ALMOST all who are so strongly oppose it bought into the FOX News misinformation on the topic. Stem Cell research does not mean abortion first. I'm not talking about adult stem cells or umbilical stem cells. Even embryonic stem cells don't mean abortion in a manner of speaking. Embryonic stem cells are only obtained from blastocysts, which are fertilized eggs 3-5 days old. Now, before you jump out with "human life begins at fertilization", just keep reading. Blastocysts used in stem cell research are NOT obtained from someone who gets an abortion. They are obtained from women who go through in vitro fertilization. If a woman can't seem to get pregnant, they have the option of in vitro. How this works is many eggs are fertilized with the father's sperm in a lab dish. Most of the time, a few or many of those eggs are fertilized. But they don't put all the fertilized eggs into the mother. That would often be too many. So there are almost ALWAYS extra blastocysts. Those get frozen. The couple have a choice. They can either continue to pay to keep them stored frozen, let them thaw out (in which they die), or donate them to be used for research. Very rarely are eggs given to other women to 'adopt'. There just aren't many people wanting to go through an in vitro process for another person's kid. If they are going through in vitro, they typically want to try their own eggs/sperm.
So basically, unless the couple who does in vitro pays to store them either forever or until they want to try to have more kids (which is rare itself due to the cost of in vitro and the cost of storage), the blastocysts die. Either thawed or used to help people. So before you say you are against it, make sure that you can say that you are just as opposed to a couple who decides to try in vitro to have a kid. I have just heard too many people who are anti abortion, but saw nothing wrong with in vitro because they don't understand the process. I have also heard too many people say they are against stem cell research because they get them from aborted fetuses. Embryonic stem cells can't come from fetuses, and they aren't taken from people who go in for abortions. They only use blastocysts that a patient is not going to freeze and store. So if you are okay with in vitro, you have no room to say you are against embryonic stem cell research.
Now if you are against in vitro, then alright. You have every reason to be against stem cell research. You are not a hypocrite, in that case. I don't personally agree with that view, but I respect the view itself.
I personally don't have a problem with in vitro for people who want to try to have their own child. In that process, not all blastocytes will become babies. They are going to die. So why not give those cells that have a doomed future a chance to make a real difference in the world?
ALMOST all who are so strongly oppose it bought into the FOX News misinformation on the topic. Stem Cell research does not mean abortion first. I'm not talking about adult stem cells or umbilical stem cells. Even embryonic stem cells don't mean abortion in a manner of speaking. Embryonic stem cells are only obtained from blastocysts, which are fertilized eggs 3-5 days old. Now, before you jump out with "human life begins at fertilization", just keep reading. Blastocysts used in stem cell research are NOT obtained from someone who gets an abortion. They are obtained from women who go through in vitro fertilization. If a woman can't seem to get pregnant, they have the option of in vitro. How this works is many eggs are fertilized with the father's sperm in a lab dish. Most of the time, a few or many of those eggs are fertilized. But they don't put all the fertilized eggs into the mother. That would often be too many. So there are almost ALWAYS extra blastocysts. Those get frozen. The couple have a choice. They can either continue to pay to keep them stored frozen, let them thaw out (in which they die), or donate them to be used for research. Very rarely are eggs given to other women to 'adopt'. There just aren't many people wanting to go through an in vitro process for another person's kid. If they are going through in vitro, they typically want to try their own eggs/sperm.
So basically, unless the couple who does in vitro pays to store them either forever or until they want to try to have more kids (which is rare itself due to the cost of in vitro and the cost of storage), the blastocysts die. Either thawed or used to help people. So before you say you are against it, make sure that you can say that you are just as opposed to a couple who decides to try in vitro to have a kid. I have just heard too many people who are anti abortion, but saw nothing wrong with in vitro because they don't understand the process. I have also heard too many people say they are against stem cell research because they get them from aborted fetuses. Embryonic stem cells can't come from fetuses, and they aren't taken from people who go in for abortions. They only use blastocysts that a patient is not going to freeze and store. So if you are okay with in vitro, you have no room to say you are against embryonic stem cell research.
Now if you are against in vitro, then alright. You have every reason to be against stem cell research. You are not a hypocrite, in that case. I don't personally agree with that view, but I respect the view itself.
I personally don't have a problem with in vitro for people who want to try to have their own child. In that process, not all blastocytes will become babies. They are going to die. So why not give those cells that have a doomed future a chance to make a real difference in the world? 
User Notice 
Sword Legion is Offline
| ID: 976959 | 50 Words
Sword Legion is Offline
