Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
BB-
Hi! Actually, the big debate is not over "fetal stem cells", its about "embryonic stem cells." i.e. the cells are harvested after the embryo has been alive for about 2 weeks (I think), before it gets to the fetus stage.
Moreover, the embryos involved in the research aren't taken from abortions. They are basically the leftovers/extras from the vast fertility industry we have in this country. Those "extras" are eventually destroyed if not used.
This may change the moral calculus a bit, although everyone should realize that this is one piece of a "slippery slope" issue with very serious moral implications.
A continuum of such issues which evolves as technology advances. See, e.g., The current practice where some parents have new children to create tissue, marrow or organ donors for existing ill children. One end of the continuum may one day be the possibility (seen only in SciFi now) of creating and raising human clones as new bodies for rich old people.
There is some line that our society should not cross, and as a general matter, it is indecent for any society to cannibalize its youngest members to prolong the lives or increase quality of life for its oldest. Where you draw the line all depends on your definitions.
S_A_M
|
You provide a solution to your own dilemna...
If the stem cells we're talking about are not yet fetuses and are not from abortions, then there's no reason no to use them.
If something is going to be wasted anyway, why on Earth wouldn't we put it to good use, particularly for a cause as noble as saving people from disease? I'm sorry, but I don't think this wanders into the slippery slope. Perhaps its near the edge where the slope begins, but to a rational person, this ain't the slope.
The problem is that the pro and con sides to this issue have realized that they can only get what they want by playing it as a zero sum game. They've taken a page from the pro-choice and pro-life crowds. Pro-choicers don't really feel comfortable with partial birth abortion, but they know if they view it as a front line. If they fight there and lose, they've still got waht they really wanted. Pro-lifers don't feel comfortable with the idea of forcing raped women to give birth, but they know if they give an inch, they're ceding a the debate - the old slippery slope again.
Its really a shame - people are being denied a cure because neither side is willing to bridge their differences and talk honestly. My guess is that most people in America would honestly talk about abortion as a necessary evil and could probably come up with a compromise, and the same goes for stem cell research. unfortunately, the vehement minority fringe idiots lord over the organizations that control the debates and refuse to talk to the opponent.
