“Should the government allow scientists to study the causes of human mental disease by using embryonic material or cloning procedures in their research? Why or why not.” Until the government creates laws restricting the use of embryonic material or cloning procedures for research, then I believe the government has no other choice but TO allow their use in research. The government creates the laws and the government enforces the laws. It is up to them. Now, if the question is SHOULD the government make laws restricting the use of embryonic material/ cloning procedures in research, then that is an entirely different matter.
I have to agree with this statement made by Dr. David Prentice, a professor of life sciences at Indiana State University and a founder of Do No Harm, The Coalition of Americans for Research Ethics. “The root of the debate really comes down to the ethical question of what’s the moral status of a human embryo,” he said. “Is it a person or is it a piece of property? And obviously we have no consensus on that in this country and I think that means we should not use taxpayer funds to fund this type of research.” What it comes down to, really, is who is entitled to actually define the status of the embryo. My opinion, being Christian, is that unless God takes a keen interest in this debate then it will never be answered. However, God did bless us with a conscience and soul for use in the meantime.
The Research paper on Impact of Government Law on Edible Oil
Keywords- Edible oil, Supply Bangladesh, Strategic, Tactical. Chain, Government Law, #1 1. Introduction A supply chain consists of all parties involved, directly or indirectly, in fulfilling a customer request. The supply chain not only includes the manufacturer and suppliers, but also transporters, warehouses, retailers, and customers themselves. Within each organization, such as manufacturer, ...
Until then, every man will be responsible for his actions. If the true essence of the research is benevolent and beneficial to mankind, I have to imagine it will be done regardless. I simply hope the government makes some restrictions regarding the usage of the material, the procedures in which it is used, and studies the actual research regarding the usage prior to making it legal. My sentiment is that at the point of conception, there is a resulting body (zygote) that is destined to become a living being. Therefore, I believe it is wrong to harvest fetuses for medical research. The purpose of reproduction is to give life, specifically to a fetus.
The purpose of the fetus does not change whether or not it is in a womb. Now, I have heard about cells being harvested from the umbilical cord. Since this does not involve the destruction of a live fetus, I feel this is definitely a reasonable alternative than creating fetuses and deliberately destroying them in the process of harvesting the cells. There is an interesting law that exemplifies how a portion of society views the embryo/ fetus. For example, if a drunk driver caused an accident killing a pregnant woman, he could legally be charged with not one but two homicides, accounting for the woman and the fetus. With that being said, I do believe there is a certain double standard in society today, specifically regarding pro-choice abortion.
I understand this may be getting off on a tangent but it does tie in with the original topic. Basically, if a woman decides to have an abortion, not for medical or disease-related reasons, then why is it not homicide as well? Let’s not play God. We all will die one day. It’s rather unfortunate to succumb to disease and illness, but that is life. What is the purpose of taking one life for another? It makes no sense.
