krisino

but why "kill" it before it could have a chance to live. If it was adopted, it could be happy one day. I know and respect the opinions of those who don't think it's murder. I thought synthetic organs were a good idea at one point. http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/photosbyage/index.htm This changed my mind. I don't expect it to change yours, I just think it's interesting.

Why do you believe it is not murder? I think the government only uses what it wants, how it wants. The law only says what the government wants it to at the time.

Even with rape, there are other options, such as adoption. In my opinion (although not everyone shares it) abortion is murder. There is never an excuse for murder. I can see therapy if the pregnancy was brought about by rape, but statistics show that most abortions occur because the mother already has children, and wishes to have no more. I definitely don't think it should be paid by the government. If you have enough money to have the procedure, you probably have enough money for therapy.

I was just wondering if members thought it was sensible to offer this therapy. Is it not legally the woman's choice? It's not as if she is a victim. Did she not bring it upon herself? I was just fishing for opinions, and I may just learn something new! Thanks for the input.

Thank you. I had been wondering about that. But wouldn't it be faster to use adult stem cells? Couldn't you gather many at a time instead of the primary cells in embryonic research?

In light of adult stem cells: If they work, then why use embryonic cells? Isn't what is used in cloning? Y try to create a new embryo when they can use adult stem cells