Stem Cell Research
There is a raging debate that’s been going since I was in high school. It centers around the scientific use of embryonic stem cells to do amazing things like regrow organs and cure degenerative diseases. Such applications are quite a ways off, of course, so more research is needed before we can see the real benefit. The potential is there, however, for the next big revolution in modern medicine.
The only problem, according to those who define it as such, is that embryonic stem cells have to come from embryos. Organizations opposed to this research claim it is immoral because of this. And while it has become a point of hot political and philosophical debate as to what an embryo really is, these organizations really want to say that the scientists are killing babies.
Consider for a moment the case of organ donation. A person is brain dead and is kept alive by artificial means. His or her organ are harvested and placed into other people who need them in order to survive. This turns one person’s death into life for several others. Yes, it is tragic that they are dead, but some good can still be cultivated from the loss.
Now consider the same of an embryo. Say, for instance, a woman has a miscarriage or the fetus has an unsurvivable birth defect. Given that few people argue against organ donation, what exactly is the problem with harvesting stem cells? Granted, this is only the case for terminal fetuses, but the point remains the same. If we have the ability to take a tragedy and turn it into hope for others who are suffering or dying, the question is not whether it is wrong to do so. For any reasonable human being, the question is whether it is wrong to pass up the opportunity to do good.
Part of my argument for stem cell research naturally derives from my pro choice views. An embryo is just that, an embryo. Whether or not it can be considered a person is highly debatable. At any stage during which stem cells would conceivably be harvested, it lacks the central nervous system necessary to feel pain or even care about its state of being. If one accepts a woman’s right to choose abortion, then an embryo about to be aborted is essentially terminal. What harm can there be, then, by using it for the benefit of others? After all, the embryo is little more than a clump of organic tissue, no more a person than a harvested organ.
I believe that thoughts, feelings, desires, and personality are what defines a person, and that these things are derived from our nervous systems rather than some esoteric, unquantifiable soul or spirit. Thus, I take no issue with the use of embryonic stem cells to promote scientific research. As paradigms tend to shift in the direction of progress, I fully suspect that in a few years any arguments against stem cell research will be considered antiquated and even the nay-sayers will be living longer, happier lives thanks to the breakthroughs it yields.