preview

Stem Cell Debate

Decent Essays
Open Document

Richard’s response to the question clearly comes from a more capitalistic and economic standpoint. However, he still manages to touch upon the heart of the issue and the overall goal, which would be promoting the common good. He recognizes that the demand for healthcare certainly does exceed the supply however he fails to offer a legitimate proposed solution. Murray, on the contrary, does offer some insight on this. She argues from the Catholic perspective that one must have a preferential option for the poor, which embraces the poor class with a genuine purpose. She points to the fact that the Catholic Church has advocated for a Universal Healthcare system since it ultimately is their belief that health and healthcare access is a fundamental …show more content…

This debate examines the controversies that arise regarding stem cell research and whether or not the cell is an inherent human person. She points to five values that one, as a catholic theology thinker, should focus on. These five values are: The value of nascent life, the value of moral virtue or moral integrity, the value of medical benefits, the value of distributive justice or just institutions, and the value of a social ethos of generosity and solidarity (Lysaught, page 696). One of the most important values that Lysaught touches upon would be the value of moral virtue. Specifically from the Christian standpoint, morals are key to fulfilling a virtuous life. Lysaught claims that, “This value may be translated into the principle that one ought always to act with moral integrity and never act against one’s conscience” (Lysaught, page 699). Here, Lysaught is arguing for the importance of our own free will as well as the inherent values that we as people are capable of using. Most arguments in favor of stem cell research come from the research that shows the promising potential use of the cells, such as treating or potentially curing diabetes, spinal injuries, Alzheimer’s, and many other life threatening chronic diseases. This hope for the cells however comes at a serious cost according to Christians. A Christian …show more content…

This mindset would involve looking at all of the values and disvalues that one’s life may provide to the majority at large. If the values outweigh the disvalues, then that person is morally permissible to live. However, if the disvalues appear to be more substantial, then a Utilitarian society would decide that the value of that person’s life is not benefitting the larger community so it is not morally permissible. While this is a very extreme example of how Utilitarianism can operate, nevertheless, it is able to show the strength that this method contains. The end goal of happiness that utilitarianism aims to achieve is one that Christians will find accordance with. God created all beings in His image and likeness with the goal of perfecting the human race as well for their utmost happiness. While both God and Utilitarianism do want happiness as the end to their means, Utilitarianism has different forms of means than Christianity does. Utilitarianism offers an economic and quantitative approach to calculating the ethical gains or losses behind their methodology of determining morality. For example, assume a patient comes into a primary care provider’s office with symptoms consistent with chronic kidney disease (renal disease). Although the disease at its current stage is manageable and therefore not end-stage, the patient will be required to incur the hefty costs associated with caring for

Get Access
Related
Get Access