Tuesday, 14 October 2008
-
Embryonic Cloning: Playing God or Saving Lives?
Guest post submitted by westernsoul
A month or so ago, a piece of literature informed me that scientists will now consider cloning embryos in order to take stem cells from the cloned embryo. There is obviously an ethical issue here; however, the scientists think this is a solution.
Their line of thinking is that since they are not killing an original embryo in order to procure these cells, it must be ok to clone, and then kill that cloned embryo for the harvest. Stem cells can have a variety of uses from curing cancers to repairing cells or replacing them, they can even program the genes in order to produce "desirable humans."
Now the problem I see in cloning embryos for harvest is that the scientists are playing God. What do I mean by playing God? Perhaps playing God is deciding when people should be brought into the world. The same idea stands when scientists decide when to harvest cells and kill an embryo. Maybe when these embryos are killed, it is not there time to die, maybe those embryos are meant to grow into great human beings whom are meant for great things.
These scientists can clone people at any stage in life; the hope here is to create perfect humans by altering their genes. Sure these ideas open doors for science and advancement for the bettering of humankind, but we have got to limit ourselves somehow.
Often times when humans are presented with new ideas, they don't know where to quit; as humans we naturally do not know where to stop, overstepping boundaries becomes the norm when we are excited with new ideas.
My Catholic religion does allow the stem cells of the umbilical cord to be used for science, just not those of living embryos. The problem with this is that the stem cells of the umbilical cord are not of good quality.
I just finished reading an article on how stem cells can now be harvested from the testicles of males. This is the supposed solution to the harvesting from live embryos. Tissue is taken from the testicles of males to obtain stem cells almost exactly like the embryonic, if not exactly. Sound painful? maybe, but the more I think of the concept I can not think of anything ethically wrong with it. Is this the solution to embryonic stem cell research?
Would like to know your thoughts Revelifers...
-
recommend
- recs 0
-
share
-
email
- sent 0
Related Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to revelife's Revelife Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in revelife's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
Comments (55)
@MrCheetah@xanga - okay ......lots to think about. I still come back to the question "is it alright to clone? is that God's will for mankind?" Is it our RIGHT to create life like this and then, indeed, destroy it? Does the end justify the means? Any human being alive has a soul yes? well, i believe they do. Just ask any mother who has lost a baby through miscarriage. They believe their child is in heaven with God. Do cloned embryos not have a soul? This is just too confusing for me. I understand why people are for this, because of the possibility of curing diseases. However, I do think that if God wills for us to cure diseases that there will be an ethically sound way to do so. I'm alll for research using adult stem cells and umbilical cord stem cells .........let's see what mankind can do with that.
And I'm not sure that comparing the life of a cloned embyro destined only for stem cell harvesting and death with Jesus Christ' sacrifice is a good comparison. NOTHING can be compared with what Jesus did for us. Jesus also willingly gave up His life for us ---- these embryos are not willingly giving up their lives. Let's see grown adults doing that for research!
@nicolevw@xanga - I think cloning at this level isn't illegal. I mean, they aren't building an army of clones or anything. If you or anyone thinks that cloning embryos is bad, please do give me your reasons. Does the end justify the means... In this case, yes. Again, I'm gonna stress the fact that these embryos wouldn't even be here if they weren't created. Their mere purpose in life is to cure diseases. Also, I have to disagree with you about this whole "everyone has a soul" idea. I don't think clones have a soul. Okay. I'm gonna clone you. Your clone gets "saved" just like you. Are both of you gonna go to heaven or just you? Did I, by cloning you, just clone your soul as well? I doubt the clone will ever make it to either heaven or hell. I mean, the "clone" was not created by God, therefore was not even in God's list of people that he created. So I don't think that clones have a soul.
I'm sorry, I was not comparing Christ's death and the embryo's, nor did speak about their willingness. I think that came out wrong. I was trying to make the point that God does use death as a means to accomplish something greater. Through the deat of Jesus Christ, our sins were washed away. Joan of Arc's death (which God allowed) the French were able to defeat the English. Through the countless numbers of martyrs that God allowed to die, the faith of Christians were strenghtened.
@westernsoul - Replying to your reply, yes, I agree that trying to manipulate genes to make people the way we want them to be is "playing God," or exercising control we have no right to. That's what I meant by "by whose standards?" God is the Creator, and to try to design humans is to say we have better standards than God for how humans should be made.
@jmallory@xanga - I understand what you're saying, but I still disagree. I think it's okay to "take advantage of" Jesus' death, because He said no one takes His life from Him, but He freely gave it. The unborn certainly didn't volunteer for this. I think that using dead embryos, whether we agree with killing in the first place or not, is still a violation of the sanctity of life because it is capitalizing on a tragedy, and creating a market for murder. Suppose researchers decided to use the embryos to research, and found the cure for some widespread and dreaded disease, and then the prayers of the pro-lifers were positively answered, and killing embryos could be made illegal. The country wouldn't stand for it, and would demand the continued killing and use of embryos, because we know the people suffering from the disease, and can ignore the cause of the unborn, because they don't have a voice.
That's why, even if I came into a situation in which a treatment from embroynic stem cells could save my life, I would refuse it. In mourning for the lives so untimely, unjustly, and preventably ended, I will not take advantage of them, and thus lend any justification to their deaths.
I know I probably haven't convinced you, and that's okay. It's just that my belief in the sanctity of life requires no less of me. After all, the word "sanctity" means it is so sacred it is not to be touched.
I actually still trying to form my oppinion on the matter...