Stem Cells and Cloning
Stem Cells and Cloning
Last Updated on Thursday, 21 April 2011 09:28 Written by Administrator Thursday, 21 April 2011 09:28
In this George Mason University video, Karol Boudreaux of the Mercatus Center hosts a group of panelists in a discussion about the ethical debates that engulf cloning and stem cell research. When President Bush announced in 2001 his decision to allow federal funds to be used for research on stem cells, he made two other striking comments. Stating his decision was based partly on the fact that ‘stem cells have the ability to regenerate themselves indefinitely’ he said he’s ‘strongly opposed to human cloning.’ How do we separate the stem cell research debate from debate over human cloning and genetic screening? What ethical questions surround them? What are the pros and cons of cloning and stem cell research? Is there a viable compromise that both pro-lifers and pro-biotech researchers can accept? Panelists include: Richard Doerflinger, deputy director for the Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Kathi E. Hanna, consultant at Science & Health Policy, and Jim Olds, director of the Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study.
Video Rating: 3 / 5
You’er welcome! I’m sort of on the fence about a lot of it. I mean, I’m in favor of Stem Cell Research but, I’m an ardent anti-abortionist. Kind of an odd grey area, eh?! LOL! I’m totally against killing a pre-born for science but, if the embryo is simply going to be “disposed” of, I’d rather some benefit come from it. Of course, the way that I phrase it would be virtually impossible to regulate.
Thanks for thinking, Paul. RE: self-awareness, according to psych textbooks, true self-awareness does not occur until an average of about 18 months of age in most infants. Certainly we can all agree not to experiment or destroy or sell parts of a one year old.
That is an interesting point. I guess it all comes back down to what you consider to be “self aware” and “human rights”. Actually, that is probably about the best point that I have heard for the anti stem cell side. It may be pertinant to note that for much of human history, inmates have been used as slave labor and in some places test subjects for weapons and the such. Still, I like the comparison.
If we destroyed all of you just to get your finger, that wouldn’t be too cool. The embryo is already human. The 9 month old stem cell line is a newborn’s stuff, alive but separated in dishes. A rat in 7 months will be a rat. An embryo in 7 months will be Isaac Newton.
In that case we should be able to use all inmates on death row for experimentation. They’re going to be destroyed anyway, right? The question is : is it okay to treat living human beings, in whole or in part, as property ?
The answer is no.
Is it better to allow that life to be sacrificed in an effort to save lives or to condemn it to be sacrifice it to the landfill?
Sorry. A human embryo’s humanness is not determined by its “spareness”.
16:00 – Suffering children can be treated by other means than SCR but, can they be cured? Obviously not! I feel like that Richard guy is just supporting the status quo and knows that there is more money in the treatment than in the cure.
true. But you have to remember, the StemCell research isn’t about using aborted babies, which I am dead set against, it’s about the use of fetilized embrios from fertility clinics that are never going to be used for reproduction. In essence, it’s sort of like recycling rather than killing humans.
Golly gee, the egg of a bald eagle is protected by law, yet a developing human is game for destruction because it MIGHT help Grandpaw remember your name ?
That clump of cells IS human. Not WILL BE. Losing your finger doesn’t destroy all of you.
“It’s not the same as laboratory rats”
So, the ethical question is that the embryo – an ungrown cluster of cells and the basis for a human – holds more respect just because it will be human? So the adult rats, who by the way feel pain and anxiety and can suffer easily in the lab, don’t deserve this respect because they are not? So if I have lost a finger, should it be treated with a certain respect because it came off a human?
throughout this video i was thinking “shut up richard you waste of space.”
is he an IRL troll? seriously?
stop hindering science!
but how many lives will we have to sacrifice- indeed, that’s what they are LIVES, to stay in this “scientific race”?
holy shit.. so when i jerk off i actually kill like billions of people =??????
i feel sorry for american people who love their country and all its attribubtes but fail to recognise and support the great intellectuals and research establishments also within their country. what wasted potential! comparatively, the UK has allowed research and our government here funds it. we are keep on at the forefront of research whilst america lags behind.. what a shame
It pisses me off how those that are against stem cell research pull random studies and statements to make it look like they’re right, and making it seem like the research is extremely simple. One statement cant say it all, and thats what Mr. Durf(something) was doing. Plus, a 200 cell blastocyst is not worth anywhere near a suffering human being such as a child or other cognitive human beings. There is no soul, therefore theres no soul in the blastocyst. Let the scientists work!