Sonal
Current event posting number: 1
Topic: Science
Title: Judge Keeps Ban on Stem Cell Funds
Writer: Reuters
Publication Name: New York Times
Date of Publication: September 7, 2010
Length: 386 words, 1 page
Although the Obama administration was hoping to legalize federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research, Royce Lamberth, a U.S. District of Columbia judge, refused to lift the ban on September 7, 2010. Lamberth says it is morally wrong to destroy human embryos since it would be killing innocent lives who have the potential to bring positive change to the world (I.e. finding a cure to a disease, help bring peace). He also argues that this is unfair for scientists against stem cell research because of the expansion of the National Institutes of Health for stem cell research. On the contrary, the Obama administration researched that legalizing the funding could bring many job opportunities for up to 1300 Americans. Moreover, this would be beneficial to many patients who are at risk for dying because the stem cell research would help to understand how to transform cells into desired tissue types and treat a variety of diseases such as Parkinson's, Cancer, etc. The Obama administration may file an appeal at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to lift the ban.
Conclusion:
Obama has been trying to pave the way for stem cell research ever since he took office in 2009; it was one of his first acts. This would help the economy under recession by bringing over a thousand jobs to Americans. However, Royce Lamberth rejected this request because he believes killing embryos for stem cell research is unfair and morally wrong. Obama will probably continue to persist for the legalization of federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research.
The article that is about stem cell research. To me it just depends on the type of situation stem cell research would be used in.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the ban should be lifted. Though this will relate to an endless debate of the origins of life and many other moral issues. If there is a way to acquire stem cells without destroying the embryo, that will be best. But before we find a solution, a ban on this might cost the human race of findings that might save millions of life, or even a way to extend life. A single minded pursuit of moral will be the opposing force of ife-saving science findings, in this case.
ReplyDeleteWhat Lamberth says is true: the embryos could potentially have positive impacts to the world. At the same time, it is important to consider that the embryos could have negative impacts on the world. It is my belief that the benefits of stem cell research outweigh the ethical objections of groups against stem cell research. Stem cell research has the potential to solve many 'untreatable' diseases and we should thoroughly investigate this potential.
ReplyDeleteThe ban should be lifted. Destroying the human embryos might be unethical, but the research can save millions of life. This debate between moral issue and health issue seems like it will never end. But I feel that some loss must be paid in order to move forward. We must sometimes forget the old idea, and progress for the people.
ReplyDeleteI think that a ban on stem cell research is a bad idea. It provides more informaton on us as humans and can help cure diseases
ReplyDelete