 |
 |
Audrey, "Would they would feel this resistance to the idea if some one they loved was raped and became pregnant, or if someone whom they loved, or knew, could be saved." ----- I believe that if a child is conceived that we do not have the right to extinguish it no matter how it was conceived or who it would help. I have definitely thought thoroughly about what I would do in these situations and their impact. Please don't take offense that we disagree. I really like you all, but I felt a need to answer you, Sid and others. Jen Dad w/ PD 55/39 -----Original Message----- From: audrey skrzyniarz [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2000 1:56 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Abortion issue and stem cell research can be resolved Hi Sid, As you may know, I am in your corner in this debate. What I am curious about is this: Isn't this particular issue mainly to do with American congressional decisions and or the future newly elected president? I understand that other countries may be debating the same issue or have already decided to use discarded tissues for stem cell research. I do understand some who have moral issues that conflict with the idea of abortion even if I do not agree. I wonder sometimes two things: Would they would feel this resistance to the idea if some one they loved was raped and became pregnant, or if someone whom they loved, or knew, could be saved or never get parkinsons in the first place? I think maybe some have not thought of how this would impact another or have they addressed this thoroughly in their own minds. * seattle * Audrey friend of pwp aussie John 49/42/38?? ----- Original Message ----- From: " Sid Levin" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2000 10:17 AM Subject: Abortion issue and stem cell research can be resolved > Att: Stephanie Dorsch, (AND all other anti-stem cell research personnel) > Your comments on the Toronto Server were read with interest. > Many who are against abortion look upon the issue of stem cells as a > different issue and not an abortion issue at all. Let me point out the > following: > > The NIH regulations say that the only source of stem cells allowed will be > from surplus eggs leftover from an in vitro fertility program. > If the woman who created these eggs does not donate them to use in stem cell > research, her surplus eggs are incinerated. > You tell me -- which is preferable? Incineration of her eggs or use to better > mankind? > (Assume stem cells could show promise to cure Downs Syndrome when you answer.) > > Please bear in mind that birth control -- or lack thereof -- is not the > issue. > Question #2 Would you deny an infertile couple the right to create a wanted > infant through test tube conception? > > Your thought re use of pig cells or adult hair and eye stem cells. > First: Adult stem cell don't seem to have the staying power of newly created > stem cells. > Second: Until they can experiment with all types of stem cells, they will not > know the true benefits and risks. They are beginning to back-off of pig cell > usage because of the possibility of new diseases for mankind from the world > of swine. > > It is possible to be Pro-life and pro stem cell research all in the same > person. > If you wish the name of a ProLife ethics committee that is Pro-Stem Cell > research, just ask, I'll gladly supply it. > > Consider the question I raised about the Hobson's choice of incineration or > research for stem cells: They use pluripotent cells which are incapable of > producing life under ay circumstances > (Totipotent cells might produce a life, but only if implanted into a womb.) > > Abortion and a woman's right to choose are not really an issue for - or > against - the use of surplus eggs for stem cells. >