My friend Jarron is doing his argumentative research paper on the benefits of stem cell research. Not much has been said about stem cell research within the last seven years. When Bush took office, you know when his approval ratings were high, he condemned stem cell research. Stem cells are seen by many researchers as having virtually unlimited application in the treatment and cure of many human diseases and disorders including Alzheimer's, diabetes, cancer, strokes, etc. Stem cells come in two general types:
1. Embryonic stem cells
2. Adult stem cells
Many pro-lifers believe that human life begins at the time of fertilization and that killing an embryo in order to extract its stem cells is a form of homicide. Usually, they are adamantly opposed to such research. Others disagree. They believe that an embryo has the potential to develop into a person, but is not a person itself. They say that an embryo is not sentient; it has no brain, sensory organs, ability to think, awareness of its surroundings, consciousness, internal organs, arms, legs, head, etc. They feel that research using stem cells derived from embryos is ethical.
Whichever side of the debate you happen to be on, you cannot deny the vast potential held within the use of embryonic and adult stem cells. Since the main issue in the debate is whether or not an embryo is actual human life or is a blank slate on which human life is drawn, the first step in stem cell research would seem to be to settle this portion of the debate, if it is not already settled.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment