This technology, according to scientists, could foster the ability to cure any disease, illness, or injury, but at what cost? Opponents of stem cell research believe that the practice of embryonic study and culture is immoral, while proponents suggest that this technology is necessary for the advancement of medical research. In 2001, then President George W. Bush quickly sided with those believing the research to be immoral. During his primetime address, he advocated only to allow research on cell lines already in existence. Much of this side of the argument is based on the idea that human eggs are fertilized with sperm to create an embryo, and then destroyed to harvest the stem cells within the blastocyst.
I propose to stop federally funded embryonic stem cell research, and research with the use of adult stem cells should be federally funded and furthered. Using embryonic stem cells strictly for research is unethical, however, couples who have undergone IVF should be allowed to donate excess eggs to research by private institutions if they desire. I sincerely hope you take this proposal into consideration. Thank you for your time.
Many people feel that abortion is wrong and should be out lawed and that it is unethical to use aborted fetuses for research. With Stem cell research benefiting from abortion it might seem that Stem cell research is an advocate of abortion, but of course that is not the case. People like our current president are morally opposed to stem cell research which has hindered its production. But what confuses me abortion and stem cell research is that stem cell can be retrieved many ways a fetus is no longer needed to reproduce stem cells. Stem cells can found in adults.
Researching the future potential of embryonic stem cells is the new hot topic debate in ethics. The moral objections from two opposing sides clash in a political and ethical battle of who is correct. Each faction tries to define the classification of what deserves unalienable human rights. Likewise, determining what is classified as human behavior such as sentiment, interests and pain has been the ground on which pro-stem cell research stand. Since these embryos share only genetic similarities and no human characteristics, it is permissible to this stance to kill them in the name of medicine.
This legislation was a major setback for the research, but did not completely stop it. Scientists continued to use the stem cell lines in place before the legislative restrictions for their research. In 2009, President Obama reversed the ban prohibiting the use of Federal funds for embryonic stem cell research, lifting the restrictions. The NIH (National Institute of Health) oversees the research, to ensure its integrity. President Obama recognized the sensitivity of this issue, but proceeded to reverse the ban, despite the protest of pro-life and certain religious groups who argue against the use of embryonic stem cells for research on moral and ethi... ... middle of paper ... ... find it very exciting to imagine what treatments may be available to future generations, made possible through stem cell research.
Scientists agree that stem cells could be one of the greatest revolutions in modern medicine. On the opposing side of the issue, many citizens believe that destroying an embryo is the equivalent to killing an unborn child. While many people assume the battle is about the use of stem cells for research purposes, it now seems that the major political controversy is the role of the federal government in funding human embryo research. Many scientists contend that the furor began with President Bush's August 2001 decision to limit government funding to embryonic stem cell lines that had already been created. Since then, scientists have been scrambling to expand funding for stem cell research with few alternatives.
Where will all the mess ups or unsuccessful clones remain at? All of this will cause the world to be overly populated, just in case they do not discard a human clone afterwards. It does not make any sense to me to clone a human if they exist or existed already. Many mistakes need to happen in order to get cloned the right way like: malformation, stillborn, or dying immediately after birth. The thought of performing the procedure over and over multiple times does not help the human mind and the society we are in.
Two, scientists could be creating new inventions; helping with saving money and building new technologies. There is no good possible outcome about this ethical idea of cloning but, yet we do have the negative results of the animal cloning’s that were done since scientist wants to clone human because they've done it to animals before. Which can also be double times harder than animal cloning which such an idea shouldn’t haven’t come to the surface, but it exists in our world. The impact that it will have in our world is more likely to be dangerous and we must be aware of this because it will influence how we live. There's nothing superior that could practically come out of cloning a human being, NOTHING!
The Great Human Embryo Clone Hype Abstract: The cloning of human embryos has sparked a major debate worldwide. New cloning methods have surpassed the technology that could only duplicate specified genes or produce offspring from frozen mice and human embryos. Cloning has been used to free would-be sufferers from a particular disease carrying gene. Likewise, out of desire to assist infertile couples and overcome the drawbacks of using in-vitro fertilization, came the newest method of cloning. Although skepticism exists because of the lack of regulation and the extreme possibilities considered such as cloning for hair and eye color or for a particular gender, with proper regulation, researchers and doctors intend to embrace this modern and unpredictable technology as our newest weapon in combating health related problems.
"Everybody who thought it would proceed slowly and could be stopped was wrong," said Lee Silver, a professor from the University of Princeton. Without proper research to support the ban, the premature ban should be reconsidered and appealed. Cloning could provide a way for infertile couples to produce children genetically similar to themselves, a method of creating spare organs for transplants, and a cure for genetic disease. Human cloning may provide numerous benefits to mankind and should not be banned. Some people say that it is morally wrong and others are scared that a leader, such as Sadam Husian, will clone himself.