Embryos are rich in stem cells, and stem cells have the potential to regrow just about any human body part or organ. There is the potential to help millions of people that suffer from bad hearts, liver, kidneys, and to cure horrible diseases. Stem cells that are in the embryos that might otherwise never be used could in essence provide just about all, if not all, needed body parts for so many people. But is it right to use stem cells from a frozen embryo that would otherwise be a baby?
The question lies in just where a person considers life to begin. Christians believe that life begins at conception, the moment that the sperm and egg unite and the egg is fertilized. In that aspect, an embryo that is frozen is still a life, and to use it for stem cell research would simply be wrong and considered the same as murder by some people.
Some would argue that a life beings at birth, that up until that time, the embryo isn't alive or a life. Some say life begins when the mom feels the baby kick inside of her. Those that argue that life isn't life at all until this time are more apt to say that stem cell research is right, that although an embryo that could be a baby later isn't yet born, so it's okay to use it to help other people.
But is it really okay to do away with one life just because it hasn't been born to help others? It's a question that some answer easily and yet other people wrestle with the humanity of it...doing away with one life to save others. Stem cells have the ability to help so many people. Helping someone can't be wrong. But is it right for an embryo, considered as life by many, to be used to save others when it is unable to make the decision to give its own life to save others? On the flip side, as an embryo and unable to decide on its own what its fate will be, who has the right to decide whether it should be used to help save others?
The Bush administration opposes stem cell research, which has upset those who support stem cell research. This brings to up the question of how far should the government go to protect human life, as some would see it, or to prevent scientists from helping care for the human race and help cure people. Stem cell research has valued points in favor of it. But at what cost to babies that have yet to be born?
Published by Cindy Thomas
I am a freelance writer and graphic designer. I've been writing for many years and have recently discovered the joys of graphic designing. Follow BlondieWrites on Twitter @Blondie_Writes View profile
- Stem Cell Research & the Effect on Voting and Political DecisionsAmerican voters, when choosing a political candidate, may have the impact to determine whether or not stem cell research is funded by the government in the next decade.
Adult Stem Cell Research Leads to a Method to Replace Damaged Heart TissueThe ethical debate continues over embryonic stem cell research even though embryonic research has not proven successful while adult stem cell research continues to deliver results.
The Conflict of Aborted Fetus' Being Used in Stem Cell Research Continue...Excerpts of a persuasive essay on Stem Cell Research and Abortion; what ties them and the controversy of it all.
Stem Cell Research UtopiaStem cell research has been highly hindered by the recent Bush administration. There are effects taking place that are limiting American scientists from performing at their max...
New York Permits Purchase of Eggs from Women for Stem Cell ResearchEthical controversy heats up over New York's decision to publicly fund the purchase of eggs from women for stem cell research after attempting to recruit women to donate eggs fo...
- Stem Cell Research: The Key to Saving Lives
- Obama Endorses Stem Cell Research, Makes Nancy Reagan Happy
- Strategies to Budget for Two Babies Born a Year Apart
- Texas Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Embryos
- Choosing the Sex of Your Child at Conception is it Right or Wrong
- Stem Cell Research is Killing or Saving Life?
- Should Stem-Cell Research Be Federally Funded?
