 |
 |
Actually, as I have written before, I BELIEVE that life begins at conception as well. I guess I should have written "...we can't all agree on when life begins". However, I still also believe that if those embryos are to be destroyed anyway, that they may as well serve some good purpose in the process. I also believe that "surplus" embryos should not be made in the first place, and if that is the only option for the process, then couples should adopt rather than go to fertilization clinics. However, that is not the issue. They are already being made, and they are already being destroyed, so that couples who otherwise WANT a baby with their own genetics can have one. So why is the argument over embryonic stem cells so heated, when the embryos are already being destroyed for what I consider a lesser purpose than SCNT? Where was the outcry over the destruction of these embryos before? But let me get this straight. If scientists say that life begins at conception, and if as Ray wrote SCNT does not involve fertilized cells, then what is the problem? If the cells being studied are per-fertilization, then by your definition, it doesn't involve life. Or am I misunderstanding something? Wendy -----Original Message----- But I disagree with your assumption about when life begins. Inquire any biologist, and they will tell you that human life begins at conception, or when the sperm and egg join, and the embryo is the beginning of human life. A new individual human being *begins* at fertilization . Show me a biologist who disagrees with that. You can't. Here are just some references: .... > >Because we CAN'T know when life begins (anyone's definition will just be >a guess), I feel very hesitant about embryonic stem cell research. >However, I also feel strongly that if they are to be destroyed anyway, >they may as well "die" for a cause. I actually find the concept of >abortion much more difficult than this topic, as the embryos are much >further developed. However, there are actually valid considerations on >both sides of the abortion issue as well. > >Wendy > >-----Original Message----- >... > >I think the in vitro clinic issue is really important because those >embryos, unlike SCNT are the result of fertilization. You know that it >often takes more than just one to produce a live birth. So, embryos are >being produced and destroyed so that infertile couples can reproduce. >Is that OK? If not, what is going to be done with all those extra >embryos? Why is this being ignored? > AND STILL GOING ON? > >It seems to me that opponents of both kinds of stem cell research need >to >deal with this question and they are not doing it. >Ray > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: >mailto:[log in to unmask] >In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] >In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn