 |
 |
> Detractors of embryonic - argue that the concerns about life should not > be limited to post birth. If three day embroyos are not considered > "alive" then what about 4 day? 5? If we allow testing on 3 day old > embryos, then discover that it would be more helpful to do 4 day, then > 5.. where does it stop? It is not a question of experimenting on embryos, It is a question of using cells from a ´body´ ressembling a small blackberry and reproducing them. > > Supporters of embryonic - argue that we need to pursue all avenues of > research to get to a cure faster > Detractors of embryonic - might argue if that is the reasoning, then why > don't we experiment on prisoners? We could probably find a cure even > faster It does happen....but prisoners are too old for embryonic stem cells to be collected on them;-) > > Supporters of embryonic - argue that if we are going to destroy embryos > anyway, why not get use from their destruction? > Detractors of embryonic - I think (and I am not sure) that the argument > would be that we don't want to create a market for "farming" embryos There is no need to farm embryos. Thousands are there, waiting to be destroyed if not reimplanted. They end up in the trash can anyways. > > I guess an overall argument I am hearing is: > Supporters of embryonic - science should not be deterred > Detractors of embryonic - God's will should not be deterred I cannot say if any god would rather destroy a source of potential treatment. It is what is being done at the moment. Extra embryos are ending on the rubbish heap. Why not use them for a worthwhile cause? Or one could argue that some god has decided that some people should suffer from diseases and that is right. Trying to cure them could be against that god´s will Maryse cg John 76,16 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn