Is it more ethical to edit embryos or to screen a lot of embryos and throw them away? I don't know the answer.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Patients' lives are more important than embryos. I do want to avoid the use of embryos if possible.
When I saw the embryo, I suddenly realized there was such a small difference between it and my daughters. I thought, we can't keep destroying embryos for our research. There must be another way.
There is no way now to get around some use of embryos. But my goal is to avoid using them.
If you are in support of in vitro fertilization, then you have to recognize that human embryos are being created in excess of what can be used safely to reimplant for a pregnancy. So they're going to end up being discarded.
Today, it is research with human embryonic stem cells and attempts to prepare cloned stem cells for research and medical therapies that are being disavowed as being ethically unacceptable.
So why in the world would anyone support the unethical, failed use of embryonic stem cells instead of the ethical, successful use of adult stem cells? Because they do not know the difference.
You cannot be against embryonic stem cell research and be intellectually and therefore morally consistent, if you're not also against in vitro fertilization.
Stem cell research must be carried out in an ethical manner in a way that respects the sanctity of human life.
The private sector can go forward, if it must, with destruction of embryos for questionable and ethically challenged science. But spend the people's money on proven blood cord, bone marrow, germ cell, and adult cell research.
There are many alternatives to embryonic stem cell research, alternatives with great potential. We need to support these and oppose creating life for the sole purpose of destroying it.
No opposing quotes found.