Purpose of this Web log

Since this blog is for my English class (unfortunately) I will be discussing a topic that is relevant to today. The topic I have chosen is the hot-button issue of stem cell research. Some of the questions I will be thinking about are:

1. What is the difference between adult stem cells and embryonic stem cells?
2. Does the harvesting stem cells fall into the realm of murder (harvesting stem cells from an embryo destroys it)?
3. Can an embryo be considered a human being?
4. Can an embryo be considered to be truly alive?
5. Do the benefits of harvesting embryonic stem cells outweigh the potential risks and losses?


The purpose of this blog is to eliminate bias from my argument. Before I begin to do this however, I would like to go on a short rant on how I feel about stem cell research:

I don't really see what the big deal is about stem cell research. Conservatives, in general, say that harvesting embryonic stem cells is comparable to abortion, and therefore murder, because the embryo is destroyed. Whether or not the embryo is alive or not is not important, a single cell is alive, the issue is whether or not the blastula from which the cells are harvested can vbe considered a human being. There are thousands of eggs frozen for invitro fertilization that will never be used and will eventually be thrown out. Are those potential humans being denied the prospect of life? When they are thrown away are they "murdered"? Those unused eggs should be donated for stem cell research and put to a good use. The potential benefits of embryonic stem cells are nearly limitless. They can be used to grow organs for transplant that are specific to the recipient, curing many illnesses such as diabetes. Stem cell research, for both adult and embryonic stem cells, should be well funded and regulated to prevent exploitation. This technology can be used to save many thousands of lives and should not be impeded due to moral qualms.