Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Killing Our Children for the Sake of Science
"Rescue those who are unjustly sentenced to death; don't stand back and let them die. Don't try to avoid responsibility by saying you didn't know about it. For God knows all hearts and He sees you. He keeps watch over your souls, and He knows you know. And He will judge all people according to what they have done." Proverbs 24: 11-12
In order to establish a case for or against embryonic stem cell research, we must evaluate what is "ethical" in terms of our own beliefs and the beliefs established by our laws and government. We also must establish if we are debating federal funding of embryonic stem cell research or embryonic stem cell research as a whole.
Embryonic stem cell research involves extracting about 30 stem cells from an embryo when it is four or five days old. When the stem cells are removed, the embryo is destroyed.
The basic choice we must make is if by extracting these stem cells we are merely destroying a lifeless embryo or murdering a human being. My opinion is that life starts the moment of conception. Jeremiah 1:5 states, "I knew you before I formed you in your mother's womb". Creating life for the purpose of destroying it seems to be a heartless and immoral process.
Embryonic stem cells can be coaxed into becoming any type of tissue inside the human body, but research has shown that there are various types of adult stem cells that manipulated into being any of the mature cells that make up our bodies. The downfall is that adult stem cells are less versatile than embryonic stem cells because they can only become the cells in a certain category. However, we also have the ability to use, "cord blood derived embryonic like stem cells." These stem cells are not as versatile as embryonic stem cells, but they are more versatile than adult stem cells.
The debate on embryonic stem cell research boils down to ethics, defined by dictionary.com as, "a system of moral principles". Do we destroy life in order to find cures that could save lives?
Extracting the stem cells from embryos as though they hold no life would be like creating a child in order to harvest their organs. Yes, those organs can help save the lives of those in desperate need of an organ, however, is that ethical? How can logic allow you to believe that creating a child in order to harvest its stem cells, and in turn kill the child, is okay?
Now, some may say, "an embryo is not a human being yet", “it is a form that is not yet a life” or I have even heard the argument that an acorn has the ability to be an oak tree, but is not yet an oak tree and that human life is formed the same way. However, the last time I heard, oak trees didn't have souls.
So the question would be; why do scientists not harvest adult or cord blood stem cells to do the same research they are currently doing with embryonic stem cells?
Scientists have yet to create something living from something that is non-living. I imagine the moral ground would ask, "Can you create a human from something that is non-human?"
President Obama said at the White House, "In recent years, when it comes to stem cell research, rather than furthering discovery, our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values". He also signed a document that reverses the ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. I wonder how a Godly man can support research that obviously treads over and dismisses God's word. I do not see where the choice could ever be "false" when we use our moral values to make decisions.
When it comes to federal funding of this research, we have to consider that the only thing Bush did was ban Federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, but did not ban the actual practice in the private sector. His position was merely that the government should not participate in funding a program that "takes an innocent life."
This brings us to the second issue: should our government give funding to scientists in order to further embryonic stem cell research? The Supreme Court voted in Roe vs. Wade that killing an embryo/fetus is justifiable. Following along with the basic ideal, the government funding of embryonic stem cell research should also be okay.
The bottom line really comes down to morals and Individual beliefs. In a country that is so diverse, it is hard to make such a complex issue black and white; however, our country was founded on Christian ideals and those same ideals should be what guide us in our law making. I support stem cell research, but I believe we have avenues that are just as productive and less destructive then using embryonic stem cells for this type of research.
Author notes
Written 03/27/09
In a list
Life
Comments
1 - 44 of 44
-
I don't know if I believe we should use stem cells in the medical or scientific fields. I know that it is a fact that at 21 days after conception the sex of a fetus is determined. I don't understand the Christian versus Non-Christian debate that has found its way to your column. I think religion weighs far too heavy on the minds of those who brand themselves without a religious prod.
I am a born-again Christian, and will never denounce my faith in an all knowing, seeing, and ever-present Supreme Being. I believe that Christ died, rose from the dead, and ascended into heaven to sit at the right hand of His father.
I also believe that because Christ sacrificed His life for a sinner like me, I may very well make a wrong choice, and He stands in the gap for that decision. That does not make me better or worse than the person who does not grasp the same concept as I do. It simply makes me saved by God's grace and mercy, as He saves the world on a daily basis.
It is evident that your writing has stirred the pot. Good for you! This piece is quite informational, and I thank you for having the courage to write it from your heart, knowing that the possibility of controversy existed.
I LOVE YOU ♥
Renee
-
-
I hope never to disrespect someone elses feelings when it comes to issues of God. I share my views and even if the other person disagrees, I feel like I've done my part.
Every one has a right to their opinion. I'm just sad for those who dont know God because they will forever burn in the depths of hell.
I love you right back.
Criss
-
-
I naturally fully support the decision of the new US government to move into the 21st century and to get rid of the previous bible belt inspired bans which probably cost thousands of lives. Mercifully, the rest of the world moved on without such "Christian" bigotry. Now the USA can try and catch up.
-
-
This is part of the reason our world is going to hell in a handbasket (not a pretty one either). No one takes accountability. The moral standard in this world is getting lower and lower each year.
-
-
Let's put it like this: I totally and utterly disagree with you. Moral standards are not declining. They have always been low and tinpot evangelical religion is a major contributor to international stupidity.
-
-
-
I was surprised to read that you support stem cell research at the end there after so much argument against the actual use of stem cells.
Very few people dare suggest that babies will be created for the sole purpose of harvesting stem cells. Most arguments I've heard involve taking it from babies that the mother is planning to abort anyway. Considering the fact that aborted babies are thrown into an "infectious waste" trashbag at abortion "clinics" and not given a Christian burial, it's no great leap for the liberal mind to think, "Why not use all that 'material' that we're otherwise just going to throw away" (especially if there's money to be made from it - the real God in this world.)
The truth is self-evident - life begins when it begins - as soon as the egg is fertilized. Liberals cry for and want to extend Constitutional rights to terrorist / non-citizen prisoners of war, but that compassion somehow doesn't extend to unborn children. They cry for the people who want us all dead when they're waterboarded but they have no similar desire to protect millions of babies from the scalpels of butchers in white coats. It's a national disgrace.
Obama is not a true Christian. He's already proven that in many ways. But he's young, charismatic and eloquent. That's all that matters to the current crop of Americans - the dumbest populace in our history.
Other than that, everything's great. lol -
-
Not so, Mark.
You said, "The truth is self-evident - life begins when it begins - as soon as the egg is fertilized." This is not self-evident at all. If so, for "Christians", a spontaneous miscarriage at 3-4 weeks would require a baptism of the pool of blood and tissue, followed by a funeral. -
-
Edna,
That's a very good point. In fact, I don't know why Christians don't baptize and bury miscarriages as a general practice, considering their adamant belief that life begins at the moment of conception. On the other hand, most Christians I have known mourn the death of a baby in the womb, too. A few have even had funerals for lost fetuses. It all depends on how far the Christian in question wants to follow his/her faith, and how sensitive they are in general. Of course, the depth of mourning is more acute when a fully developed child dies, but one can also mourn what might have been, wouldn't you agree? Almost every woman I've ever known who had an abortion said they would mourn it till the day they die. Of course, then there are those who use abortion as a birth control method, having one abortion after another, and seem to be missing a crucial sensitivity/conscience chip.
Anyway, love the self-portrait. lol Hope you're well.
-
-
How nice to at least partially agree with you!
Dear Mark,
I naturally agree that a mother who loses a child before birth may well "mourn" it, whether she is Christian or not. However, to hold a funeral for an unborn foetus seems to be a gross waste of time and money. Only a rich country can afford such frivolities. I would also agree that many women who have had abortions have regrets later and imagine what their unborn child might have become. However, probably rather more are very pleased to have got rid of an unwanted child which would have ruined their lives; and many others have spared the world a brat who would probably have grown up to be a lowlife like themselves.
