(It's from http://www.scienceinpublic.com/bio21/stemcells.htm)
There you go, a picture from a place were they discuss stem cells.
*I disregard what I just said* I personally am for stem cell research.
I think that the good things about it:
1. It could (will) lead to major medical achievements.
2. It could be the ultimate cure to a whole ton of illnesses.
3. It has shown it's usefulness, so we know it's a good investment.
...Out-weighs the bad things about it:
1. Saving more and more lives may lead to overpopulation.
2. Is it murder?
3. Is it anti-moral?
*Yet again* The entire back story behind stem cell research being bad seems to be that we destroy life and kill when we collect stem cells. It eventually boils down to "when does life begin?" I say life begins at birth; when that baby's head first pokes out into the world, that is life. In fact, the definition of life is "the period from birth to death" (birth to death) or "a specific phase of earthly existence". That is "earthly" existence, so until being born the not-yet-existent life has not been on earth yet, it has only been in the womb. That is to say that it is not life yet, thus meaning that we do not kill -nor waist- any life because there is no life to be killed or waisted.
And, even we are wisting chances on Earth, it would be worth it. I mean, all the knowledge we would acquire, would make us twice as efficient than any one human, or any ten, fifteen, twenty humans. If we invest the life, we'll get it back with how much of it we cure.
No comments:
Post a Comment