To: jimkress
Just use adult stem cells and avoid any moral questions. Seems to me that this also avoids moral questions by using unfertilized eggs to produce stem cells. If life begins at conception, then no conception = no life, right?
8 posted on
04/24/2003 10:03:50 AM PDT by
general_re
(You're just jealous because the voices are talking to me....)
To: general_re
Except for the moral question of using women as farm animals, by hyperstimulating their ovaries to produce enough eggs. Which women are they more likely to get eggs from? Middle-class Americans or poverty-stricken third-worlders?
12 posted on
04/24/2003 10:49:09 AM PDT by
nina0113
To: general_re
If life begins at conception, then no conception = no life, right? That statement contains a few loaded assumptions;
- Life began a few billion years ago (or a few thousand, if that works better for you) and living cells simply continue to generate more living cells. Life does not "begin" from inanimate matter.
- "Conception" does not mean "fertilization". It means "implantation" in current medical jargon. Fertilization is the often considered the starting point of a new individual.
- Where an individual starts is a less important question than whether an individual entity is an individual human being worthy of protection.
So the question is not whether these embryo have a conventional beginning (they clearly don't) or whether they are alive (they clearly are if they can grow -- dead cells don't divide and metabolize). The question is wether these embryos represent unique individuals worthy of protection. A key question there is, "If you were to implant one of these embryos into a woman, would it be possible to get a baby?" A related question is, "How similar are these embyos to a normal fertilized embryo?"
To: general_re
"Parthenogenesis is a form of reproduction in which the egg develops without fertilisation"
Once the artifically fertilized egg starts to divide, we DO have a conception - an embryo. The whole idea of Parthenogenesis is that development of the embryo (in this case a human embryo) begins without a sperm.
Contrary to popular myth, opposition to embryonic stem cells has never been about how the embryo came into being. It has always been about killing the embryo once it exists.
To: general_re
Seems to me that this also avoids moral questions by using unfertilized eggs to produce stem cells. If life begins at conception, then no conception = no life
Bump
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson