What is the history of stem call research legislation in the US?
How does it compare to the rest of the world?
The argument for life is often one that results in two circumstances – either life will go on or life will not. Millions of families are afflicted with diseases and disorders that they would do anything in any lifetime for cures to spare their loved ones. Stem cells through argument of science can cure diseases or help heal individuals who suffer from debilitating conditions such as spinal cord injuries, strokes, heart conditions, and burns to name a few. (Reaves, 2001) The argument for stem cell research proves to be one of both moral hazard and religious conviction. (G.Fischbach, 2004) On the moral side, the idea
…show more content…
This question continues to plague and ponder the mind of individuals who feel conflicted about their spiritual obligations, but when life is on the line does belief in a higher power step in and tell them that the individual that’s being afflicted will be spared and saved? Other parts of the world share the United States beliefs in understanding a moral or religious boundary. South Korea fabricated their results of a recent stem cell finding with regards to human cloning, but these results were fictitious and resulted in backlash from the world. However, the rest of world is contributing funds such as India where 22 private and public research institutions conduct stem cell research. (Acharya, 2011) Though it is a hotly contested topic in a country like India to partake in this research, Hinduism preaches valuing life and being a Good Samaritan when need be. (Bhanot, 2008) As the world takes a stance on the moral or religious values of stem cell research, one has to understand how vital it is to improve the quality of life. Stem cell research should not be looked at something that is immoral and the use of terminated pregnancies may have ended life in one instance, but can help life in another. If anyone has ever had a family member afflicted by an illness, they would know that there were two means in which the family can cope with the illness. One would be to continue to provide care and medicate the individual