The Stem Cell Debate

[Garnet2727]

**raises hand** I am pro-life and against traditional in vitro fertilization, i.e. in vitro in which many embryos are created, only some implanted and the rest discarded or frozen and abandoned. I am not however against in vitro fertilization as a whole, simply methods that result in the unnecessary destruction of excess embryos. There is a family at my church that was directly faced with this decision. The wife was unable to conceive naturally and they were seeking in vitro fertilization, but didn't want to have potential children - embryos - destroyed. To you it might just be an embryo in a petri dish, but for them it would have been their child in that dish, their child that would be destroyed so cells could be removed...I could never make that decision.

Thank you. You are the only pro-life person in my experience that has taken what can be the only logical position if a person believes that life begins with a sperm fertilizing an egg. Most hardline pro-life people that I've spoken with simply avoid this issue like the plague.

Do you support illegalizing abortion? If so, would you support illegalizing in vitro fertilization where embryos are discarded or destroyed?

Besides, at the moment embryonic stem cell research is right up there with gene replacement therapy - a great promise that has yet to deliver. In fact, there has been recent success with adult stem cells that is as yet unparalleled by embryonic stem cells.
http://aolsvc.health.webmd.aol.com/content/article/112/110298.htm

This is good news. However, from the article:

"This work is a promising step, and supports the need to study multiple stem cell types for the possibility of treating human neurological injury and disease," says Anderson in a news release."

"Adult stem cells are different from embryonic stem cells. Both types of stem cells can develop into different kinds of cells. Embryonic stem cells may have a wider range of possibilities than adult stem cells."

The jury is still out. I suspect that embryonic stem cell research has been widely and negatively impacted by the controversies generated by the pro-life crowd. That speaks to availability of material, not efficacy of the research.

To you it may be "just an embryo" but in truth it is a unique human being. Sure the potential has not been realized, it has not developed and been born, but how can you look at that embryo in the petri dish with all it's potential and cast it aside?

I can cast it aside because all emotional breast-beating aside, they are only cells in a petri dish. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Sabina41]

Thank you. You are the only pro-life person in my experience that has taken what can be the only logical position if a person believes that life begins with a sperm fertilizing an egg. Most hardline pro-life people that I've spoken with simply avoid this issue like the plague.

Thank you too. I like to think of myself as a logical person. I try anyway.

Do you support illegalizing abortion? If so, would you support illegalizing in vitro fertilization where embryos are discarded or destroyed?

I'm not sure yet. To be honest, I was very much pro-choice until about 6 months ago - I became a Christian nearly a year ago. It wasn't until the conversation I mentioned in my last post that I reconsidered my views. I'm still figuring them out. Part of me says that if we are indeed holding embryoes sacred because of their potential then abortion should be illegal and in vitro that results in the destruction of embryoes should be illegal also. But we do not live in a theocracy and I'm wary of the over involvement of government in people's lives....so I can't really give you an answer to your questions because I don't know it yet myself.

I can cast it aside because all emotional breast-beating aside, they are only cells in a petri dish. Nothing more, nothing less.

It makes me very sad to hear that honoring the possible life of those cells is simply "emotional breast-beating"....but many people do think that way. And I pray for them always.

 

[Garnet2727]

I'm not sure yet. To be honest, I was very much pro-choice until about 6 months ago - I became a Christian nearly a year ago. It wasn't until the conversation I mentioned in my last post that I reconsidered my views. I'm still figuring them out. Part of me says that if we are indeed holding embryoes sacred because of their potential then abortion should be illegal and in vitro that results in the destruction of embryoes should be illegal also. But we do not live in a theocracy and I'm wary of the over involvement of government in people's lives....so I can't really give you an answer to your questions because I don't know it yet myself.

I appreciate the honesty of your answer. It's a difficult subject at best and not at all black and white. My personal take on in vitro fertilization is ambivalence. I have a condition that makes it highly unlikely that I could carry a child to term. And even if I did, that child would likely have some pretty severe problems. I am also, thankfully, past my prime child bearing years.

I never had the desire to have children. I suppose that stems in large part from the knowledge I had from a very early age that having children is not a viable option. So I have difficulty understanding, either intellectually or emotionally, the burning desire that some women have to produce children regardless of the possible health risks to both themselves and their children.

So...I pretty much keep my nose out of the fertilization debate.

It makes me very sad to hear that honoring the possible life of those cells is simply "emotional breast-beating"....but many people do think that way. And I pray for them always.

*chuckle* This is where we view each other across a seemingly uncrossable chasm. I simply cannot wrap my head around the argument that a few cells are anything more than a few cells. You cannot wrap your head around the argument that there is nothing special or sacred about them. Impasse.

But that's ok as long as we don't kill each other over it.

 

[Sabina41]

I appreciate the honesty of your answer. It's a difficult subject at best and not at all black and white. My personal take on in vitro fertilization is ambivalence. I have a condition that makes it highly unlikely that I could carry a child to term. And even if I did, that child would likely have some pretty severe problems. I am also, thankfully, past my prime child bearing years.

I never had the desire to have children. I suppose that stems in large part from the knowledge I had from a very early age that having children is not a viable option. So I have difficulty understanding, either intellectually or emotionally, the burning desire that some women have to produce children regardless of the possible health risks to both themselves and their children.

So...I pretty much keep my nose out of the fertilization debate.

*chuckle* This is where we view each other across a seemingly uncrossable chasm. I simply cannot wrap my head around the argument that a few cells are anything more than a few cells. You cannot wrap your head around the argument that there is nothing special or sacred about them. Impasse.

I agree and I recognize that that chasm exists. Like I said, just six months I'd have been standing next to you. I'm shocked myself that it took a 45 minute Bible study session to change my way of thinking. But as much as your position is influenced by your own life situation mine is undoubtedly influence by the fact that I'm 21 and (God willing) will be married and starting a family in the next 8 to 10 years (still have quite a bit of school to finish...). So even the concept of a fertility problem and having to make that choice is rawer for me because it is a possibility in my life.

I also wanted to say that I definitely do recognize that at the most basic level day old embryoes are little more than 4-8-16 cells in a dish. I'm a scientist and that's how I've been trained to look at things. They're no more an infant than an acorn is an oak tree, both simply have the potential to reach that final point given the right conditions. It's ethics/morality and religion that places the marker of when life begins at different points.

But that's ok as long as we don't kill each other over it.

Agreed! Haha. I think that this might be the most civil abortion/stem cell debate to ever exist on CF.

 

[crumbs2000]

Our problem is using dead babies to do it.

Have you made a Private donation lately to help fund what the governmnet is not.

Dead babies? A dividing cell isn't a baby as far as I know or had been taught at university genetic engineering classes.

 

[Kroger99]

I strongly support stem cell research. I strongly oppose embryonic stem cell research.

Conventional stem cell research using cells from sources that do not involve destroying an embryo is the only thing which has produced positive results -- and has a lot of great potential. Using stem cells from things like umbilical cords is a great field of research.

Embryonic stem cell research has yielded nothing but tumors so far, and there is no reason to think that it will be better than the non-embryonic stem cell research.

Why kill something if you don't have to?
-lee-

I think that you have nailed it here... well said!

I think that is there was anything to this that private companies would be falling all over themselves to fund this.