Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Obviously, if you are not among that anti-abortion crowd, this argument resonates not at all. But, to make the statements that you made without even acknowledging the basis for their anti-stem-cell position is sort of simplistic, I think, and pretty much guarantees that there will never be productive discussion.
|
I have heard this said before and I don't agree. Just because 100,000 people believe something does not mean it is a valid viewpoint which may be used as rebuttal against science.
The embryos at issue will never be alive. The people who can benefit from research are very much alive. The notion that stem cell research will lead to more abortions or a more casual attitude toward abortion is a non-starter.
I really don't understand when it religion rose to the level of scientific proof. This debate is not unlike the people who argue that creation science, despite its utter lack of supporting data, is a valid alternative to evolution. Its not. I'm certain there are just as many people who believe in UFOs as believe in Creationsim in any given year, but we don't argue that weather pattersn are caused by UFOs or that secret alien invders are running among us. If a viewpoint has no science or logic behind it (and faith is not logic), it should not be considered a valid counterpoint. Stem cells might save someone. Embryos remaining frozen or thrown away never will. The debate should end there, unless someone has a crystal ball and can show us in High Def exactly how the slippery slope of stem cell research will hurt us more than help us.
This is one of the very few real black and white issues out there.
