Posted on 06/12/2005 9:58:42 PM PDT by CHARLITE
Mankind has an aggravating habit of complicating simple issues. Perhaps the most obvious example in present times is the raging debate over embryonic stem cell research. Let’s put this in its proper perspective… Do you think it’s okay to create a human child, freeze the little guy for up to 5 years, then thaw the poor kid out and kill him? This is the process of storing human embryos and harvesting embryonic stem cells.
I could explore the various facets of the debate ranging from the hidden agenda of pro-abortionists to the possibilities of medical advances. But why bother? All of these ancillary questions are answered by addressing the most important part of the issue: The moral implications.
Scientists wish to harvest embryonic stem cells for use in medical research. The primary source for the embryos is the in vitro fertilization industry. Doctors at fertility clinics routinely harvest 10 or more eggs and fertilize all of them for couples who are unable to conceive naturally. The embryos are carefully examined and 2 to 6 of the “best” embryos are then implanted in the womb. The success rate hovers at around fifty percent, so a couple can generally expect 1 to 3 children from an implantation. Some couples of course have no success at all while others have had as many as 6 children. The remaining, unused embryos are then either destroyed or frozen for future use. In the majority of cases, couples elect to preserve the remaining embryos for at least a year. The most common reasons for preserving the embryos are:
- In case of miscarriage during pregnancy - For use in a planned future pregnancy - Moral considerations or guilt feelings about destroying an unborn child
In the United States alone, an estimated 400,000 (2004 estimate) frozen embryos exist in storage facilities. The biological parents have to pay for the service of preserving the embryos at a cost of up to $1500 per year. Do the math… that’s six hundred million dollars per year just for the storage. That doesn’t include the cost of the fertilization or implantation. There is a lot of money to be made by harvesting more eggs than are necessary for a successful implantation.
Proponents of stem cell research contend that since most of these embryos are eventually destroyed anyway, there should not be a problem with using them for scientific experimentation. Those opposed to this practice argue that it’s wrong to take the life of an unborn child, regardless of the motives. The solution should be obvious. The amount of eggs fertilized at one time should not exceed the number to be implanted. This would eliminate the horror of unborn children being stored like beef in a meat locker, and also eliminate the main source of embryos for the butchers who would carve them up for use in Frankensteinian experiments.
There are other sources of stem cells. Early research indicates that adult stem cells can be made “pluripotent”, meaning that the cells are non-specialized and can become any type of cell occurring in the human body. Cells from the blood of the umbilical cord also show potential in this regard. Why then, do scientists continue to insist upon killing unborn children? My guess would be the fact of a ready supply of material with which to work. Scientists have a habit of pushing ahead without consideration of the moral aspects of their actions. They often fail to realize that the ability to do a particular thing does not automatically constitute a license to do that thing.
These are the same people who believe that the universe is the result of a gigantic explosion and that Man is a descendant of some nameless creature that crawled out of an ocean millions of years ago. It is unrealistic to expect any semblance of Godly morals from people who believe that Man is the ultimate intelligence. This is why it is critically important for science to always be controlled by morality, not vice versa.
As always, it boils down to the need for a Godly society. Our people on Capitol Hill and in the White House must be expected to cease this nonsense of looking for compromise. Embryonic stem cell research and the practice of freezing unused embryos kill unborn children just as surely as does abortion. While it remains unclear as to just how much benefit can be had from such research, the moral implications are quite clear. If we are to remain consistent we must recognize that a human life is destroyed each time embryonic stem cells are harvested. Life begins at conception, whether in the bedroom or the laboratory.
Comments: burkhartonline@yahoo.com
Embryos aren't foetuses. They have no brain, they feel no pain. I'm sure Reagan would be wanting us to pursue stem cell research.
They don't have a brain but these little human beings are already "smart enough" to know how to grow one.
It's not "smart enough," it's just genetics.
Are you willing to advocate outlawing IVF?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.