 |
| Pâ•qidꞋ Yi•rᵊmᵊyâhꞋu |
2004.10.26 – How many lives could be saved if we ended conflict by sacrificing Jews andor Israel to satisfy Arabs? What about sacrificing the Sudanese of Darfur to satisfy Arabs? What about sacrificing Hutus to satisfy Tutsies? What about sacrificing Croats to satisfy Serbs? What about sacrificing Kurds to satisfy Turks? What about sacrificing pre-birth children to satisfy sick people? Huh!?! 
“It could be considered immoral not to use embryos that would otherwise be destroyed to develop potential cures for disease affecting millions of people.” (National Human Genome Research Institute). That’s the chief argument for using embryonic stem cells for research. Embryos are destroyed to harvest embryonic stem cells.
We shouldn’t permit “unused” embryos that may be discarded, destroyed, harvested or otherwise killed to be stored in the first place. For those already existing, there are innumerable qualified married couples wanting to adopt. Bring these viable embryos to infancy and allow them to be adopted. Pass laws strictly forbidding future storage of embryos, no exceptions. With no storage of embryos, no future children will be “harvested” for their potential body parts.
I’ve been listening and learning about the embryonic stem cell research debate. I think now it’s time to speak out. Only a generation ago, what we today consider viable preemies were unsalvageable miscarriages. Perhaps such preemies should be “harvested” for research on their stem cells? Even today, most of those preemies couldn’t survive without extreme measures of life support. By the standard of the last generation, today’s viable preemies would be a non-person to be “harvested” for research. Today we know better. Or do we? We have become calloused; stone cold, by the desensitization campaign of the abortionists who wish every mother to have the right to murder as many of her unborn children as she wishes so that she will have the right to fornicate whenever and with whomever she wishes. For this unborn children are killed? Every reasonable person recognizes the right of a mother to choose survival of herself when forced to choose between her own life and that of her baby. But other abortions are simply murder to permit unrestrained pleasure -- hedonism. The embryos from which Michael J. Fox, the late Christopher Reeves and U.S. presidential candidate Sen. Kerry wish(ed) medical researchers to harvest embryonic stem cells are viable, simply undeveloped, embryonic human beings. If permitted the proper care and nutrition, most will become people.
There’s an enormous difference between embryonic stem cell research and umbilical cord stem cell research. Embryonic stem cell research requires “harvesting” viable embryonic human persons, while umbilical cord stem cell research harvests stem cells from an umbilical cord that has served its purpose and is simply discarded. Embryonic stem cell research requires murdering a viable embryonic human person while umbilical cord stem cell research harms nothing and is completely ethical.
“Umbilical cord stem cells are ethical. There is no loss of potential life from their use.” (Research physician David A. Steenblock, M.S., D.O., director of Brain Therapeutics Medical Clinic, (PRWEB) October 27, 2004) Umbilical cords and placenta are shed by the body and discarded. Harvesting stem cells from umbilical cords (or placenta, if that becomes possible) causes no harm and is perfectly ethical.
Shall we pay donor mothers and fathers for sacrificing their embryos to be “harvested” in a petrie dish? Perhaps we should pay mothers to sacrifice their unborn infants via abortion to harvest their parts? How macabre and degenerate has Western society become?
“Harvesting” embryonic stem cells is irredeemably unethical. Harvesting umbilical stem cells, by contrast, should be authorized immediately.
 |
|
 |