Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Amelia

Fetal stem cells are removed from the dead fetus, the result of elective abortions. A common practice of harvesting these fetal stem cells is partial birth abortion.

Embryonic stem cells are stem cells harvested from embryos. Most of which come from in-vitro clinics. However there is now a move to clone these embryos to provide further "research material".

Adult stem cells - found in everything from bone marrow to the pancrease, liver and brain, are not only readily available - but proven to be effective treatments. There is no need to end a life using these stem cells.

What many of us are fighting against is the belief that the deliberate destruction of a human being so that another may benefit is morally wrong.

The slippery slope some of us talk about in this discussion has a lot to do with the thinking behind the statement often made: That the embryos were deprived of life long ago, so why not test them and see how it turns out. If they were dead, they would not be viable for anything. Many, if not all, of them are frozen in time, literally.

My thinking on this is very personal, and it goes back to this thought: The argument that "they're already dead, so it's okay to test them until they prove beneficial" is a thin one. We are already being told - not by doctors or scientists - but by politicans and celebrities that embryonic and fetal stem cells WILL HELP SICK PEOPLE GET BETTER. It is the same argument I've heard that "well the abortion already happened, so there is nothing we can do about it, so let's just use the tissues." It isn't as black and white as that.

There is no evidence of any benefit to using fetal or embryonic stem cells to treat any disease or disability or injury, and it saddens me to hear it used: when I am the direct target. Should I sacrifice another so I may have a little less discomfort?


715 posted on 11/13/2004 3:56:05 PM PST by cgk (The Left was beaten by Pres Bush twice & will never have another shot at him... who's dumb?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 634 | View Replies ]


To: cgk
There is no evidence of any benefit to using fetal or embryonic stem cells to treat any disease or disability or injury, and it saddens me to hear it used: when I am the direct target. Should I sacrifice another so I may have a little less discomfort?

If I understand correctly, you're correct that the greatest therapeutic benefits (and perhaps the only ones to date) have come from adult and placental stem cells.

I don't think they should sacrifice any more fetuses to make more stem cells - however, when I die, I hope whatever parts I have that are still good can be used to improve someone else's quality of life, and I do see something of this logic in making use of lives that would otherwise be completely wasted.

I certainly don't think babies should be conceived for this purpose, I don't believe in abortion under most circumstances, definitely not after the first trimester, and one would think that with all the methods of birth control available today, abortion should be extremely rare for any purpose.

I think we need strict constructionist judges, but I also think we need to work on hearts and minds...until we change hearts and minds, I'm not sure the law could be changed even if Roe V. Wade was overturned.

777 posted on 11/13/2004 6:53:52 PM PST by Amelia (Didn't watch the movie, but I did read The Book.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 715 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson