Welcome To CK5!
Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.
Score a FREE Membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.
Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by cbbr, Sep 28, 2005.
Any one have an opinion. This story got me thinking about it.
It's fine by me, as long as we're not harvesting aborted fetuses to get the stem cells. Adult stem cell and umbilical stem cells have value for research, embryonic ones don't, no matter what the democrat feminazi's say.
I'm not sure where I stand on this one yet.
Are the people who are totally against research using embryonic stem cells also against in vitro fertilization for couples who cannot have children naturally?
My understanding is that embryonic stem cells come from left over embryos from IVF, not from aborted fetuses.
So, typically when a couple goes in for IVF, several eggs are fertilized, more than are necessary for implantation. Then the lab implants the best embryos in the prospective mother – the leftovers are then destroyed.
Am I just not understanding? What difference does it make if they are destroyed or implanted? I don’t hear anyone calling for a stop to all IVF or to only produce the exact number of embryos that will be implanted. I guess I need to actually spend some time researching this so I can decide where to stand on the issue.
ah t shirt hell come through again...
Separate names with a comma.