's wrong to try and force my beliefs on other people, so I don't press it. I have my right to believe that, and you women out there have your right to get an abortion, it's that simple.

However, when it comes to stem cell research.. Cloning babies just to kill them again is wrong, pure and simple wrong. Not to mention the fact that most scientists with half a brain who aren't creaming their jeans at the prospect of human test subjects are telling us that even once we have the stem cells, we're nowhere near ready to use them to their full potential yet.

But hey, that's just my opinion, and I could be wrong.

 

[*ladylove*]

We just had a whole debate in ethics class on the issue of stem cell research. Actually, which the news doesn't seem to report, stem cells can be taken from the umbilical chord also. And, the stem cells research is not actually coinciding with the research on cloning, they are two slightly different issues.
Also, many stem cells are gathered from the artificial insemination of an ovum. And since many ovum are fertilized but not all are impregnated in the mother, this leaves them to be tossed away. but that does leave the issue of whether they would be harvested at a later time.
I think that most of the argument isn't regarding the whole stem cell research in itself, but more a religion argument on where people stand regarding when life begins. Most of these same people disagree with not only abortion, but artificial insemination and any unnatural "cause of life". My personal opinion is that because of this, and the way it would affect so many different issues both ethical and scientific, there may never be an actual decision made legally as to whether life starts at conception or whether it starts with the first breath of air. Or somewhere in between.

 

[paganangel]

not a big bush fan but...

i believe it was william james who once said, "politics is the art of compromise." while i don't believe this was a successful solution, i give georgie credit for trying.

here's my take. i don't know whether abortion is right or wrong.
i do know it' legal.
even if one believes it shouldn't be legal, for as long as it is we have to let the law follow the vein of an embryo or fetus not being a child as per Roe v. Wade.
just as ru 46 (the "abortion pill") should be legal (it's disgusting that just because abortion opponents can't win their case in the supreme court they would make abortion as difficult, harrowing and trying as possible on the women who choose to receive one) so should stem cell reserch. just logical progressin.

"The law is reason freed from passion." -Aristotle

 

[Gingersnap]

This topic was brought up recently on another thread. My opinion has not changed.

 

[riff]

In the end...

There will be stem cell research in the future.

I agree with the person who says it is a religious issue where people are disagreeing just when a person's life begins.

If you ask me, life wants people to live- while this is not a "moral" absolute, it is a natural law.

It just seems to me that if you look at the cost in human (not political or religious) terms and weigh it against the possible benefits, then I think it is ridiculous not to research.

 

[daughter]

Members--

One of them is defining where life begins and assigning protective rights for newly defined personhood. If an embryo is give personhood status, how will that affect a woman's reproductive rights? Will an embryo's rights supersede its mother's?

When do you think life begins?

Feel free to say whether your view is ethical, moral, religious, political. Hopefully the discussion won't deteriorate into saying who is right or wrong rather it will be an intelligent conversation about how we feel and why.


Peace,

daughter

 

[girl]

In my opinion, life begins when it can live on its own outside the womb. Obviously that does not including food and the like, but if it can breath and function outside the womb, then it is alive, otherwise, in my opinion, it is not.

girl, who isn't sure jumping into this thread as a newbie is terribly wise. Oh well.

 

[daughter]

I don't think you need 'status'

to speak your mind.

Btw, if you spoke up more often, you wouldn't have the 'newbie' sign hanging around your neck either. LOL

Thanks for jumping in.

Peace,

daughter

 

[girl]

Re: I don't think you need 'status'

Btw, if you spoke up more often, you wouldn't have the 'newbie' sign hanging around your neck either. LOL

Hey, I only signed on like 3 days ago! I'm working on it!


Don't worry, when ya get me started, you'll wish I'd shut up.

*grin*
girl

 

[Guest]

Re: Re: stem cell research

 

[patient1]

Well daughter, I think you're one of Laurel's spoons. it's a myriad of issues all right. I only come here to have fun, so if this thread flames like a fuse I'll drop it.These are just my thoughts on these matters, I'm male, so I can't judge when human life becomes human life firsthand. I'm not trying to debate anybody or refute their opinions. I understand this as a pole.
My personal opinion is that human life is sacred. Created in God's own image. I Don't believe in capital punishment ( except for treason in time of war, because life is so cheap under the circumstances that it doesn't make much difference ) or abortion. Apart from that, the only thing that seperates
us from the lower animals are our minds, and they don't function much in the womb or in a coma.
I quite agree that a legal definition of life is important. Now days I usually draw the line at a beating heart .It's an easy determination point. That's about 10 or 11 weeks past conception.But once you establish a recognized life that doesn't mean it should have more rights than the mother.
I don't think a person that can't survive without a heart/lung machine is alive anymore.Let them go.
STEM CELL RESEARCH is being done in many ways. It might one day be possible to produce spare parts from the fat cells of your own body.This would solve rejection problems. I don't like the embryonic stem cell research because it cheapens life. Once we find a " good "use for convicts & unborn babies( like keeping the voters young & alive for extended decades by supplying spare parts), they'll be dismantled in a moment, & we'll make more . It's an easy vote. All crimes could become capital crimes.Anyone who is considered detrimental to society can be forced to benefit it. People will fertilize extra embryos for spare parts. Pretty much like eating your young to improve your survival.
It seems to me that that all of these laws are a big compromised mess. Abortion only in the case of rape or incest? Well, if you believe it's a baby why should the circumstances of it's conception matter whether it lives or dies? It all seems punitive to me....and misdirected...If you're out to punish someone, then why not abort the rapist?
Our champion pro-lifers in the senate adamently opposed fetal cell research, unless it was done with spontaneously aborted fetuses until they found out that abortions might benefit the health of their daughters with a diabetes cure.
If you're wondering, yes I've donated gallons of blood & put myself on the bone marrow registry to support the idea of sharing life rather than taking or trading it.
Identical twins are clones. No problem. I used to be an artificial insemination technician. No problem with that or embryo transfer.
I just think life is precious.
I Rant. That's merely the collection of opinions I live with, luckily nobody else has to. I don't impose.

 

[SA Storm]

.

 

[Azwed]

In my opinion, life begins when it can live on its own outside the womb. Obviously that does not including food and the like, but if it can breath and function outside the womb, then it is alive, otherwise, in my opinion, it is not.

girl, who isn't sure jumping into this thread as a newbie is terribly wise. Oh well.

Ack someone who agrees completly with me. Scary.

This makes perfect sense to me and I don't understand why it does not to anyone else. The only problem is defining when this is. The best NICU's have kept fetuses alive that are only 4 or 5 months into gestation. Does that count? Keeping the baby alive with incubators and IV lines. They are basicly mimicking the womb.

*don't shoot me please*

 

[LadyDarkFire]

My personal opinion is that stem cell research is probably going to be very benificial, and that I hope it continues. To me, it's a woman's body, and a woman's choice. The issue of a god, or a religious belief, has no weight in a court of law. The Seperation of Church and state is one of the key ideals held in this country, and I think it is a good one. In the end, you have a fetus, that will never come to be a child, if aborted, weighed against a possible benefit for alot of people. Even if I did feel differently, I do not believe that anyone has the right to hold another person hostage with opinions. We are all unique, even Identical twins are different in certain ways, and we, IMHO, should all be able to decide our own fates. A fetus is a potential life to me, yes, I'm sad that there might be great promise in that potential life, but I'm not going to say that a pregnant woman Has to carry a child to term.

 

[alltherage]

I have no doubt life begins at conception. Consciousness begins much later obviously but to my mind we are dealing also with potentialities here. I am pro choice, not because i believe that it is a moral act, but because it may be a necessary act. The problem i see with abortion is the numbers. They feed the religious argument and unfortunately there are thousands of cases where abortion is the only choice for the woman. If the religious argument were to win out then these women would suffer and invariably so would there children.

Stem cell research is a practical line of medical research that should be persued.

The cloning of embrio's troubles me. The best arguement for allowing the research to continue that i have seen concerns the potential elimation of rejection in transpant patients. Unfortunately, this seem to be the kind of research that the rich and powerful dream about. Imagine Bill Gates living to 180 years old. We are on the verge of changing the very definition of our existance and that frightens me.

 

[girl]

Ack someone who agrees completly with me. Scary.

Uhm. Thanks.

This makes perfect sense to me and I don't understand why it does not to anyone else. The only problem is defining when this is. The best NICU's have kept fetuses alive that are only 4 or 5 months into gestation. Does that count? Keeping the baby alive with incubators and IV lines. They are basicly mimicking the womb.

In my opinion, no. If it can't live on its own, it dies. That's the way nature works. Am I against medical treatment? Certainly not. If a couple wants to put it in an incubator and nurse it through its weak time, that's absolutely fine and it's their choice.

Another .02 into the pot,
girl

 

[Moridin187]

This makes perfect sense to me and I don't understand why it does not to anyone else.

That's a good question Azwed, and hopefully, I can help express the opinions of at least some of those who believe otherwise. I can't speak for Christians, as a matter of fact, I can't even speak for most Pagans here in that most of us have beliefs that are at least somewhat, if not incredibly different.

All I can do is speak from my beliefs, which most likely No one on this board will completely agree with. As I look at it, there is such a thing as reincarnation, and each chance at life you recieve is a precious gift. A chance to learn all that you can, to experience things as they can only be experienced in this world. That is why I am so against suicide (No, I don't think suicidal people are stupid, I made three unsuccessful attempts in my past), the death penalty, and abortion. Life begins even before conception to me, when whoever decides these things decides that it's your chance to have another life. Ending a life before it ever begins is a horrible, horrible tragedy. It deprives this world of great minds, of great art, things that could have happened but now never will. To take a life, for any reason except to protect another is one of the most terrible crimes there is in my opinion.

But, that's just my opinion.

 

[Graymouse]

Okay . . . like everyone else has already said, I'm just expressing my own opinion here and I'm going to try really hard not to upset or offend anyone. I have a feeling my views are a little left of center. Actually, I just graduated college and I'm about to start my masters in reproductive physiology; one aspect of research within this type of program is stem cell research. Not surprisingly, then, I'm all for it, having read extensively about the type of things being done and the potential benefits. Incidentally, the National Institute of Health maintains a really good web site on stem cell research for anyone that's interested--it's pretty objective and straightforward and it's not too much technical jargon. It's good to check out because it shows all of the potential sources for stem cells--not just embryonic--and it talks about the pros and cons of each. It also mentions, as I forget who said above, that having embryonic stem cells does not mean we have cures for those various diseases yet; however, I don't think that's a good reason not to do the research. Yeah, it's going to be a lot of time and effort, but if we shied away from that we'd never make progress on anything. What it comes down to, like some people have already said, is where you believe life begins--for me, I agree with whoever it was who mentioned a beating heart and the ability to exist independently. Of course this is not a cut-and-dry answer. Tapeworms that must exist within a host are clearly alive. However, I'm willing to ride the line on this gray area when considering the potential benefit and when looking at the fact that embryonic stem cells are derived from blastocysts (approximately the 8-cell stage.) This is well before the development of a central nervous system, a heart, or by all indications, a consciousness.

 

[cymbidia]

Where the FUCK is the SEARCH function when one needs it?

We have discussed the question, "When does 'life' begin?" over and over and over and over since i've been at Lit. I've involved myself in most of those discussions. I want to do some cutting and pasting but SEARCH is **still** unreliable.

When you've made good (bordering on *great*) arguements reflecting your beliefs in the past - several times in the past - it gets harder to do it from scratch again... and again...

Here's the short course:
Life, biological life, begins at conception.
That doesn't mean that single living cell is in any way the concious humanity most of us mean when we use the word "life". It's not "human" - not a "baby" - for months after the sperm cell met the egg cell, they fused, mitosis happened, and the one cell became two. Then four. Then eight. Then a round hollow ball of cells called a blastocyst at the 16-cell stage. On and on.

Blast it!
WHEN is our reliable SEARCH function coming back!

 

[MagicJohnson3333]

Hi all. I'm fairly new here, so forgive me if I don't know the protocol. That said...

I don't know enough about stem cell research to really be able to talk intelligently about it. However, I think that many people on both sides of the argument suffer from the same affliction. My concern mirrors that which many of you had earlier: while there are undoubtedly possibilities for benefits following from stem cell research, there are also the possibilities for "evil" or at least dangerous uses. Some of these were already mentioned, but others include racial profiling at birth, gender profiling, feature selection, "perfection" selection (did anyone see the movie Gattica?), etc.... I think that we need to at least think about and determine the possibilities, and a way to handle them, before we let the cat out of the bag.

As for abortions, I am generally against them. I have some strong religious views, and that obviously has some influence. But I also think that there is somewhat of a double standard. For instance, consider the two scenarios:

1) 6-month fetus (with heartbeat, brain function, etc.), helpless in its mother's womb. Could probably not survive without assistance for more than a few hours.

2) 6-minute old baby (normal birth), helpless in its mother's arms. Could probably not survive without assistance for more than a few hours.

Question: Why is it that in the first scenario, the mother has the right to terminate the life (I won't say "kill" since we agree to disagree on that issue), and the mother's "rights" are sacrosanct; whereas in the second, the mother would probably go to prison if she killed the baby, and we don't really care what her reason for doing it was?

Please do not take offense to these opinions. I have several friends who have had abortions, and I still love them all; we just disagree. (Sorry if this is too long...)

 

[bearlee]

I probably have more interest in stem cell research than many people because I have a disease(non-fatal) that would benefit greatly from the research. Yet, I do believe life begins at conception so, even though it would be of great benefit to me, I oppose it. On the other hand, I support the death penalty-go figure!

 

[Moridin187]

I probably have more interest in stem cell research than many people because I have a disease(non-fatal) that would benefit greatly from the research. Yet, I do believe life begins at conception so, even though it would be of great benefit to me, I oppose it. On the other hand, I support the death penalty-go figure!

Ever read the stats on how many people who get the DP are proven innocent, and how many more Should have been proven innocent?

 

[Laurel]

Blast it!
WHEN is our reliable SEARCH function coming back!

I know, I know. It's driving me crazy as well. I've been bugging Manu about it, but we just can't rebuild the search index without crashing the site until we get more hardware or software or fix something, or something or other. We've tried a couple of times with bad results.

If they can eventually cultivate stem cells via cloning or other technologies - grow them in a petrie dish - then I really don't see what the problem is. There are soo many diseases - life-threatening illnesses killing tens of thousands of people each year - that would benefit from this research.

As for the "playing God" argument, surgeons play God when they revive a heart attack victim. We play God when we take antibiotics to fight infections that might otherwise kill us. If it were your father with Alzheimers, or your child with a fatal brain disease that stem cell research could eventually cure, would you sit on your hands and watch your loved one die? I doubt it.