Debate on embryonic stem cell

Debate on embryonic stem cell :

Arguments FOR:

Its allows to reduce the mortality because of the treatments fined to treat diseases incurable like Parkinson. The capacity of these stem cells would allow to regenerate every type of tissues who the dead cells, and would offer important therapeutic perspectives.

In my opinion, the life starts at the birth and so, I think an embryo is not alive. So, we can say, when we take stems cells we destroyed an embryo and not a life. An embryo which is not implanted in the womb has no psychological, emotional or physical properties which we associate for one person. He should not rather thus protect and we can use it for the profit of the patient.

People who have a treatment of in vitro fertilization are going to have, during this treatment, several embryos of created, who are going to be destroyed to keep for it only one. How to justify that we don’t have the right to do research on these embryos which are going to be destroyed.

The embryo is not a person, the science is very clear on that. If they were people, that would mean that the embryos which we create and which we destroy within the framework of in vitro fertilizations, are murders. It’s not absolutely the case.

Arguments AGAINST:

They believe life starts now of conception, when a sperm fertilizes an egg, since a distinct organism has come into being. Thus, the destruction of an embryo is the destruction of a human life.

It is a moral transgression, a violation of the human dignity!

To conclude, If we are not sure if a fertilized ovum must be considered as a human being, we should not destroy it. A hunter doesn’t shoot if it is not sure if its target is a deer or a man.

...