Changes

Jump to: navigation, search

Human embryos in medical research

215 bytes removed, 06:21, July 12, 2007
/* Arguments for and Against Embryonic Stem Cell Research */ -- Nose cells don't replicate into a human being; you took it too far
== Arguments for and Against Embryonic Stem Cell Research ==
A variety of arguments are used both for and against embryonic stem cell research. Some proponents argue that the embryos do not constitute human lives or that even if they do since the embryos would be destroyed anyways and thus it makes sense to use the embryos.<ref>http://www.spinneypress.com.au/178_book_desc.html</ref>. These arguments have been accepted by some [[Christian]] groups and by many [[Jewish]] groups, even Orthodox ones.<ref>http://www.jlaw.com/Articles/stemcellres.html</ref>. A typical human blastocyst contains about 150 non-specialized cells. There are no neurons, and thus no brain function present. (By way of comparison, a fly's brain contains over 100,000 cells.) The only way a blastocyst can be considered human is in its potential to become a living human being. However, modern biotechnology has endowed every cell in the human body with the same potential. If we follow this argument to its logical conclusion, a person commits a holocaust every time he scratches his nose.
Opponents to such research have argued that such embryos are human lives with the full rights of humans and that even if they are not human lives the slippery slope is too great. Furthermore, they argue that the sanctity of human life is so great that even the destruction of such embryos for research is not permissible even when they would be destroyed anyways. Opponents have also argued that the potential of embryonic stem cells have been exaggerated and that more research must be done with cord and adult stem cells.<ref>http://www.americancatholic.org/News/StemCell/</ref>, <ref>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,31748,00.html</ref>,
NsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
13,818
edits