Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat
Whats stiking is that you would question why some people are opposed to embryonic stem cell research - whether you agree with their point of view or not.
There was arguably scientific benefit to the horrific research the nazis did experimenting on prisoners in WWII. I hate to use such a extreme comparison to prove a point, as no rational person would equate what the nazis did to embryonic stem cell research, but the underlying principle is the same - Scientists can't just perform research because of the potential benefits. Ethical concerns should be weighed against potential benefits in any type of research.
The reasons many peope oppose research using embryonic stem cells are obvious. Whether you agree with their point of view is entirely another matter, and its entirely reasonable for a person to have no problems with embryonic stem cell research.
|
Of course scientific research must follow ethical paths. There is no question in that. The question is, which ethics? The ethical stance which conflates stem cell research with abortion issues? Or the ethical stance which holds that healing people is a central good, so stem cell research should be expanded?
It seems to me that RGIII's case is an example which teaches that we should be expanding stem cell research of various types rather than being, as a society, so squeamish about stem cells. Just my opinion.
