It’s just an attempt to prove Darwin wrong.

Selectivity Rules.

I’m with Darwin on this one.

Ian M

I’m against the potential to harvest from embryos.

But if we were all given the option of harvesting cells from the cord that goes from mum to baby (sorry can’t remember what it’s called) then the issue would be null and void, because the same stem cells are found there.

If I ever have any more kids i will be requesting that the doc’s take some blood from there and I will have it stored for my child.

It is also a fact that the only debate is whether federal dollars should be spent on it. There are very few embryonic stem cell investors in the private sector compared to those investing in adult stem cells for one very important reason: Adult stem cell research has produced a multitude of treatment and cures for various diseases, while embryonic stem cells have not produced any. Remember, this is NOT because there is a ban on embryonic stem cell research, because there is no such ban. The controversy surrounding the federal government and embryonic stem cell research is whether the government should pay for it.

I am all for it and for gov’t funding of it.

The argument that it takes killing babies to make stem cells is ludicrous and just plain ignorant.

Where is all the outrage when millions of embryos are destroyed every year because the are not needed/wanted for in vitro fertilization?

I think that anyone who is against stem cell research is an uninformed idiot reacting from an unfounded, religiously-motivated stance of stupidity.

I understand the good points but cannot get past the moral objections. I’d be upset with federal funding.

Didn’t know there were negatives.