The Michael J. Fox Effect

The "Rightie" Reaction is just that: the right reaction. Cultivating embryos for deliberate destruction is wrong. It's immoral. It's something that should not be done.

In the last 15 years, since 1991, there has not been one single treatment from embryonic stem cell research.

Adult stem cell research has produced more than 30 treatments and cures.

What is so hard to understand? IVF clinics aid in fertilizing eggs to create embryos with the intention of producing a baby. I can understand why many women would want to have a baby. I had fertility issues myself. I cannot participate in IVF because of my religion -- because the cultivation of embryos is destructive.

The "extra" embryos that are being "stored" in these clinics should not be destroyed. If anything, the embryos should be donated to other infertile couples or surrogates. I know that's a lot to ask -- but think of the millions of people looking to adopt children? Why shouldn't we give them the chance to be parents instead of killing innocent embryos?

My understanding is that any woman wanting to "adopt" an embryo, have it implanted, and carry any resulting pregnancy to term is not turned away. Are you claiming that women are trying to be implanted with these embryos, but scientists are refusing on the basis that they'd rather destroy the embryos? That would be interesting to know, if you have evidence.

Laura Scott
design ( http://www.pingv.com ), snap ( http://scatteredsunshine.com ), blog ( http://www.rarepattern.com ) ... admin ( http://www.blogher.com/website-feedback )

Please, let Missourians elect our own representatives. In the past 10 days, I've gotten 50 recorded messages from hyped-up, slathering at the bit Claire McCaskill supporters: if I'd been tempted to vote for her on her record, the out-of-state support would kill it. Stem cell research is 2006's Choice/Life and Gay Marriage/Opposition issue of 2006, the all-too-successful to nationalize politics and influence (corrupt?) local elelctions. MUST we talk about it more?

Alanna Kellogg, A Veggie Venture ( http://kitchen-parade-veggieventure.blogspot.com/ )

The NIH ( http://stemcells.nih.gov/policy/defaultpage.asp )
States that President Bush's fed. policy on stem cell research is:

Federal Policy
The President's Criteria

On August 9th, 2001, President George W. Bush announced that federal funds may be awarded for research using human embryonic stem cells if the following criteria are met:

* The derivation process (which begins with the destruction of the embryo) was initiated prior to 9:00 P.M. EDT on August 9, 2001.
* The stem cells must have been derived from an embryo that was created for reproductive purposes and was no longer needed.
* Informed consent must have been obtained for the donation of the embryo and that donation must not have involved financial inducements.

so research on embryonic stem cells is allowed but under these specific conditions?

On another front,an embryo is only a few days old and has potential for life, but is not life. (Ok I know there is a huge debate on when does life begin and I will probably be annoying people with my interpretation. I want to say in advance we all have different beliefs about this and we are all entitled to our own opinions)

Instead of adopting embryos why don't we adopt children that are alive right now and need our help. Wouldn't it be more humanitarian to adopt a life than a potential life?

Birdsword ( http://birdagirl.blogspot.com )

I live in Missouri and have a lot to say on this subject. Here is my post in favor of stem-cell research...and why.

http://surrenderdorothy.typepad.com/surrender_doro... ( http://surrenderdorothy.typepad.com/surrender_doro... )

Surrender, Dorothy - When I was your age, we just let them ride in the back window.