Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethical theories and delimas regarding embryonic stem cell
Controversy of stem cell research
Ethical theories and delimas regarding embryonic stem cell
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
"It's time to lift the political barriers blocking the stem cell research that could treat or cure diseases like Parkinson's. I believe that science can bring hope to our families. I want America to lead the world in the medical breakthroughs of the future. There's no time to wait. At stake are millions of lives. I'm John Kerry and I approved this message because America can do better. It's time to take America in a new direction."
Senator John Kerry made these remarks in a 30-second television ad which aired before the 2004 presidential election. This ad was aired in "battleground" states, states in which both candidates would have needed for a victory. The stem cell research issue began to affect the presidential election August 2003 when Senator Kerry made vocal the lack of effort that President Bush is exerting in his policies. In my research I will show how politics and stem-cell research are intertwined with one another and that they do relate with politics. I will first give a brief definition of stem cell research, and then I will show both sides of the issue from the 2004 presidential election, lastly I will show how it affects politicians in personal ways.
Before the stem cell research issue concerning President Bush and Senator Kerry should be addressed, an overview of stem cell research in general is imperative to gaining a better understanding on the candidates' position. First of all, stem cells are called "non-programmed" cells in that they can differentiate into specific cells to certain areas of the body. They are derived from fertilized embryos or unfertilized eggs. These cells can replace damaged cells as well as malignant cells anywhere in the body by forming solid and healthy tissue walls. Thus, stem c...
... middle of paper ...
...hard to argue that it is not going to play a role in the 2008 presidential election.
Works Cited:
Shreeve, Jamie. "The Other Stem-Cell Debate" The New York Times Magazine 10 April 2005
"Fact Sheet: Embryonic Stem Cell Research." The White House: President George W. Bush 9 Aug. 2001.
Fiona, Hutton, and Roger Salazar. "Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger Endorses; Prop 71." Yes on 71: The California Stem Cell Research Cures Initiative. 18 Oct. 2004
Green, Ronald M. The Human Embryo Research Debates: Bioethics in the Vortex Controversy. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc. 2001.
Long, Ray and Christi Parsons. "Stem-Cell Bill Turned Down." Chicago Tribune 16 Nov. 2004. 17 Nov. 2004
Sobel, Rachel K. "Miracle Cells? Maybe." U.S. News World Report 4 Sept. 2000
Stolberg, Sheryl Gay. "Transition in Washington: Research and Morality." New York Times 20 Jan. 2001: A17.
Lieberman, Robert C. "THe Freedmen's Bureau and the Politics of Institutional Structure." Social Science History
The editorial, ?Stem Cells and the Logic of the Nazis,? appeared in the September 3, 2000 issue of the Los Angeles Times. Even though the Los Angeles Times, a widely distributed newspaper, has a slightly liberal slant, this editorial displays a strongly conservative view on stem cell research. Thus, the author of the editorial has to be very cautious in the tone that he uses in order not to offend liberal readers. George Weigel, the author of this editorial, picks apart what he sees as the fallacious argument of Michael Kinsley, a well-known libe...
Research on human fetal life involves numerous complex medical, moral, and legal aspects. It is not always easy, nor desirable, to seal off one aspect from another. Both sides of fetal tissue use will be equally focused on as a moral issue. The topic is a timely and important one because research on human fetal life is reportedly a growing industry and the subject of legal developments both in the United States and around the world.
I believe President Bush and his staff are well aware of the truth about embryonic versus adult stem-cell research. Unfortunately, many in the public will read about this letter, recognize some high-profile "icons" or simply that there are a lot of "smart people" who've signed on, and think that they know all about this scientific research. Knowledgeable people do not always perpetuate the truth. President Bush and Congress obviously have the final say on how our federal research dollars will be spent. The hope is that all who are participating in this debate are fully informed about the facts and are not swayed by celebrities who are unfortunately ill-informed or deliberately misled, but rather weigh both the scientific and the ethical evidence.
One of the most heated political battles in the United States in recent years has been over the morality of embryonic stem cell research. The embryonic stem cell debate has polarized the country into those who argue that such research holds promises of ending a great deal of human suffering and others who condemn such research as involving the abortion of a potential human life. If any answer to the ethical debate surrounding this particular aspect of stem cell research exists, it is a hazy one at best. The question facing many scientists and policymakers involved in embryonic stem cell research is, which is more valuable – the life of a human suffering from a potentially fatal illness or injury, or the life of human at one week of development? While many argue that embryonic stem cell research holds the potential of developing cures for a number of illnesses that affect many individuals, such research is performed at the cost of destroying a life and should therefore not be pursued.
The word abortion brings out a variety of attitudes & perceptions amongst people. The topic is surrounded by emotion and empathy, which often creates a divide, those who view abortion as permissible and those who do not. In “Bioethics Before Birth," Tooley and Marquis provide their arguments on abortion. Their arguments share some similarities but their viewpoints and delivery set them apart. I will evaluate and compare the differences and similarities in their arguments.
Stem cell research is a heavily debated topic that can stir trouble in even the tightest of Thanksgiving tables. The use cells found in the cells of embryos to replicate dead or dying cells is a truly baffling thought. To many, stem cell research has the potential to be Holy Grail of modern medicine. To many others, it is ultimately an unethical concept regardless of its capabilities. Due to how divided people are on the topic of stem cell research, its legality and acceptance are different everywhere. According to Utilitarianism, stem cell research should be permitted due to the amount of people it can save, however according to the Divine Command of Christianity, the means of collecting said stem cells are immoral and forbidden.
The President’s Council on Bioethics published “Monitoring Stem Cell Research” in 2004. This report was written in response to President Bush’s comments regarding research of human stem cells on August 9, 2001. President Bush announced that he was going to make federal funding available for research that involved existing lines of stem cells that came from embryos. He is the first president to provide any type of financial support for the research of human stem cells. A Council was created with people who are educated in the field of stem cells to help monitor the research and to recommend guidelines and consider the ethical consequences that this research could create. This report is an “update” given by the President’s Council in January of 2004 to make the public aware of the significant developments in the science and medical aspects of stem cell research. It also describes the ethical, legal and political implications that stem cell research may create. However, since the research is still in its beginning stages, this “update” does not describe a complete or definitive study of stem cells nor does it provide specific guidelines or regulations. This is a report that is suppose to help the President, Congress and general public make better-informed decisions as to the direction that we should go with stem cells.
With the increased rate of integrating In Vitro Fertilization (IVF), there has been a steep inclination within the associated needs of specifications. Observably, the development of babies using scientific measures was initially formulated and specified for developing the diverse range of development associated with the same (Turriziani, 2014). However, these developments are noted to be creating an adverse impact on the natural course of events and subsequently, resulting with an adverse impact on the natural process of the development of babies. The initial integrations within the system of IVF for developing babies have further been initiated with the effective use of science to develop a healthy baby. Hence, the use of such progressions can be argued as not hampering the ethical needs associated with the same. Conversely, the initial progression within the same and the changes in the use of such practices are identified as unethical, as it has been acting as a threat in the natural course of development of embryos and altering the natural course of events, suspected to be imposing significant influence on infant mortality (Turriziani,
Imagine that there is a cure for nearly every ailment that affects the human race. Imagine that you could help the terminally ill, put those you love out of pain, and cut the healing time of an enormous number of serious illnesses in half. Imagine a world in which pain and suffering would be nearly nonexistent, and the people you love can live safe from the fear of crippling injury. Now what if I told you that this utopia was a fast approaching reality? Everything from serious life threatening burns to lymphoma, AIDS, Alzheimer’s, Muscular Dystrophy, Parkinson’s Disease, Spinal Cord Injury, and Strokes could, in the very near future, be eliminated through the simple culturing and implementation of stem cell therapy . These diseases are no small component of the myriad of conditions that plagues the human race, and yet, the end for these horrible maladies could very well be in sight. Man has always sought to end suffering, largely without success, until now. the promise that stem cell therapy holds could completely change our world for the better. Already, stem cell therapy is being used to treat leukemia, immune disorders, hodgkins and non-hodgkins lymphoma, anemia and a profusion of other ailments. As you all know, this is no small accomplishment. One day i believe that we may look at alzheimer's and diabetes and other major illnesses much like we look at polio today, as a treatable illness. Right now, our research with stem cells is providing us with new light into how we look at and model disease, our ability to understand why we get sick and even to develop new drugs. In 2008, a researcher from the New York Stem Cell Foundation Laborato...
Monroe, Kristen, et al., eds. Fundamentals of the Stem Cell Debate: The Scientific, Religious, Ethical and Political Issues. Los Angeles/Berkley: University of California Press, 2008. Print
Keiper, Adam, and Yuval Levin. “Federal Funds Should Not Be Used for Research That Destroys Embryos.” Stem Cells. Jacqueline Langwith. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from “Stem Cells, Life, and the Law.”National Review (25 Aug. 2010). Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 15 Apr. 2013.
Hirsen, James L. “Who’s the Victor on the Stem Cell Debate?” 7 Aug. 2001. 24 Sept. 2007 < http://www.firstliberties.com/stem_cell_debate.html>.
Anderson, Ryan. "Stem Cells: A Political History." First Things. First Things, November, 2008. Web. 10 Feb 2012.
Domhoff, G. W. (1990). The power elite and the state: How policy Is made in America. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.