What do you think about stem cell research or cloning?
548381
Yes, and I completely support it. It would save many lives, and apparently, Bush doesn't care about that.
87621
I think all forms of cloning should be banned.  What good can possibly come of it?\n\nThe ones that they have cloned have died at early ages or turned out to be a veg, instead of a sheep
976097
stem cell research is good, per se, but it is unfortunate that sensationalism has turned the debate so that people think that it is some automatic holy grail that cures all diseases
106747
if you clone organs or whatever in purely medical purposes I`m all for it \nbut when you start talking about cloning people you like \ne.g. I like sting and I want one at home so he can sing to me  \nwell that`s crazy\nor deciding not to give birth but to clone yourself hello\nwhy not make a race of clones who will be superior to us because of their manipulated genetics \nI know tgis sounds like sf but cloning was also sf 15 years ago
943624
I think embryonic stem cell research is wrong.  I am a Christian, have been all my life, and I don't like being stereo-typed because of my religious 'convictions.'  Advocates argue that Christians are against embryonic stem cell research because they, we, think when we die we will have to answer for it.  NEWS FLASH!  I have accepted Christ, I am going to Heaven when I die, and here is the kicker......I won't have to answer for THEIR transgressions!  I think embryonic stem cell is wrong because life does begin at conception.  The argument that it doesn't is just a way for those who end life to feel better about themselves.  You shouldn't be able to harvest humans like potatoes for the sake of research.  Any way you look at it, it's wrong.  No ifs, ands, or buts.  I have a hard time figuring their reasoning.  What it boils down to is that they want to kill babies to cure old people.  End new life to save one that's already been lived.  For what?  To add another 10-15 years to a persons life?  Why?  Like you said, embryonic stem cell research has yielded no results, however, adult stem cell research has been the most promising so far.  I don't have an argument with these practices.  I don't even have an argument with using aborted embryos for research.  I don't believe in abortion, but the US Supreme Court says it is the right of a woman to decide.  If she decides to end her pregnancy, then I believe the embryo can be used for research.  Is this not a good enough compromise?  I have had a great grandmother die from one of those diseases stem cell research promises to cure.  I watched her suffer, held her hand as she passed, but I would never have signed anything that would have her better if I had to kill a baby.  So many people out there would love to be parents, but they can't because of medical or financial limitations.  Democrats want us to sign on for funded programs that allow babies to be killed for research to cure illnesses and diseases.  I don't see any of these people pushing for a federally funded program to help barren women conceive the children they so desparately want.  Are they really trying to help people?
374875
For embyronic stem cell:\nit will provide many cures for possibly many diseases and conditions such as diabetes and paralysis, it has proven to be effective so far and can better the lives of many, it is the cutting edge of modern medicine\n\nAgainst:\nThere are other methods of stem cell research using adult stem cells that won't use embryos at all, many believe that killing the embryos just for their stem cells is not moral, the eventual result of stem cell research could be overcrowding due to increased life span for many and/or cloning which is an issue that is also very controversial
971448
I agree that stem cells hold the answers to many different diseases. I do not see anything wrong with using embryos.\nHere is the problem, not all groups can agree to this due to religious reasons. \nSome believe a child is a child at conception, others believe in the 2nd trimester. Its very complicated and unfortunate. I believe that the embryos that will not grow (there are many) should be used for research. That way maybe both groups will be ok.\nI also believe that people should not put other people down for their beliefs. I understand from both sides.
699943
Opposition to stem cell research is almost entirely ethical/moral.  There are two major concerns, both of which turn on the sanctity of life and the slippery slope argument.\n\nThe first is that if any gains are realized from this research, that scientists will begin to farm human beings a la "The Matrix".  The basic fear is that even though scientists currently intend only to use cells from embryos that were going to be destroyed anyway, they will begin to create babies for the sole purpose of harvesting their stem cells.  In essence, it's a more sinister form of abortion.\n\nSecondly, many of those people who oppose cloning are against stem cell research because the methodology of conducting stem cell research is that of small-scale cloning.  More specifically, legislation legalizing stem cell research may be written such that full-on cloning would also be legal, although this is a somewhat tenuous argument.\n\nIf you want to know any more, I would suggest you look at most any Right-to-Life website.  They will likely have talking points to better explain these and other arguments.\n\nBest of luck with your speech.  Arguing against your own beliefs can often refine your own debate skills and understanding of your real position.
128352
It is not wrong and it is neccessary for humnas to move ahead and be able to combat the more debilitating diseases.\n\nI think some limits need to be in place and any research should be vetted by a committee for ethics, scientific rationale and soundness, but if it meets that criteria, then stem cells should be used to find new treatments for disease.\n\nWhat is sad is that many groups would like you to think that a baby has to die to obtain stem cells. This is far from the truth. There are many fetal sources for stem cells, and none are from aborted fetuses. Many of these sources are just incerated as medical waste because of current legislation promoted by those ignorant of basic biology. \nScientists should be free to do life saving research that will benefit all of humankind.
808174
Genetic modification is a dangerous game until the technology is absolutely fool-proof. \n\nI think cloning technology is the future since curing many diseases could depend upon it. But there has to be strict regulation involved because guess what, obtaining anyone's DNA is easier than picking your nose. \n\nYou may find the movie 'The Island' very interesting.
991356
The Christian community does not worry about stem cell research, we worry about babies being murdered to save adults.  Since it is hard to control what goes on in private labs once this activity is started, it is best to stay clear of launching into this practice.
14531
at this point there are more pros to the research (currently being investigated) but we must be careful not to take away(OR create a market that takes away) a human life inorder to improve our life. thats what people are ultimately afraid of this research turning into.which would be you being cured of a desease by doctors injecting into you part of an unborn dead fetus or a cloned one.
359710
It's not so much the acutal medical risks, but the ehtical and moral implications of conducting research in the field.\n\nThe following is an excerpt from a research paper I recently wrote concerning stem cell research:\n\nEmbryonic stem cell research raises immense ethical and religious concern:\nThe issue of research involving stem cells derived from human embryos is increasingly the subject of a national debate and dinner table discussions. The issue is confronted every day in laboratories as scientists ponder the ethical ramifications of their work. It is agonized over by parents and many couples as they try to have children or to save children already born. The issue is debated within the church, with people of different faiths- even many of the same faith- coming to different conclusions. Many people are finding the more they know about stem cell research, the less certain they are about the right ethical and moral conclusions. (“Bush Embryonic Stem Cell Decision” 1)\nQuite often, the status of an embryo is debated among scientists, politicians, theologians, philosophers, and even everyday people. There are many ideas circulating the globe as some vie to protect the embryo and others hope to use it to benefit society. Those that oppose stem cell research claim that the methods scientists use are not morally justifiable. Human embryos, in their minds, are “not mere biological tissues or clusters of cells; they are the tiniest of human beings” (Espejo 49). According to the Human Embryo Research Panel and the National Bioethics Commission, the embryo should be considered a living organism from its earliest stages (Espejo 46-50). People therefore claim that scientists are alienating the rights of living human beings by performing experiments on embryos: \nThe painful lessons of the past should have taught us that human beings must not be conscripted for research without their permission- no matter what the alleged justification- especially when that research means the forfeiture of their health or lives. Even if an individual’s death is believed to be otherwise imminent, we still do not have a license to engage in lethal experimentation- just as we may not experiment on death row prisoners or harvest their organs without their consent. (Espejo 49)\nThe widespread Christian view that life begins at the moment of conception has caused many to believe that the destruction of the human embryo is murder (Espejo 4). People also believe that is irrelevant whether the embryos are capable of implanting in a uterus and developing, as they are embryos nonetheless (Morris 2). As Morris questions, “are we willing to recognize life, even if it’s living in a Petri dish?” (2). Those that sympathize with these concerns feel that research requiring the destruction of a human embryo should be banned. Others argue that since IVF procedures often generate more embryos than needed, the excess embryos should be used for potentially life-saving research rather than being discarded (Espejo 36-37). Also, they claim embryos do not have the same rights as adult humans. The suggestion that a mass of 50-100 cells with no heart and no brain is entitled to the same protections is “unprecedented and not embodied in American law” (Espejo 38). With this in mind, it seems that embryonic stem cell research should not be undermined by the aforementioned arguments. There are additional concerns however. The use of SCNT is often criticized by those opposed to cloning, as a majority of people view cloning as morally wrong.  SCNT has been used in reproductive cloning, such as the cloning of Dolly the sheep. In the public’s mind, the distinction between this form of cloning and therapeutic cloning, which involves SCNT used for medical purposes, has blurred. The two should not be confused however, as they are completely separate procedures. Outlawing the use of SCNT would prevent the development of very promising techniques for curing disease
868206
Approve stem cell research. This will be the next great technology. If we conceed this to off-shore interests, the game is over.
1122171
They have proven that the stem cells found in the cords at the time of delivery provide just as much genetic material and supply for testing and research. \n\nI think they should use those cells, and not those they collect from cultured embryos.\n\nThere is always a way to test and research that doesnt involve the use of lives without voices. Such as the unborn or animals. I think those should be sought after and explored.
1163027
It depends on the purpose the cloning is fulfilling. If we clone racehorses, we could have a bunch of Secretariats running against other Secretariats and their may be the demise of a great industry.\n\nHowever, if cloning, genetic engineering and selective reproduction have a well defined intent and the end result can benefit humankind, then let's do it. Not being a moralist, I would like to see science continue researching the distinct benefits all forms of reproduction have upon all of the species on the planet.\n\nThe protests that are being offered against artificial or any other form of selective reproduction, must be taken into consideration on a scientific basis and not offer up the old adage, "if God intended man to fly, He would have given him wings" in regards to reproduction.\n\nIn a day and age when it would be very wise to keep our religion and morals to ourselves, we should allow science to progress within reason and justification. In a nation that prides itself in a government 'of the people, by the people and for the people', I say, lets all be a part of the decision making process regarding sin and science and...\n\nGod help us toward that decision.
976355
How about the fake cloning (see below): you could cover how other scientists were conned - and how it impacts science and research.\n\nScientists fretted Friday that a spectacular cloning fraud that hid in plain sight has set back legitimate stem cell work around the world. \nCloning experts and stem cell scientists said research in the potentially revolutionary field of regenerative medicine will continue unabated. But they said public confidence in their work had been weakened by a sham branded by experts as the most visible case of scientific fraud they could recall.\n\nScientists also struggled to explain how they didn't earlier catch the charismatic South Korean veterinarian's claim in a Science paper published in May that he cloned 11 human embryos to produce stem cells.\n\n"That's a difficult one,'' said Keith Campbell, the University of Nottingham researcher who helped clone Dolly the sheep in 1997. "Scientists are asked to referee a lot of papers and to a certain extent we have to believe each other as to the validity of the data.''\n\nA disgraced Hwang Woo-suk resigned from Seoul National University on Friday after the school said the researcher fabricated groundbreaking cloning and stem-cell research that had raised hopes of new cures for hard-to-treat diseases.\n\nWhen Hwang published findings in February 2004 and again in May, it was believed he had developed a new cloning method that enabled him to accomplish something no one else had.\n\nHwang chalked up much of the success to South Korean government support and dedicated researchers working around the clock. He also credited his workers' dexterity with chopsticks; stem cell researchers visited from around the world and rushed back to their labs to try the new technique.