Stem Cells Vs Politics

Politics VS Stem Cell Research The topic of stem cell research has been the center of a heated debate for some time now, and there are constantly new arguments developing for and against the research. This particular article puts forth two new ideas addressing the concerns of “ pro- life ” individuals in an attempt to avoid the political fund regulations, which have been set in place in consideration of ethics. While the article is mostly neutral at times it discredits the pro-life community by providing biased quotes from professionals in the field of stem cell research. A good deal of the evidence given to support the article is obviously in favor of the research, thus leading one to believe the author has a swayed opinion of the topic. Throughout the article the author provides scientific evidence to explain the nature of the new methods. The explanations are efficient because they are easy to understand regardless of the reader ’ s knowledge of science. This is important to the article ’ s persuasive aspect; it allows the reader to be comfortable with the information thus making the angle seem creditable. The evidence justifies the research by suggesting the methods eliminate the need for ethical debate because they do not destroy the embryo- “ This gets around all of the ethical arguments, except for that small minority of the pro-life community that doesn ’ t even support in vitro fertilization, ” a quote by Representative Roscoe G. Bartlet who is described as a “ Republican of Maryland ” and “ a pro-life legislator. ” The article goes on to say even if the research gets to the point of use on humans there will still be obstacles concerning the legislation on the subject. It also brings in supporting facts about the positive effects of stem cell research. It projects success in the future, using children and the elderly to add some pathos for measure- “ The cells would be available throughout the child ’ s life for the kind of tissue and organ repair it is hoped stem cells will one day provide. In many of the degenerative diseases of old age, from heart attacks to Parkinson ’ s, the body loses vital cells and fails to replace them, an omission that could perhaps be overcome if embryonic cells like those present atthe beginning of life were available to regenerate replacement cell artificially. ” This quote truly exemplifies what the author ’ s opinion is not only because it uses bias but it is emotional in its portrayal. The author also includes political influence on the subject by providing legal details. Within the article the Dickey-Wicker amendment is presented- “ prohibiting federal research where human embryos are destroyed, discarded or subjected to substantial risk. ” The author suggests how the amendment could be bypassed by the new methods yet is still under investigation. A small sentence concerning President Bush has him appear as an anti-abortion advocate, stating congress would not allow research that kills an embryo and the President ’ s federal support only goes so far. It goes on to imply the amount of information ethically available just isn ’ t enough and commends a Dr. Lanza of the Advanced Cell Technology Company for developing new ways to remove the cells from the embryo without killing it. Another quote states that Lanza ’ s work “ has come at a very propitious time ” due to the fact that “ the Senate is considering various stem cell bills, including