Janet Rowley, Tony Perkins Debate Embryonic Stem Cell Research
President Obama repealed a federal funding ban on human embryo stem cell research. Advocates say that such research could cure afflictions that include spinal cord injuries and Alzheimer's disease, but critics say it involves destroying human life unnecessarily. Should such research proceed?
Should stem cell research be permitted?
Pro
Janet Rowley
Professor of medicine at the University of Chicago and a member of the President's Council on Bioethics.
The decision to end many restrictions on embryonic stem cell research has removed a key barrier to research and discovery. Scientists are driven by the desire to succeed as fervently as our most success-driven businessmen, entrepreneurs, or lawyers. But for years they have contended with research limits that prevent innovation but do not serve a clear moral purpose. A responsible expansion of embryonic stem cell research can advance a vital goal—the search for new medical treatments—while respecting the dignity of human life.... Read more >>
Con
Tony Perkins
President of the Family Research Council, promoting "the sanctity of human life in national policy."
Proponents of embryonic stem cell research must view the future with great hope. After all, on Monday, President Barack Obama reversed President George W. Bush's decision to shut the door on such research in August 2001 when he restricted federal research funds to a limited number of embryonic stem cell lines.
One might also think that with all the talk about the promise of human embryonic stem cell research since 1998 (mouse embryonic research started in 1981), patients would be seeing some benefit using these stem cells by now.... Read more >>
Reader Comments
It is defiently not wrong.
How is it murdering? Human embryos are basically tadpoles and should be used for stem cell research to help people who are living keep living! Its just ridiculous
Both forms of stem cells needed
Adult stem cell research has been studied and funded for fifty years. Human embryonic stem cells only about ten-- and it has only received about one-seventh the amount of money given to adult stem cell research. Not surprisingly, adult stem cell research has a head start.
But to imply that adult stem cell research replaces embryonic stem cell research is a major error-- they are different tools.
Both forms of research should go forward.
The Lipinski-Forbes bill referred to is just another way to block funding for embryonic stem cell research. The same folks tried the same bill once before, only they called it the Hope Act.
Support all embryonic stem cell research
The religious right keeps claiming that embryonic stem cell research "murders" persons. If that is true, why can IVF clinics dispose of extra embryos without penalty?
Blastocysts are microscopic undifferentiated C-E-L-L-S, not fetuses, babies or people. How does one murder a cell?
Most of the claims for adult stem cell cures are phoney. Dennis Turner was for years claimed as an ASC "cure" even when his Parkinson's disease had returned.
The religious right is a completely unreliable and dishonest source of influence and opinion on this controversy. As a person who has suffered from Parkinson's for 13 years, I wish they would confine themselves to prayer and let scientists do their jobs.
advertisement
