Stem Cell Research

Mar 10, 2009 08:30

Scientists can now destroy embryos with federal funds, in the name of research ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 41

(The comment has been removed)

pink_porcupette March 24 2009, 16:50:05 UTC
I hope you are being sarcastic with "Of course we are all aware that unborn people are more important then born people..."

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

pink_porcupette March 24 2009, 17:00:22 UTC
Okay, that is a relief. :)
You never know in this sort of debate.

Reply


cutout18 March 24 2009, 16:43:14 UTC
jakshadows, do you have a specific link to a specific news article?

I ask because a lot of stem cell research talk is sort of a misrepresentation of what actually happens (i.e. having little to do with destroying embryos sometimes) and I just want to see what is specifically under discussion here.

Reply

jakshadows March 24 2009, 17:17:02 UTC
This is more about Obama's executive order and how a few states are reacting to it by drafting legislation to protect embryos.

States like Georgia and Oklahoma (according to that recent article). And New Mexico to name a few of the more prominent.

(To be honest, I had posted this a few weeks back I think. It's taken this long for it to get past the moderator's queue and I'd forgotten all about it.)

Reply

cutout18 March 24 2009, 18:03:11 UTC
Gotcha. I know about the Georgia bit. I've got a friend who's a Legislative Aide at the Capitol here in Atlanta.

Really, on one hand, there shouldn't be an argument. We're talking about small collections of cells that frequently don't make it to fetuses in the first place. The science behind it is adding a hormone first that prevents it from becoming a fetus (or something to that effect, I am by no means a biology major) THEN working with the cell itself. This really is the only way to study how our bodies heal themselves and develop.

It really is sort of like saying that you're not allowed to look at sperm or eggs under the microscope, donated sperm or eggs, because that prevents the two from developing into life. A lot of people fear progress that will go against their preconceived notion of how the world works ( ... )

Reply

jakshadows March 24 2009, 18:47:47 UTC
I agree that it's a bit overblown. Jersey (Princeton and the surrounding areas) seems to live in it's own world and has been doing this kind of research for a long time.

The funding though.... The government funds a lot of things I disagree with myself, and I've asked that question before. That missile shield thing comes to mind...

Reply


pink_porcupette March 24 2009, 16:59:41 UTC
I think the side of those against abortion rights was pretty weak to begin with.
I don't think religious views should influence decisions the government makes regarding scientific issues, and I hope that the President's ruling will allow new advances to be made in medical science.
I think the legislation they are trying to pass in Georgia is ridiculous. What are they going to do to give an embryo the same rights as a born child? Will there be an investigation into potential child neglect every time a woman has a heavy period that may actually be an embryo being lost? Are they going to make it illegal for women of childbearing age to buy large amounts of vitamin C or any other natural supplement that can induce periods/ cause an embryo in the early stages to be miscarried?

Reply

ladyinred667 March 24 2009, 17:48:26 UTC
Not to mention that embryos from IVF clinics are destroyed regularly anyway.

Reply

snackbreak March 24 2009, 17:50:52 UTC
I don't think religious views should influence decisions the government makes regarding scientific issues, and I hope that the President's ruling will allow new advances to be made in medical science.

You can be against the destruction of human embryos without being religious.

I am open to the possibility of God, but I do not follow any particular religion. I am not a complete dunce as far as science goes as I do have a Bachelor of Science in Biology. With this in mind, I still do not support stem-cell research that requires the destruction of embryos, because I find it to be a sanctioned equivalent of murder.

Reply

jakshadows March 24 2009, 18:07:51 UTC
So you think Obama's rationale: "restore scientific integrity to government decision-making" isn't accurate?

Reply


ladyinred667 March 24 2009, 17:48:10 UTC
*deleted and resposted to reply to the correct commenter*

Reply


anonymissity March 24 2009, 18:59:31 UTC
They were already destroying them to begin with. They were slated for destruction.
The only difference is that now, they can be put to some beneficial use.

Reply

gemfyre March 24 2009, 22:56:21 UTC
My thoughts exactly.

Waste not, want not.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up