There is a big ethical debate going on about stem cell research, particularly embryonic stem cell research. Opponents argue that it is a slipery slope, very unethical and could have dangerous consequences. But I disagree.

To the opponents form the relegious point of view who say that this is playing God and immoral, I say, what if God gave us the technology to do it. And to others who argue form more scientiific points of view or just ethics I say this;

The potential for stem cell research is huge, it could possibly cure things such as,Brain damage, Parkinsons, Cancer, Spinal cord injury,Heart damage,Haematopoiesis, Deafness, Blindness and vision impairment 

All of these things will vastly benefit everyone.

Now, stem cell research is very expensive and a slow process, and all the red 'ethical' tape isnt helping it either.

These treatments arent and wont yet be available to everyone because of the huge costs involved. But through technology and competition the cost could be brought down enough so that in a decade or so the NHS will be able to cover the costs or a large part of it.

What I mean by that is, if several companies compete to get the govt contract to carry on their practice, then the competition between them will lead to new breaktroughs in technology, and costs will also be brought down aswell through increased efficiency.

In the long term this will all pay off economically, since those people who wouldnt have been able to work either due oi cancer, spinal cord injuries, parkinsons etc will now be able to participate in the work force. So as well as paying taxes, theyll also contribute to economic growth. It will also mean that they are not relaint on the welfare.

Once the companies gain the govt contarcts, they'll have to be strictly regulated, by a governing body from the UK, and independant body, and also the EU. Any fowl practice or failure to meet standards will result in termination of contract, which will allows other companies to take over. This will keep them on their toes and performing at their best.

Thats my two cents anyway, what are your opinions.

Is it a good thing, or is it unethical?

if we are capable of bettering ourselves and others then im all for it

Bump for quality post a friend made elsewhere, it's actually about abortion but it covers the whole 'right to life' thing that's integral to the stem cell debate.

"Arguments against abortion are the result of theofascist interpretations of "right to life" concepts. Any englightment or post-enlightment perspective on human life considers autonomy to be a critical aspect of human value. A potential human life is completely valueless; shit, you've tossed out many a potential human life trapped in a blood-soaked tampon, and last night alone, I washed billions of potential human lives off my body in the shower. Hell, with the advent of cloning technologies, every nucleated human cell is a potential human being with the potential to live a happy and unique life. Argumentum ad absurdum.

Abortion to terminate an unwanted pregnancy is no more a callous disregard for human life than tripping and skinning your knee. To claim otherwise, and to push that opinion on other people, is to attempt to forward theological bullshit as a cultural norm."