Stem Cell and Organ Harvest

[SolomonVII]

Recently Geoge Bush vetoed his first bill pertaining to the issue of funding research that usrf fetal tissue for harvest. For him, it was a question of morality, for it involved drawing profit from the death of a life.
It was not so much a question of creating life for spare parts, but using fetal material already widely available through abortion.

Most states and countries do not share the morality of Bush. However, most have not gone the way of China and allowed the harvest of organs from condemned criminals.
Here too though, it is not a question of creating life for the purpose of harvesting valuable human tissue, but rather a question of taking advantage of a tissue that is already available.

Now the question is, is there not a moral equivalence between the two cases. While neither the sanctity of life at birth nor capital punishment are universally accepted, neither are they universally rejected.

So, would we be imposing our own morality on the wishes and needs of citizens by accepting one form of potential medical enhancement, but not the other?

As Christians, what ought ot be our moral position on this question?

 

[OD3]

If it helps people live, I am all for it. The dead fetus's are just gonna get thrown in the trash can anyways, might as well use them for something good.

 

[Sam Gamgee]

both options are morally acceptable for me.

I think that the use of stem cells will save millions of lives in the future. I'm ok with losing a few lives now to save millions of lives in the future.

 

[BrokenGhost]

#1, what happens when abortion is not practiced anymore? Where will they get the material

I think that the use of stem cells will save millions of lives in the future. I'm ok with losing a few lives now to save millions of lives in the future.

#2 Why stop at criminals, and we will just go to all those that willfully and repeatedly break Gods Law too, and we will start harvesting from the homosexuals. Its ok to lose some now to save millions that do follow the Bible.

 

[OD3]

#1, what happens when abortion is not practiced anymore? Where will they get the material



#2 Why stop at criminals, and we will just go to all those that willfully and repeatedly break Gods Law too, and we will start harvesting from the homosexuals. Its ok to lose some now to save millions that do follow the Bible.

Are we not all EQUAL in God's eyes? Ive noticed that some Christians seem to hold themselves above others, when we should regard everyone as our equals instead. I have friends who are not christian and I do not hold it against them or consider myself more "correct" or more "important".

In fact, saving a homosexual is probably more of a wonderful thing in God's eyes than saving someone who is already saved.

 

[Harlan Norris]

It never stops does it.Mans desire to live forever,without pain or problem.Such things are not and never will be possible in this life.We have to be careful about what we do,trying to achieve the impossible.One thing is certain, the cells in question are human.I have to go on record as saying, that in spite of any potential cures that may be made available by stem cell research,the potential for outrageous abuse of some people, for the sake of others, is likely.

 

[notto]

#1, what happens when abortion is not practiced anymore? Where will they get the material

Same place as always, which isn't from abortions.

 

[belladonic-haze]

Uh, I miss an option....namely that I totally agree with stemcell research and organ donation....or harvesting.....what has to do this with criminals? Are their lives less worth than others?...I am an organ donor myself, but they can't probably use not much, just eyes and skin I guess.....

 

[illudium_phosdex]

I have a rare form of muscular dystrophy. It can cause my extremities to become virtually paralized at times. It can cause numbness or excrutiating pain. And it causes extreme fatigue. In order to function properly, I really need about 10 to 12 hours of sleep. All that being said, I realize that stem cell research may very well help me and others who suffer from my disease in the future. However, I still can't condone embryonic stem cell research. The fact that the embryos used are abortion and fertility clinic cast off's makes not a whit of difference to me. Two wrongs will never equal a right.

As for harvesting organs from convicted criminals, I'll have to think on that one.

 

[ChrisCountryGirl]

It never stops does it.Mans desire to live forever,without pain or problem.Such things are not and never will be possible in this life.We have to be careful about what we do,trying to achieve the impossible.One thing is certain, the cells in question are human.I have to go on record as saying, that in spite of any potential cures that may be made available by stem cell research,the potential for outrageous abuse of some people, for the sake of others, is likely.

I totally agree with you. I think we need to draw the line somewhere. Some people just need to accept that death is inevitable. It's going to happen someday wheather you like it or not. I also think one reason why people may want to prolong life is because they want to make up for "missed time" with family or have fun/enjoy life. My philosophy is "Live today as it's your last"

 

[SolomonVII]

Uh, I miss an option....namely that I totally agree with stemcell research and organ donation....or harvesting.....what has to do this with criminals? Are their lives less worth than others?...I am an organ donor myself, but they can't probably use not much, just eyes and skin I guess.....

Many of the criminals executed in China are young and with healty organs. Rather than burying the organs with the condemned criminal, the Chinese government harvest them.

