Or, 50 Ways To Kill Your Baby – The Sequel. The following screenshot from this morning deserves a comment or two. It’s a very important issue.
I decided to read a few of these links, and others, to see how this news was reported. My comments are in red.
From CNN - ”The field of embryonic stem cell research has been highly controversial, because in most cases, the research process involves destroying the embryo, typically four or five days old, after removing stem cells. These cells are blank and can become any cell in the body. Because of the destruction of embryos, most opponents believe this is a moral issue. Supporters of the research point to the potential for saving lives.” [Seems reasonable. We can save lives and the destroyed embryos are only four or five days old. How can this be a moral issue? Just a microscopic mini-hunk of tissue at risk. Right? Maybe not.]
From NBC – “Embryonic stem cells have been the focus of fierce debate since the mid-1990s. Many scientists see them as a watershed in the treatment of serious ailments because they have the potential to grow into any of the body’s cell types, promising the eventual generation of replacement nerve lines and vital organs, including the brain and the heart.
“But anti-abortion activists vigorously oppose the research because the cells come from human embryos and days-old human fetuses, which they contend [my emphasis] are fully human. Many of them want to limit research to stem cells derived from adult tissue, which most researchers contend have less potential to transform into other types of cells.” [Contending that these cells are fully human is a bold statement from the anti-abortion activists. And contending that adult stem cells have less potential? I would have expected the reporter to dig into these two points a bit. If we get this wrong, aren't we talking about the murder of humans?––not potential humans but humans with potential.]