Human Embryonic Stem Cells : The Moral Dilemma

Embryonic stem cell research is important for further development in the medical field. It strongly supports the idea that every life has value, an idea known as human dignity. Human beings are created in the image and likeness of God, and thus, are all equal. The idea of radical equality before God leads us to think no less of someone regardless of their physical appearance, religious beliefs, cultural background, or anything else. It is through virtues such as charity, mercy, and justice that our human dignity is preserved. By living through these virtues and realizing how to effectively instill them within us, we are able to live a virtuous life. This paper argues that although issues involving embryonic stem cell research are controversial, research in this area is typically permissible for further development in the medical field when looking to preserve human dignity. In order to defend this thesis, this paper will be structured into three sections as followed: the description of embryonic stem cell research, the development of a moral lens, and the moral argument and analysis of this case.

This report describes how ethics involving embryos has been ongoing for 25 years but has significantly increased with the stem cell controversy. Another issue brought up by this report is whether or not federal funds should be spent on an issue that is so ethically

The studying of stem cells is a very controversial issue that has been around since 1998 when the research of the use of embryonic stem cell treatment began. The main issues surrounding the discussion of treating people with life-altering disabilities through the use of these pluripotent cells is the ethicality of the matter and whether or not it is a savage act against a fetus. Many who oppose the use of these stem cells derived from excess embryos use the formerly stated opinion to support their argument, while those who are pro research argue that the destroying of one life could save another. The core complications that arise in studying stem cells lies in many Christian-like ethics and morals, otherwise called Christian bioethics. These are rooted in the modern day controversies arising due to advancements made in biology and medicine, mixed with religious views that argue against it. The conflicting interests of the polar opposites which are scientists and those with religious views have caused many complications along the way to discovering new treatments and cures for diseased cells. This bumpy road which has refrained scientists from making tremendous breakthroughs must smooth itself out, and the only way possible is through coming to an agreement that certain stem cell research should be practiced, such as the IPSC and adult stem cells, and others like the

Embryonic stem cell research is a controversial topic nationwide, because of its clash of ethical and moral values. Many people, including those suffering from diseases that this research is seeking to cure, do not believe in killing a living embryo in order to advance research and science.

The introduction and expansion of embryonic stem cell research initiated a highly debated ethical topic. Can our society agree to disagree? What are embryonic stem cells? What are stem cells? Is all stem cell research considered abortion? Debates surrounding embryonic stem cell research is further complicated by social standards and needs, religious beliefs, and personal morals.

In the past few years’ embryonic stem cells have been used and tested a whole lot. Which begs the questions what are they? What do they do? Is the use of them ethical? Embryonic stem cells are cell that can turn into whatever kind of cell is needed these are also referred to as pluripotent stem cells these are obtained by uses unborn children. This leads into the point that the use of embryonic stem cells in organ transplants is not ethical because embryos are killed to use and test.

Throughout the course of history, healthcare advancements have been some of the most important events to happen to the human race. Whether it was the invention of the first stethoscope or the first vaccine for polio, these findings have helped lengthen and improve human life, as well as aid scientists in better understanding humans as a species. In recent years, embryonic stem cells have been discovered to offer a variety of benefits to many different diseases and disorders. However, despite their amazing potential, the source of these lifesaving cells have brought up the question of ethics and morals in the scientific and medical communities as well as mainstream media. Is stem cell research worth the dangers and moral controversies in

Embryonic Stem cells have led to a very long line of discussion. Whether to see it as immoral not to pursue research or immoral to pursue research, it is nonetheless very difficult to discuss. Questions are uncovered during this debate, for example, Is killing possible life (Embryos) lesser or greater than saving the already living, such as people with incurable diseases? The debate goes deeper and deeper into moral judgment and it doesn't matter whether you are religious or not in this argument because in both cases it is a life. But what if it didn't have to be a life? Further forms of research may be used to help save lives both from people who have incurable diseases and the embryos. If such research can be formed without a moral block, performance of such research should not be delayed. The possibility to save loved ones is incredible, to do so without victimizing women for embryos and killing those embryos, which could possibly behold life, only to maybe

Imagine living in a world without cancer, Parkinson 's, or even diabetes. While everyone may wish this is true, people are against a way that researchers can make this possible, which would be by the use of stem cells. There is major controversy on whether or not stem cell research should be allowed, especially when it comes to embryonic stem cell research. Although many consider it to be killing a potential life form, embryonic stem cell research may eventually be acceptable to use because there is consent and a lengthy process to make sure the donor understands what their embryonic stem cells will be used for. That may be viewed as a much better

There has been a controversial debate on whether or not embryonic stem cell research should be morally justified if it leads to the enhancement of treatments for acute and chronic diseases. Stem cell research is important because it leads to new potentials for regenerative therapies and treatments for diseases such as blindness, spinal cord injuries, and myocardial infarctions. In addition, stem cell research allows scientists to learn their fundamental properties and what makes them different from adult stem cells. In this essay, I will investigate the differentiation between adult stem cells (somatic stem cells) and embryonic stem cells. I will discuss the potential benefits of embryonic stem cells and the process of harvesting these embryos. Furthermore, I will examine the moral status of the human embryo based on rationality and when the embryo takes on human form. In this essay, I plan to accomplish that embryonic stem cells are scientifically more beneficial than adult stem cells because

“Now science has presented us with a hope called stem cell research, which may provide our scientists with many answers that have for so long been beyond our grasp.” (Nancy Reagan). Most cells within our bodies perform one specialized task. Contrary to these single job cells are stem cells. These cells are unspecialized and can morph and perform any task that is needed within the body. However, the way that stem cells are harvested has caused a lot of controversy. The way that the stem cells are taken destroys the embryo. We should support the recent decision to allow embryonic stem-cell research in the United States and federally fund the work to use these stem cells to cure diseases. Better stem cell research would provide safer procedures and medical practices for everyone.

While embryonic stem cell research has been ongoing for more than 30 years, it has only become a controversial topic over the past decade. The embryonic stem cell was first isolated in 1981 by two scientists at the University of Cambridge. However, it wasn’t until 1998 at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, where the first batch of embryonic stem cells were created in a test tube. In 2001, President George W. Bush approved the use of federal funding for research on this topic, following this action the stem cell controversy has been developing. The controversy around this topic focuses heavily on the ethical portion of stem cell research rather than the scientific evidence. Stem cell research has shown great promise for potentially

There are many diseases that have the potential to affect every single person in the world. Some are curable and some are not. However, some cells called stem cells may impact and help many people. Stem cells are what are called undifferentiated cells, which means that they are not specialized cells. However, they can develop into all different kinds of cells within the body. So through this, stem cells control the development of the body by evolving into the cells the body needs to survive, or even replacing worn out or destroyed cells (Levine and Miller 294-297). These cells can reproduce to make more of themselves through cell division. In the long run, stem cells enable the body to continue functioning and to stay healthy (Stem Cell).

Embryonic stem cell (ESC) research has caused great amounts of controversy for at least fifty years. This debate tears at the roots of our nation’s morals and ethics. Lawmakers must ask themselves if the unethical research on embryos is worth never finding a cure for diseases that have killed millions of people. While Congress has made many decisions regarding this topic, it seemed to be impossible to please both sides of the controversy; however, with recent decisions and new research, common ground has become more possible to obtain.

Embryonic stem cells research has challenged the moral ethics within human beings simply because the point at which one is considered a “human,” is still under debate and practically incapable to make a decision upon.