Since the Chiense government executes so many people, and because the availability of good organs are always in short supply, there is a definite captialistc opportunity there, according to the laws of supply and demand.
The Chinese government has already decided that the life of the criminal is worthy of death. It is they who are exercising the option of organ harvesting, and not the criminal who has given up his/her rights when he/she ran afoul of the government.

Is this morally acceptable?

 

[Harlan Norris]

I totally agree with you. I think we need to draw the line somewhere. Some people just need to accept that death is inevitable. It's going to happen someday wheather you like it or not. I also think one reason why people may want to prolong life is because they want to make up for "missed time" with family or have fun/enjoy life. My philosophy is "Live today as it's your last"

I'll agree.

 

[13thDesciple]

Recently Geoge Bush vetoed his first bill pertaining to the issue of funding research that usrf fetal tissue for harvest. For him, it was a question of morality, for it involved drawing profit from the death of a life.
It was not so much a question of creating life for spare parts, but using fetal material already widely available through abortion.

Most states and countries do not share the morality of Bush. However, most have not gone the way of China and allowed the harvest of organs from condemned criminals.
Here too though, it is not a question of creating life for the purpose of harvesting valuable human tissue, but rather a question of taking advantage of a tissue that is already available.

Now the question is, is there not a moral equivalence between the two cases. While neither the sanctity of life at birth nor capital punishment are universally accepted, neither are they universally rejected.

So, would we be imposing our own morality on the wishes and needs of citizens by accepting one form of potential medical enhancement, but not the other?

As Christians, what ought ot be our moral position on this question?

First, he didn't ban stem cell research. He banned the creation and harvesting of fetus's for their stem cells which is genocide. Using already dead fetus is still perfectly legal and I believe perfectly justified.
As to the China thing, I can understand that resonably. If they are going to die on death row anyway, why not put the body the executed criminal to use? Also, China is doing far worse in terms of criminal justice that should be brought up, such as the prejudice, jailing, forced labor, torture, and execution of citizen and imigrant Christians.
Just my two cents.

 

[belladonic-haze]

Many of the criminals executed in China are young and with healty organs. Rather than burying the organs with the condemned criminal, the Chinese government harvest them.

Since the Chiense government executes so many people, and because the availability of good organs are always in short supply, there is a definite captialistc opportunity there, according to the laws of supply and demand.
The Chinese government has already decided that the life of the criminal is worthy of death. It is they who are exercising the option of organ harvesting, and not the criminal who has given up his/her rights when he/she ran afoul of the government.

Is this morally acceptable?

Depends, if the criminal agrees with it, I do not see a problem......BUT I believe we should harvest all healthy organs from all people who are brain death, no matter if they were criminal or not....Why? because there are too many people out there that die because they don't have enough hearts or kidneys or loungs or livers to help them and with these organs they can live on for their children and family.

It sounds very strange and morally wrong, but I will need a new heart in maybe - if I am lucky - 15 years. That is why I applaud stem cell research. Maybe we can create new organs from stem cells, organs that have the same genetic composition as the reciever. No expensive meds will be needed to avoid rejection and no one needs to be donor.....I know this is something for the future, but I really hope that one day we will able to help more people then we can help nowadays. I wish they could use my organs, but I use meds and because of a bad heart my organs get slowly damaged by lack of oxygen (I have an enlarged liver already because of my bad heart)........

Maybe I am wrong, morally and being selfish. Some people who are ill accept that they will die young. I don't want to die young. I already had to give up children because of my heart.....but the sould is the important part of the body, the soul connects to God.....and the body is just the temple that holds the soul, the person who you are. Some have beautiful shinning temples, mine is more a hovel than a temple....lol.......

Jesus taught me that sometimes giving up your body is the greatest gift you can give to this world, and the Talmud I believe says "Save one life and you save the world...." I have been an organ donor all my life, but I can't be a donor in that way anymore. I also think about giving up my body for science after I am death, so sience can learn from it and help other people who suffer in the same way.... I have a beautiful life, I want others to have that too.....so I dream that someone in this world thinks the same way. My Mom would give up her heart in a heart beat for me....but that is not what I want. But using organs of a body where the soul already has moved on...why not....

 

[SolomonVII]

Depends, if the criminal agrees with it, I do not see a problem......

IN the case of China, the issue was raised by the Falun gong, a persecuted religious sect in China that is claiming that their members are being executed as a means of having their organs harvested.
It is not a case of the criminal freely giving anything.

BUT I believe we should harvest all healthy organs from all people who are brain death, no matter if they were criminal or not....Why?

I have 'organ-donor' listed on my driver's license. I agree, organ donation is a good thing.

because there are too many people out there that die because they don't have enough hearts or kidneys or loungs or livers to help them and with these organs they can live on for their children and family

.
Agreed. there is a great need.
And the rumor has it that many wealthy canadians are the ones going to China for their much-need transplants.

