Sanctity of human life??

[slugshooter]

As we all know, the Bush Admin has blocked further efforts for research regarding embryonic stem cells by claiming that an embryonic stem cell is the beginnings of life. Regardless of what lives stem cell research may save, GW Bush seems more concerned with the 400,000 frozen embryos in storage by saying that they are individual lives and blocking any attempts at research. Recently, the president paraded some children born from this stockpile of embryos in the East Room of the White House, in total, approximately 80 children have been born with frozen embryos. 80 out of 400,000. What happens when these embryos are no longer able to be used for fertilization? They are destroyed!! So instead of these embryos being destroyed in research that may bring about life saving treatments, they are destroyed by tossing them out in the garbage. Where is the respect and sanctity of human life in that???

[johnf]

I would think that when they are no longer viable for justation they would be also nonviable for the research. I've got a sister who's a PHD in two scientific fields that could probibly answer that question. I'll try to remember to ask her tomorrow and I'll get back to you on that.

[LifeNRA]

[ QUOTE ]
So instead of these embryos being destroyed in research that may bring about life saving treatments, they are destroyed by tossing them out in the garbage. Where is the respect and sanctity of human life in that???

[/ QUOTE ]

In stem cell research, they would need the cord that was attached to a growing baby, right? If that was the case, then you would be growing the babies from the embryo. What would happen to the babies? Abort them?

[Tominator]

Touchy subject for sure. I can see how both sides see this.

Personally, in a way, I'd like to see the research go forward, because selfishly it might help me someday. I'd love it if a doctor could clone me a lung someday and replace the one the docs took out a few years ago.

On the other hand, fertilizing embryos for the express purpose of destroying them is wrong too.

Tough subject.

[fisherguy]

Life NRA, they do not need to grow the embryo until there is an umbilical cord. An umbilical cord can be used to gather another form of stem cells, but they use umbilical cords from born babies.

[wtnhunt]

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, fertilizing embryos for the express purpose of destroying them is wrong too

[/ QUOTE ]

Could not agree more with that. I would think that if the "stockpile" was usable, it would be used. Dont think anyone is throwing out human life.

[markyj987]

I hate the idea of the embryos being destroyed, and particularly being created just so they can be destroyed. The worst, however, is for them to be frozen, stockpiled, and then completely destroyed.

Also, I think there is a common misconception that embryonic stem cell research has been stopped by Bush--that's what the left wants people to believe.

In fact, the administration has only tried to stop federal funding of such research. I can't say I disagree with that from a policy standpoint at all.