The Ethicality of Stem Cell Research

The Ethicality of Stem Cell Research

Stem Cells and stem cell research alike are both a daunting and complex subject to the uninformed. The average American hears of the issue on a daily basis it seems – primarily the strife instigated by institutions with a “revivified” bioethical code. Yet, the average citizen has no idea, or any valid conception of what encompasses the study, or the true use of the cells themselves. Ask a person on the street, and odds are that the extent if their knowledge of the usage of stems cells will be something along the lines of “they’re extracted from human fetuses - that’s wrong!” Misinformation about the subject is spread more often than not. The media easily influences the public, because if it’s on TV, it must be true, right? Not to mention the countless religions that has mindlessly regarded the process as “murder”. A concept at stake, a concept with so much potential to benefit the human race, a concept being put on the path to nothingness for the wrong reasons. As a member of the human race – someone needs to take obligation to object this . What, who, how, and why - determines the ethically and legality of this practice?

In our country, a single voice matters. A lowly person with enough passion can change anything. Opposition is only there if you acknowledge it. Those who make the most difference find themselves alone among a crowd of silent followers who share the same ideals - yet lack the passion to speak of them. When dealing with adversary, as immense as a religious sect – intimidation is an intrinsic accompanist. Yet, few realize that this is the key to achieving persuasion. Those who blindly accept ideals from one can accept them from another. The weak-minded are the majority, and in America, majority rules.

Opposition from such a huge force, a force that has no other worthy competition – may seem futile, but as history shows, the smallest voices can have the biggest bark. On such a complex subject as stem cell usage, the task becomes even more demanding People are reluctant to accept complicated notions – rather, falling back to the secure and hypothetical beliefs. To get people to accept an idea, you must simplify it. The practitioners involved in the field of medicine have failed to do this. In a sense, there is absolutely nothing wrong with them. Cutting indolence is an impossible task. The ideal in itself is paradoxical. The key to appealing to the indolent is to encompass their methods in distributing your message. You must twist your message to appeal of the majority.

The majority is controlled by a few. The American government has the universal authority in our country, infact, they literally decide the legality of stem cell usage. At current time, our president Mr. George W. Bush of the Republican Party is a conservative who is strictly against stem cell usage. His reasoning is based off his, and his collogues morality. What influences his morality is obvious, the major being Christianity. President bush’s record with stem cells is hazy, and full of indecision. He told the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops that he believed ''taxpayer funds should not be used to underwrite research that involves the destruction of live embryos.'' Ken Conner, president of the pro-life Family Research Council, had said, "The president's own credibility and integrity are at stake here. Should he violate his pledge, the political fallout would be devastating.'' Bush is attempting to appeal to both sides, quite unsuccessfully. Without the support of pro-life Roman Catholics and conservative Protestants, President Bush wouldn’t be our president right now.

The lagging of America in the decision may be irrelevant now. The British government has already approved stem cell research, in 2001(Shapiro 138). This is simply how the debate is sided. Those who are pro, attempt to convince the millions that have thoughtlessly turned away, and shunned this potentious practice. Few have realized this method of teaching and influence; yet, it’s quite a valid ideal to appeal to the adversary. Many have made immediate assumptions, thought out hastily rash criticisms that possess no