In July of 2001, President Bush took a stand against abortion by limiting federal funding for stem-cell research. What are the arguments for and against President Bush's policy?© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com March 21, 2019, 1:18 pm ad1c9bdddf
Please see response attached, including two supporting articles.
1. In July of 2001, President Bush took a stand against abortion by limiting federal funding for t-cell research. What are the arguments for and against President Bush's policy?
Arguments for President Bush's policy: -
Proponents of President Bush's policy use both scientific and ethical issues as a rationale against stem cell research.
• Stem cells are those with the potential to form many different types of tissue
• They are found not only in embryos but in many types of non-embryonic and even adult tissue
• Their potential for growing many types of tissue means that they show promise for treating many types of diseases and disabilities
• The best treatments to date are from non-embryonic stem cells, and the best source so far is lipo-suctioned fat
• Conversely, embryonic cells have had no successes, and experiments have shown potential dangers
• Embryonic stem cell research is closely linked with human cloning, to avoid the problem of tissue rejection that is a non-issue for somatic stem cells derived from the patient
• Human life begins at fertilization
• Therefore, ESCR and human cloning inevitably lead to death of tiny human beings http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1845/
• The Bible teaches that humanity starts at the beginning of biological life
• Since murder, intentionally killing human life, is wrong, it follows that ESCR, human cloning and induced abortions are wrong because they all involve intentional killing of human embryos
• Genesis 2:7 does not support the view that the human embryo does not have a soul or humanity
• The secular media is largely biased towards abortion
• The secular media is not against imposing one's religion or morality, as long as it's humanistic religion or morality
• The successes of non-embryonic stem cell treatment have largely been overlooked
• Justifying the killing of embryos for research or medical benefits will help de-humanise them in the eyes of the public, and perpetuate the idea that one class of humans is expendable
• The previous point seems to be the real agenda behind the push for ESCR http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1845/
From another source, White (2006) lists the following:
Arguments for President Bushes policy and Against Stem-cell Research:
Some staunch pro-lifers and most pro-life organizations regard the destruction of the blastocyst, which is a laboratory-fertilized human egg, to be the murder of human life. They believe that life begins at conception, and that destruction of this pre-born life is morally unacceptable.
They believe that it is immoral to destroy a few-days-old human embryo, even to save or reduce suffering in existing human life.
Many also believe that insufficient attention been given to explore the potential of adult stem cells, which have ...
In July of 2001, President Bush took a stand against abortion by limiting federal funding for stem-cell research. This solution examines the arguments for and against President Bush's policy. Supplemented with articles on the topic of stem cell research.