It sounds very strange and morally wrong, but I will need a new heart in maybe - if I am lucky - 15 years. That is why I applaud stem cell research. Maybe we can create new organs from stem cells, organs that have the same genetic composition as the reciever.

I personally don't thing organ transplants are morally wrong. There is a moral boundary being transgressed however, when a human life is being sacraficed in order that I might live.

No expensive meds will be needed to avoid rejection and no one needs to be donor.....I know this is something for the future, but I really hope that one day we will able to help more people then we can help nowadays. I wish they could use my organs, but I use meds and because of a bad heart my organs get slowly damaged by lack of oxygen (I have an enlarged liver already because of my bad heart)........

Maybe I am wrong, morally and being selfish. Some people who are ill accept that they will die young. I don't want to die young. I already had to give up children because of my heart.....but the sould is the important part of the body, the soul connects to God.....and the body is just the temple that holds the soul, the person who you are. Some have beautiful shining temples, mine is more a hovel than a temple....lol.......

Life is a precius gift. I hope that it works out for you.

Jesus taught me that sometimes giving up your body is the greatest gift you can give to this world, and the Talmud I believe says "Save one life and you save the world...." I have been an organ donor all my life, but I can't be a donor in that way anymore. I also think about giving up my body for science after I am death, so sience can learn from it and help other people who suffer in the same way.... I have a beautiful life, I want others to have that too.....so I dream that someone in this world thinks the same way. My Mom would give up her heart in a heart beat for me....but that is not what I want. But using organs of a body where the soul already has moved on...why not...

I just want to make the choices clear here. There is no option in the poll that questions whether organ donation is wrong, or whether receving an organ is a moral breach.
The poll questions the morality of Chrisitan in regards to what lengths we would go to in order to set up a human tissue industry.

 

[SolomonVII]

Freely given, the gift of our human body is a gift from our heart.

However, does not harvesting organs from human life deemed not worth living in effect objectify the concept of body? The dualism that sees us as consisting of body and soul inherently ogjectifies the body, so that fetal tissue can be seen as no more than tissue, or the organ of one deemed socially undisirable as yet being objectively useful for the paying members of a society.

It is this objectifying of the human body, and taking away of choice that strikes me as being morally repugnant.

 

[IisJustMe]

both options are morally acceptable for me.

Ignoring for the moment that you would condone the surgical removal of organs from an uncooperative human being, incarcerated for reasons that but for the grace of God go all of us, I'll address this ...

I think that the use of stem cells will save millions of lives in the future. I'm ok with losing a few lives now to save millions of lives in the future.

My question to you (because I can't get any of the researchers to respond to me) is why so much investment in what thus far is a dead end? Adult stem cells, fat stem cells, and umbilical stem cells have thus far resulted in new treatments for 69 diseases and genetic disorders. in only about eight years' committed research under adequate funding. By the same token, embryonic stem cell research has been well funded and the subject of committed research for over twice as long, and how many diseases and genetic disorders have been treated from this research?

Zero, zip, nada, none, big fat goose-egg.

In fact, even though they've worked twice as long, embryonic stem cell researchers say they are still 20 years from a significant breakthrough. Meanwhile, umbilical stem cell research is showing great promise in the "golden goose" of embryonic research: spinal cord injuries.

Given all this (and you can look it up anywhere you like on the web, the story will be the same) why the rush to work with embryos? Anyone want to hazard a guess? I'll give you a few hours to kick it around. I know the answer. I'll post it later.

 

[Sam Gamgee]

Anyone want to hazard a guess? I'll give you a few hours to kick it around. I know the answer. I'll post it later.

OK, it's been a few hours.

Why don't you share with us your wisdom and knowledge. I'm waiting with breathless antici....

























































pation

 

[IisJustMe]

OK, it's been a few hours.

Why don't you share with us your wisdom and knowledge.

OK, fine, but I think it interesting you didn't bother to answer my question about the "great rush" to embryonic stem cell research. You might take the time after I give my answer to respond to my points that other, mature stem cells, or the umbilical stem cells (which don't require the taking of a human life to harvest) offer more promise.

The answer is cloning. The researchers who are pushing embryonic stem cell research are hoping to develop a cloning technique under the guise of stem cell research. Admittedly, not all of them. In fact, less than half. But if even one wants to attempt that subterfuge, I would think it would be enough of an alarm among Christians to rally against the concept. Going back again to my point that other stem cells already have given results that ebryonic stem cells are at least 20 years from producing, if they ever do.

 

[JulySheMustFly]

Excuse me. . . Does organ harvesting involve killing a person soley for their organs?