posted
I'm curious, and knowing that Hatrack represents a wide array of views and thoughts, I'm wondering if you'll all indulge me in a little poll. I'm not picking a fight, I don't even care if a discussion forms (at the moment anyway) or not, I'm just curious. If a conversation comes out of this, we'll see what happens.
So the question is this: For people against abortion, are you also against stem cell research and in vitro fertilization? For anyone who doesn't fit that description specifically, do you agree to one or two of those issues but disagree with one or two others?
Why?
If you're curious about why I want to know, it's might just be faulty reporting from the media. Constantly we see stories about the debate over embryonic stem cell research, and the debate over stem cell research. Both are controversial, both have die hard advocates and detractors. But I don't see that kind of attention turned on IVF. For all intents and purposes, it's really no different. Embryos are destroyed in the IVF process, some because they failed to implant and some because they are simply discarded, but I don't see the uproar over IVF like I do with ESCR and abortion. Is there really a disconnect, or is the media just not covering it?
I'd offer an opinion, but really I don't know, hence the poll. Thanks in advance.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am generally opposed to abortion (although I do not support legislation against it and can conceive of situations where it would be possibly okay. Far and few between, but I can conceive of it-- no pun intended.) I don't support legislation against abortion because I think our society has moved to a place where that would do more harm than good; I think that change is needed but I don't think that that is the correct avenue for it, at least not right now.
I am fairly in favor of stem cell research but support finding alternate sources and definitely do not support creating embryos just to destroy them in any kind of research.
I am somewhat in favor of IVF, although I am generally more in favor of the European practice of attempting to implant no more than 2 at a time, to reduce the risks of complications. It is scary to me when people get pregnant with quints or sextuplets and the babies have to fight so hard to survive (and the mom, too.) It is often a hard enough fight for a singleton or twin conceived via IVF, when you get above that, it gets really really scary. I know some people probably only have one or two shots at it, and so I understand why they choose to implant more, but for myself, I could never choose to implant more than 2 at a time, just in case they took and/or one or more fetus twinned spontaneously.
I have very complicated opinions on when life as such begins and when a soul is attached to a body-- in fact, I think I may believe that it depends on the particular baby. (I say may because, honestly, I'm not ever really quite certain where I stand on this.) That probably influences all of my beliefs. The main reason I'm against abortion is that since I don't know when exactly I would say life begins I would never know when it is murder to abort and when it is just... close to it.
And I'm happy to give you my opinion but I will not be reading any other posts in this thread-- so if anyone replies to this, I'm not gonna see it, to give you fair warning.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think most people don't know what IVF means, and confuse it with GIFT (Gamete IntraFallopian Transfer.) FWIW, the Catholic Church is against IVF but OK with GIFT.
I am not against abortion, or IVF, or other forms of assisted reproduction, although I think ethical bounds need to be set for all of these. But it will take time for societal consensus to emerge about those bounds, perhaps generations worth of time. Abortion has a head start in that regard (not that any consensus is near), the other procedures are less common and less thought about.
I just found this funky poster for the 40s movie Test Tube Babies (FAST TIMES LEFT THEM STERILE!! it trumpets) and now I want to see it.
edit: ketchupqueen uses generic ketchup! It had to be said.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
This came up slightly today talking with my family. My mom was saying that she had an amniocentesis done on me because there was indication I may have had spine abifada (sp?) (I didn't) and had it been severe enough my mom would have aborted the child (me). She went on upon follow-up questions to say that had any significantly disruptive genetic disorder been found in her kids she would have aborted the pregnancy.
I too am rather pro-abortion/etc DEFINITELY pro stem-cell research and simply uninformed about IVF. I think obviously something like aborting a pregnancy the day before delivery is immoral, and probably for a good few months before that also. But to save an extremely early embryo just because it COULD be a person, even though it may ruin the parents lives, place a strain on society, and have few prospects for a happy, healthy, constructive life given the circumstance into which it is being born seems irresponsible.
"definitely do not support creating embryos just to destroy them in any kind of research" This seems asinine. I know that in at least SOME cases, I will not say all because I do not know it to be the case, the zygote is allowed only to develop to 16, 32 cells. Surely that culture of cells cannot be warranted the same sympathy that even a squirrel would receive in our day-to-day lives. And if the pay-off from halting the development of clusters of tens of cells is generating serious medical cures, I'm willing to pay that cost.
Posts: 655 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Starsnuffer, I know a lovely young woman who was born with spina bifida. Good thing her mother wouldn't have made that choice. Oh, and she has not ruined anyone's life, and while she required some expensive surgery in childhood, she is fairly healthy now. And seems both happy and productive. Although I've never actually been to her place of work, so who knows.
posted
I'll just quickly note, abortion morals aside, that in many of these cases if an fetus is aborted due to some genetic disorder, the mother would not simply go on to be childless. They may simply try again until they get a child with no abnormalities or even adopt. The limiting factor is not the number of children the mother can birth, but the resources to support a certain number of children to adulthood.
So the comparison isn't really between a specific individual and "nothing". The comparison is between that individual and the "next" individual which may or may not be more likely to be "normal." i.e. that lady may be lovely, but would the "next" child be necessarily *less* lovely? Thats a harder question to answer.
posted
I am opposed to abortion, in vitro fertilization, and embryonic stem cell research. As a good catholic, I follow the church and what she says about these issues. And I agree with her.
I do support adult, non-embryonic stem cell research, though.
Posts: 1042 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
Now, on to the discussion of genetic disorders and aborting them. If my mother had aborted any children of hers who had genetic disorders, three of the four of us would not have been born. Granted, in our cases, our genetic disorder hasn't been a huge financial drain, but we're still mutant. Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:"definitely do not support creating embryos just to destroy them in any kind of research" This seems asinine.
Wow. So much for respectful discussion.
Yeah... I'm sure that his points could have been made without directly insulting someone else. Starsnuffer, even though I'm an atheist I can understand a point of view that says a soul goes into that being from the start (one cell). I disagree with it, but calling people names won't make them respect you or try to understand your opinion. So please keep a normal tone however different your views are from the other posters'.
Posts: 4519 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think we should allow women to terminate their pregnancies because I don't think anyone, woman or man, should be forced to use their internal bodily processes to support the life of another. Similarly, I don't think a man who punches another man and disrupts one of the second man's kidneys should be required by law to give that man one of his own kidneys as restitution.
If any improvements can be made to the abortion process to make it more humane for the babies or even to allow the babies to live artificially, I'm all for researching them.
I'm fine with embryonic stem cell research (and, I suppose, in vitro fertilization) for a different reason: even though I know the embryos/zygotes being killed are genetically unique members of the species Homo sapiens (and as they're not in a woman, there's no question of them counting as simply parasites or part of a woman's body), they just don't look human enough. Yes, I know that that statement has been used to justify slavery in America and other horrible practices, but I can't help but think that when we're not allowed to touch what are essentially clumps of undifferentiated cells we've crossed the line into totemizing human life.
Posts: 781 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's important to note that embryonic stem cell research is actually done on blastocysts not embryos (a blastocyst having something like 8 cells in total iirc when stem cells get extracted). Also, afaik, there is literally no difference between a pluripotent adult stem cell and an embryonic stem cell. In the future it might be possible to use adult stem cells to create a clone. In other words, the potential for making a human being is still there.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am against abortion. I am against embryonic stem cell research but firmly support stem cell research from umbilical cord blood and adult stem cells. I am okay with IVF but I do believe there should be strict regulation over how many embryos are created and what is done with them.
Bottom line for me is I don't know when life truly begins, or when a soul becomes present in a human, but I'm going to err on the side of life. For the same reason, I'm against the death penalty and assisted suicide. Whenever there is a question , I'm going to come down on the side of preserving and protecting human life.
If the mother's life is threatened, then I can see the termination of a pregnancy (as in the cases of ectopic pregnancies) but that is only because, as I see it, you have to make a choice between one death or two, so you naturally go with one and protect the mother.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Belle: I am against abortion. I am against embryonic stem cell research but firmly support stem cell research from umbilical cord blood and adult stem cells. I am okay with IVF but I do believe there should be strict regulation over how many embryos are created and what is done with them.
Bottom line for me is I don't know when life truly begins, or when a soul becomes present in a human, but I'm going to err on the side of life. For the same reason, I'm against the death penalty and assisted suicide. Whenever there is a question , I'm going to come down on the side of preserving and protecting human life.
If the mother's life is threatened, then I can see the termination of a pregnancy (as in the cases of ectopic pregnancies) but that is only because, as I see it, you have to make a choice between one death or two, so you naturally go with one and protect the mother.
Very well said, Belle.
When it comes to IVF, I'm quite torn. I can't draw a line between the cells created for stem cell research and the cells created for IVF, both of which are destroyed, but I also can't turn a blind eye to women who so dearly want a child. On one level (Catholic), I agree with my Church, and on another, I can't. I wish it were possible to have IVF procedures that didn't result in "leftovers." Then I would be quite content.
Posts: 2849 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, what can I say? Anti-abortion, anti-embryonic stem cell research, pro alternative stem cell research, hoping for advances in IVF that reduce or eliminate the number of embryos created but not implanted.
Posts: 1594 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Thanks in advance.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
