Your view on stem cell research..
 

I know many think that this is immoral and just plain wrong.

Is "destroying" life in the "hopes" of saving many more lives in the future justified?

For that matter, (I know this has been debated ALOT) when can one say that life starts?
My view is not when life starts, but when a person starts.

When does a person become a person?

For instance, I have the choice to save 20 human fertilized eggs or one 5 year old child from a fire?
What would be the moral thing to do?

thoughts please..

Re: Your view on stem cell research..
 

Im'a member of 'the moment of conception' camp, I believe a person has been granted a human soul at the moment of conception. But at the same time, I have no qualms with stem cell research, due to the fact that an embryo can not become a viable human being without a female host. For me it would be a question of viability,(I would save the 5 year old child.)and most stem cells are harvested from embryos created via in vitro fertilization. Another way stem cells are created is through theraputic cloning, where the nucleus of a different cell is transplanted into an egg and allowed to progress as an embryo. Now since the embryo is created from a hair cell per say would it be granted a soul?? I don't know. I do know that there are only 155 stem cell lines world wide, only 78 of them are approved for federal funding and only 28 of those are suitable for research. Anywho, I personally would prefer the embryos to be donated to stem cell research, which would be for the greater good , than to be otherwise destroyed, which is what would happen to them. Either way that particular embryo will never have the opportunity to become a viable human.

Re: Your view on stem cell research..
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is "destroying" life in the "hopes" of saving many more lives in the future justified?

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not necessarily convinced that a fertilized egg is "life." I really don't know where to draw the line to when specifically human life begins. In the absense of a definitive answer by science to this question, I prefer to play it safe. I'd rather err on the side of considering it life too early than too late. Where exactly that line is, though, I don't know.

In the absense of solid scientific evidence, I rely at least somewhat on my gut feeling. Abortion, even very early term, feels very wrong to me. The morning after pill, and embryonic stem cell research do not feel wrong. I'm not entirely comfortable with the morning after pill, but I don't have anywhere close to a strong enough opinion on the matter to pass judgement on anybody who does use it.

I do feel that the benefits of embyonic stem cell research greatly outweigh any trepidations I have to killing a fertilized egg. If science somehow comes up with an answer that definitavely identifies conception as the moment life begins, I'll revisit my opinion on stem cell research.