CreateDebate


Debate Info

15
13
Yes because... No because...
Debate Score:28
Arguments:26
Total Votes:35
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes because... (11)
 
 No because... (9)

Debate Creator

Vermink(1944) pic



Should embryonic stem cells be used in research?

Is it moral? Is it good? Is it worth it? Give me your opinions.

Yes because...

Side Score: 15
VS.

No because...

Side Score: 13

They are the best thing available.

Side: Yes because...
1 point

Unwanted fetuses might be useful then.

Side: Yes because...

1. We do not need a law degree to know that we have a intrinsic sense of individual morality. Almost all of us would agree that a "moral" action is one that helps the most people. If embryonic stem cell research has the potential to save more people than it kills, then it is a justified, moral experiment.

2. Mankind is scientifically inclined to protect its own species. If embryonic research help to eliminate illness and promotes evolutionary possibilities then it is only logical.

3. There is a concept known as the "greater good". This means that in some cases altruism must occasionally be sacrificed to help the general populace. We must realise that medicine, like all science, is in its unaltered form amoral; all medicine really cares about is fulfilling a patient's desires insofar as is possible.

4. Once a woman becomes pregnant, the embryo, as much as she may love it, is inherently parasitic. This means that the embryo, as it is cohabiting the woman's body, can only morally exist when it is not inhibiting the woman's right to live as she desires. Therefore, if a woman judges an embryo to be impairing her right to live as she pleases, embryonic stem cell research or abortion becomes justifiable.

Side: Yes because...
1 point

Hey should we cure all known diseases and develop cheap organ regeneration, or stick to an archaic morality that brings modern day medicine to a hault and causes more potential harm than the alternative?

Side: Yes because...

The benefits of researching with them are gargantuan, as they are seemingly limitless in what they can develop into, and the deterrents are non-existent. Stem cells have no need of pity, kindness or empathy, so there is no moral issue whatsoever.

Side: Yes because...

No, there are new treatments that can revert adult stem cells back to share the same characteristics of an embryonic stem cell without killing an embryo. Why go though all the controversity when there is a viable alternative.

Side: No because...
2 points

Setting aside the moral aspects of the arguments... it is criminal to kill one human being to save another in any situation other than as act of self defense - where the person killed is the perceived attacker.

There is no such justification for creating a new human life and then killing it for parts to save or to benefit another human life.

Side: No because...
Akulakhan(2985) Disputed
2 points

Now these are human cells, not human beings. Are you sent to prison every time you trim your nails?

Side: Yes because...
Chuz-Life(497) Disputed
1 point

I'll cut you some slack and give you the benefit of some doubt. Did you actually not know that the child is killed when the stem cells are harvested?

Side: No because...
1 point

There is no such justification for creating a new human life and then killing it for parts to save or to benefit another human life.

What about to save millions?

Side: Yes because...
Chuz-Life(497) Disputed
1 point

Not even if it were guaranteed to work.

And we all know that it's not.... so millions would be killed TRYING to find one that MIGHT "save millions".

Side: No because...