Stem cell research

[Rudy]

I didn't see any other threads about this so...

What's your personal opinion about stem cell research/use and why. I wanted to know what regular Hindu's might think (I know this is a tense subject so please keep calm).

[Obelisk]

Hi Rudy,

Are you referring to that "stem sells have souls and must be left alone" stuff propagated in the West? Personally I feel all that is just superstitious trash. Stem cell research has opened up a plethora of opportunities on the scientific front about replacing defective mechanism in the human body and has the potential to give millions of disabled or ill people a whole new and happy life, and I strongly encourage it. My dad has been doing some work in this field as well, and he's a devout Hindu. I certainly don't know of any Hindus who oppose stem cell research, or give religious reasons for it if they do. Certainly there are some other, genuine issues associated with this like inappropriate or indiscriminate use of knowledge and the treatment of laboratory animals in experiments, but that's a different topic for discussion.

[Divine Kala]

For many it depends on whether you mean embryonic stem cells or not. If so I support all forms of stem cell research and find it absurd that people push the 'a tiny bundle of cells has a soul!'. That tiny bundle of cells has much more of a chance of being spontaneously aborted by the mother's body before she even knows about it then it does of being a living, breathing baby.

If we can help and improve the lives of others why shouldn't we? The religionists should just butt out.

[Rudy]

Are you referring to that "stem sells have souls and must be left alone" stuff propagated in the West?

Why yes I am. I'm going to pull a ignorant American here so... I'm kind of surprised that two religious people (your on this forum right?) whole heartedly support it.

For many it depends on whether you mean embryonic stem cells or not...

Why yes I mean that too (I should of been more clear).

Obelisk: If people don't get a soul at conception when do they get them in your opion? (that wan't a taunt just a honest question)

[Jainarayan]

Stem cell research has opened up a plethora of opportunities on the scientific front about replacing defective mechanism in the human body and has the potential to give millions of disabled or ill people a whole new and happy life, and I strongly encourage it.

For many it depends on whether you mean embryonic stem cells or not. If so I support all forms of stem cell research and find it absurd that people push the 'a tiny bundle of cells has a soul!'. That tiny bundle of cells has much more of a chance of being spontaneously aborted by the mother's body before she even knows about it then it does of being a living, breathing baby.

If we can help and improve the lives of others why shouldn't we? The religionists should just butt out.

For those reasons ^ I am in agreement with it. Many disorders could be eliminated: Parkinson's for one, among a host of others.

If people don't get a soul at conception when do they get them in your opion? (that wan't a taunt just a honest question)

That's the only thing that bugs me about it. Some people say life begins at conception, and I think without a soul there is no life. But on the other hand as Divine Kala says, suppose the mother's body rejects the embryo and it never makes it past the blastocyst stage. Did it ever have a soul?

Though I think stem cells can be harvested from umblilical tissue, thereby removing the "does life begin at conception?" argument altogether.

[satay]

namaste,
I approve of all stem cell research. I wish they continue to do more research as someone said here already that a lot of disorders can potentially be cured. It gives hope to people.

[Kismet]

That's the only thing that bugs me about it. Some people say life begins at conception, and I think without a soul there is no life. But on the other hand as Divine Kala says, suppose the mother's body rejects the embryo and it never makes it past the blastocyst stage. Did it ever have a soul?

Though I think stem cells can be harvested from umblilical tissue, thereby removing the "does life begin at conception?" argument altogether.

In my view the fact of soulhood does little to posit a life-sanction. While I do believe all life is sacred, life is also adversarial. And much life is, as it were, "asleep" and indifferent. The death of blastocysts, of more advanced life forms like fish and insects, is much less a tragedy than some other creature with genuine self-awareness.

After all, what great ill is death to one who has no opportunity for personality, no memory or concentrated will whereby to authenticate him or herself as an assertive being? It does not sound like much of a tragedy to me.

[Obelisk]

Obelisk: If people don't get a soul at conception when do they get them in your opion? (that wan't a taunt just a honest question)

Namaste Rudy,

I see the concept a bit differently, I think everything is a manifestation of the Paramatman after all, the divine energy flows though everything. So for me it's more of a concern about whether the cell is being unjustly destroyed when it has the full potential to grow into a healthy being, rather than whether it has a "soul" or not. Divine Kala explained this well.

[sanjaya]

If we must start applying labels, I do consider myself "pro-life." That said, I don't believe in this idea that life starts specifically at the moment an ovum is fertilized. As such, I suppose I have no ethical objections to embryonic stem cell research.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't researchers determine, a few years ago, how to extract non-embryonic stem cells from human bodies? That would be preferable, since it avoids the debate completely.

[Jainarayan]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't researchers determine, a few years ago, how to extract non-embryonic stem cells from human bodies? That would be preferable, since it avoids the debate completely.

Yes, that was the umbilical tissue I referred to earlier. The umbilicus is supposed to be composed of stem cells.