You commented, "Of course, then there are those who use abortion as a birth control method, having one abortion after another, and seem to be missing a crucial sensitivity/conscience chip." The first part is sadly true but the second part, although a neat quip from you, is the incorrect conclusion, I feel. I'd amend your sentence to, "There are those who use abortion as a birth control method, having one abortion after another, and seem to be missing a crucial intelligence chip in their DNA chain."
I also love YOUR self-portrait! Nice to see you have lost none of your willingness to have an argument.
-
-
A spontaneous abortion is not the same as creating a child to kill it. Miscarriages are natural events. Extracting stem cells from an embryo is not natural. A baby lost to a miscarriage is mourned the same way a baby lost after it's born would be. Baptism is a way of giving your child to God, in a miscarriage, the baby has already gone to God, because He called it Home.
-
-
I can only attribute your lack of rationality to your having been indocrinated and brain-washed by evangelican Christians. When discussing science you really simply can't use phrases like "in a miscarriage, the baby has already gone to God, because He called it Home," and expect anyone rational and sane to take you seriously. End of conversation.
-
-
Science is not all factual, there are a lot of theories. If I wish to discuss science and include the notion of God, than I will.
My comment was in response to yours and was simply saying that baptism is to give your child to God. There is no reason to have a baptism for a miscarried pregnancy because the child has already returned to God.
I was not talking about science, I was talking about life. -
-
Wrong again!
1] Science IS about facts. But naturally it includes some theories which may still need validation. Evolution is not one of those theories, but is fact.
2] You were not talking about "life"; you were talking about irrational, illogical and superstitious faith. To talk of miscarried foetuses "returning to God" is verging on religious insanity.
3] Naturally I have no possible objection to anyone's faith in the supernatural whether it be the Tooth Fairy, witches and goblins or Christianity. That is their private affair and should not be foisted on others. However, I must object when people confuse facts and faith and try to impede scientific progress which may well save thousands, if not millions, of lives on the grounds of religious superstitions. -
-
1) Right.. that is why it is called the "evolution theory". It's a theory that they can't prove and it evolves as they find new information that "might" be true.
The evolution theory is just as convincing as the big bang theory.
But hey, if you want to believe that you came from a one celled organism or that you came from a monkey be my guest. But then let me ask you one thing.. where did that cell come from or that monkey?
2) Where else would the soul go? Or rather, where does your soul come from? Give me some scientic facts about that. I feel like every one is allowed to have their beliefs, but it's so sad to believe you came from nothing and will return to nothing. There is no purpose in life with those views.
You dont believe in God.. I do.. nothing is going to change that, so instead of being insulting, present some facts or consider this conversation complete.
-
-
Wrong and Wrong again!
1] It WAS originally put forward as the Theory of Evolution. But now it's fact. You are entitled to believe in the fairy story of Genesis if you wish, but that's about as likely as pigs flying. But funnier.
You say: "But hey, if you want to believe that you came from a one celled organism or that you came from a monkey be my guest. But then let me ask you one thing.. where did that cell come from or that monkey? " That's a silly question, beloved of the god-squad. Equally, if your god created everything where did HE come from? Think before you answer and "He always was is not logical".
2] You say "Where else would the soul go? Or rather, where does your soul come from?" And my answer is: what soul?
I agree that everyone is allowed to have his or her beliefs (however ill-informed), but it's so sad to believe you were created by a supernatural being, that science is all a load of rubbish and that a mythical creature is all-powerful. There is no intelligence in life with those views. You really should try not to be so blinkered, but I suppose it must be hard growing up in a bible-belt land of primitive superstitions, misinformation and brainwashing.
So instead of being foolish,present some facts or consider this conversation complete.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I think I was misunderstood Sunshine. I do support stem cell research but there are other ways other than EMBRYONIC stem cells.
"I support stem cell research, but I believe we have avenues that are just as productive and less destructive then using embryonic stem cells for this type of research."
I support "stem cell research", however, I dont support embryonic stem cell research. There are other ways to harvest stem cells, cord blood is one and adult stem cells are another. Although they are not as versitile as embryonic stem cells, they dont kill babies and so I think we should take our research in the direction of seeing how we can utilize the other avenues instead of making babies just to murder them.
Is that more clear friend?!
I did vote for Obama, but I in no way can understand how a "Godly" man can think killing children for the sake of research is OK. He's def not earning points from me!
Criss
-
-
Devided
It is with some measure of concern that I would venture to take a stance on this issue, for what if the life you will save is your child's life..
Would you be willing to have a frozen embreyo used in a situation where it would help further a cure for one of your own younger children?
I am hard pressed to say no for I know to most the love of family comes above all.
-
-
Would I kill one of my children to save the other... absolutly NOT!
-
-
Perplexing.
This article is very perplexing and it makes you think. Certainly there is no case of stem cells being used to help a person walk again. I do believe in cord blood, I agree with you that there should be a way both sides of the debate can find mutual ground.
-
"Jeremiah 1:5 states, "I knew you before I formed you in your mother's womb". Creating life for the purpose of destroying it seems to be a heartless and immoral process."
In parts of this it seemed that you had contradicted yourself, on one hand you say that it is a "heartless and immoral process" yet at the end you state that you support stem cell research.
I agree with parts of this, it wasn't clear which point you were trying to make, rather it was just immoraly wrong, against religion, or something wrong with the politics in your country.
I'm for Stem Cell Research because it advances science, if it defies religion then let those who believe, have the quarrel with the system but not accept medical treatment that has helped the development of their child. Which the research has done.
You've made some valid points in this,
thank you for sharing this with me
Kind regards
Sophie
-
-
I think you misread..
I do support stem cell research but there are other ways other than EMBRYONIC stem cells.
"I support stem cell research, but I believe we have avenues that are just as productive and less destructive then using embryonic stem cells for this type of research."
I support "stem cell research", however, I dont support embryonic stem cell research. There are other ways to harvest stem cells, cord blood is one and adult stem cells are another. Although they are not as versitile as embryonic stem cells, they dont kill babies and so I think we should take our research in the direction of seeing how we can utilize the other avenues instead of making babies just to murder them.
Is that more clear?
-
-
Sadly, it does not.
You arguemtent wasn't clear enough nor was it convincing.
You call the cells "babies" but they are not. Nothing about them would be developed nor would it feel. Therefor it isn't murder, I don't classify it as murder because it's necessary for the development of scientific research.
Like I stated in my previous comment, let those who do not agree with stem cell research to not accept treatment from medical professionals who have advanced science in making the development possible.
I did like what you were portraying, I just feel like you weren't convincing enough to get your point accross, It needs to be better constructed and not only that, you need to know completly what avenue you are from, which arguement you belong to, whether it is religious, political or moral.
Kind regards.
Sophie
-
-
I guess anyone who doesnt believe in God could make the case that an embryo is not a "baby" or a child or even a human, but those who know God know that is not true.
I'm not religious at all. I am spiritual and I feel like morality comes with knowing God. So those are one in the same. Second, I was giving the case of the political side because it's important to the debate. In no way do I think that taking an embryo and destrying it is okay.
I said "President Obama said at the White House, "In recent years, when it comes to stem cell research, rather than furthering discovery, our government has forced what I believe is a false choice between sound science and moral values". He also signed a document that reverses the ban on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. I wonder how a Godly man can support research that obviously treads over and dismisses God's word. I do not see where the choice could ever be "false" when we use our moral values to make decisions."
I think it's pretty clear which side of the fense I am on when it comes to EMBRYONIC stem cells. There are other ways of doing similar research without destroying life.
Once a person has it's soul, its considered a human and you get your soul the moment your concieved. So that rules out any argument that this embryo is a child.. we arent talking about oak trees here
-
-
Firstly, you are wrong. I have had a religious up-bringing.
I was raised an Evangelical Christian, so please don't assume that because I am not necessarily worshipping the word of God, I am not educated in it. At the end of the day, we should be thankful to this type of research. Let God judge those who have done wrong because they will be judged.
We are all entitled in our own opinions and I thank you for letting me
have mine, It was nice conversing with you.
Regards,
Sophie
-
-
In that same..we should let murderers go free.. or child molesters... just let them do what they do, God will judge them. At some point, we have to take a stand against things that are wrong. We dont have to accept something that we know is wrong. "God will judge them" is a Christian cop out. It's used in instances when a Christian knows something is wrong, but is not willing to put themselves on the line for what they know is actually right.
It says in the Bible that God wove you into your mothers womb, pretty much that He had a part in your conception. I cant be thankful for someone taking a life to save a life. There is no doubt that it's wrong. The sad part about our world, is that we watch injustices be done and we do nothing about it. -
-
Considering I'm not a Christian and neither are you, it would be impossible for this to be a "Christian cop out".
All of this "arguement" wasn't constructed on YOUR beliefs, it was based on other people's fundermental beliefs and you used and took completly out of context the word of the Bible, yet you are not a Christian, you made did not make moral, nor political point, all you did was conjure all the evidence, whether it was personal to you or not and took all of it out of context.
Yes, there is injustice in the world and yes, people should do more about it but stem cell research is not one of them.
If you are so morally concerned why don't you write a piece of all the starvation/war in the middle east or the bombings in India?
People like you make me outraged, you sit behind your computers all day making complaints about the world when your country is one of the most biggest factors in the way the world is today.
Try fundrasing, volunteer work, all of which I do in my spare time.
Now, please stop bothering me with this tripe, I tried to be polite and back away from this conversation but you have gone too far, now I suggest you kindly take the hint.
Kind regards.
Sophie
-
-
so you think that we should let the murderers and child molesters run free... and be okay knowing that God will judge them? Being Christine is irrelevant. It's the fact that saying "God will judge them" is a cop out not to take a stand against something that is so obviously wrong. Not only Christians do it.. calling it a "Christian cop out" just gives the behavior a name, it's not limited to just "christians"
-
-
No you're right, It's called ignorance.
I wonder if you've ever heard one of my favourite quotes,
"He who saves a life saves the world entire" -Oscar Schindler.
Do you know who this man is?
He made a difference, you, on the other hand are just complaining, whining, get out there and stop criticising me! Go save the world super woman!
It has no relevence to stem cell research, do you know what making a difference is about?
Regardless as to what I'm doing with my life, It's my business, look at yourself. Take a good look at your country and look at all the blood that has been shed through thre ignorance of its' citizens. YOU did nothing about suffering and the on going war in the middle east besides electing someone as president to make it worse and exploit it. ALL of you have blood on your hands.
-
-
He who saves a life saves the entire world.. what about he who takes a life?
The war in the middle east happens to be a result of terrorist attacks on the US. We didnt start it, we're just finishing it.
LOL, super woman huh?! I do as much as I can to make the world a better place the best way I know how. So get off your high horse and look around. This world is the way it is because not enough people take a stand. You dont know enough about me to say one word about the kind of person I am. You think name calling or insults are going to change anything? Take your own advise sweetheart.
Embryonic stem cell research is the tip of the iceburg. -
-
Typical, so you think retaliation is the solution to the problem? You people are bland enough to elect a dictator.
I never insulted you I was simply stating that not only do you want to save the world, (as in response to my quote) you wish to get revenge for those who commit crime.
I've seen enough to know what type of person you are, an ignorant one.
You need tact to "save the world" you also need compassion and understanding.
-
-
Retaliation? Seriously, retaliation isn't the half of it. It's about protecting our soil. And we could have just kicked their ass and then came home.. we didnt have to help rebuild, risking the lives of OUR children. I dont wholy support the war.. but I do support my troops and what they are fighting for.....
I'm not trying to save the world sweetheart, just trying to do something good, to help even one person in a time when they have no other options, would be enough for me. I have compassion and understnading..
All crimes have their punishment.. its the way of the world. -
-
Now that's a much better perspective, wanting to do what you can.
I have never been to America but I see the mark it has made on the world and the destruction it has caused in places.
I don't believe in retaliation, I believe in having the higher ground, protect yourselves by all means though.
It has been a pleasure, Criss.
Kind regards
Sophie
-
-
-
-
-
-
You say that none of this is my belief? How do you know that? Becauseyou know me as a person?!
I do volunteer and help people in need. It's something that I feel is important in a world that is in such need of help.
I dont have to be a Christian to believe in God.
The bottom line is that some things are wrong and unless we let our voice be heard, unless we take a stand, than nothing will ever change.
Life is about choices. You are right, in the end we will all be judged. We are judged on the things we did... and the things we DIDN'T do.
Take care,
Criss -
-
I never stated you were a Christian, although you were quoting the Holy Bible.
"By their deeds ye shall know them" (Mark 7:10)
And that is all I have to say.
Kind regards
Sophie
-
-
No you stated that I am not a Christian, which is true. I believe in God but not the church. I believe in sprirituality, not religion.
You are right by their deeds (action) or lack there of.
God knows your heart. -
-
Morally, there are parts of the Bible that I agree with but in my eyes that's decency, not the help of God. I'm not saying there isn't a God, I'm an Agnostic, I don't know and I'm open for change.
-
-
You are right... the Bible is a moral guide to life. I'm not a preacher, I dont step on peoples toes when it comes to beliefs in God or the lack there of.... everyone has to come into God at their own time.. or, some never do. Everyone is judged. You're heart is known. It's not my place to judge you.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
and today, it was on the news, that the doctors who don't believe in abortion, so far, have not been forced to do them because of a consciousness law. obama is trying to get rid of the law so that all doctors will have to do them, no matter their belief. give me a break! when will we stop the madness. thank you for sharing this with me today and i so am looking forward to reading more from you in the near future. viyanna rosemarie
-
-
Abortion too, is wrong.
-
-
Sigh...there are many sides to the coin...and many valid arguments. But many people don't know their pregnant until the first few weeks and they're hurting their bodies with alcohol or smoking etc. Which could potentially harm the baby or kill it...
I'm torn though...doctors should use the embryo for aborted fetus' or something. **shrugs** -
-
True. There is a difference between hurting a unborn child because of neglectful behavior before you know your pregnant and hurting one after you know you are pregnant. In the sense of embryonic stem cells, they are harvesting the stem cells from an embryo created for that purpose. Who creates a child to kill it? Anyone who thinks that is okay should consider giving their child to doctors to harvest their organs to save a few lives. It's the same thing. You wouldnt give your baby to science in order to have its organs split up and given to different people, so why would it be okay to do that to an embryo?
-
-
You've enlightened me. I didn't know all of the things you've mentioned. Personally, I'm all for anything that saves lives but, not at the cost of life. What I ask makes one life more important than another? NOTHING! I too believe life begins at conception and is God given which in my opinion gives only Him the right to take it away. Some would say all of our knowledge to do this and other types of research comes from God. True but, He also gave us free will. If what is needed from stem cells can be harvested without taking a life I believe that is what should be done. I also believe the federal government should not fund or participate in this.It kind of I would think fall under "separation of church and state". I'm not all that up on politics, mostly don't discuss politics or religion with folks. In this instance I feel it is not politics but, babies. I'm very glad that I clicked on this for as I said you've enlightened me.
-
Thank you!
it's very frustrating when people mention to me that stem cell research is saving lives, and they associate it with embryonic stem cells, but in fact it has not yielded any information that researchers could use. It was from the stem cells found elsewhere (umbilical chord if I'm not mistaken.)
Very informative and direct. Thank you for sharing.
Vladimir -
every avenue of research should be explored to save lives except ones that kill lives-it common sense really, any other option is cannaballistic ...peace
Adding your comment:
1 - 44 of 44
