Hey all,

I am currently taking a philosophy course and we have been assigned a debate assignment that is in regards to the morality of stem cell research. My group was given the task of being opposed to stem cell research. If anyone can give me any idea why people may be opposed to stem cell research that would be great. Thanks!

Well, one reason may be that it is too expensive.

Sigh... you did it. You cross-posted...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by psi42

Sigh... you did it. You cross-posted...

---

Cross posted?

I'm sorry if I did something wrong, but I was hoping to get different veiws on the subject, so I posted in different boards. I'm fairly new to the site, I didn't realize this was a bad thing.

Are you aware that science has now shown that you can take fat cells, and make them into various cells, without the use of stem cells.

So avoiding the disagreement entirely by using their own cells (fat cells) seems cheaper, better, and no argument about "where did these cells come from".

Doctor to unhappy patient after fat cells removed to be used like stem cells, "well let's see we made you thin, and improved your health at the same time. why are you unhappy,again?"

So be against research because there exist better ways that do same thing.

Hi,
One day, this type of research will lead to cures never known before.
Anything worthwhile in any type of research costs money...
Your best bet for finding info you want is to use a search engine, like Google.
Best of luck,
fredg

If it's not over yet check out:

http://www.education-galaxy.com/arti...-research.html

The Internet is alive with the pros and cons on this

Yes the argument is over.

The person who posted wanted to know logical reasons for being against stem cell research. You did not answer the question they Asked!
They are not actually interested in which is better "stem cell" or "fat cell", they only wanted a valid argument against stem cell research.
Try to stay with the question that was asked.
I gave them a cheaper, better technique that does the same thing without needing any donor. So no arguments about where the cells came from, or cost of getting them, because fat cells come FROM you. They are plenty of them to use for research/treatment of you, and you may at the worst, get a side effect of getting thinner because of the treatment, oh no! Not that, is that what you are saying about fat cell research?
You see the person who posted ONLY wanted a argument FOR alternatives to stem cell research, i.e. things that are logical, and give the same results but do not have any arguments against it. So you think there exists somewhere a crowd who would rather not have "fat cell" (their own fat cells transplanted from one part of body to another) research. What could they fear/dislike about that?

:mad: I have no idea why you are answering and with such an aggressive attitude. It is obviously one that would severally limit information for a solid research plan that would be acceptable in any respectable educational institution.

It was not even your question in the first place :rolleyes: so let the poster speak for themselves. The person asking the question was preparing for a debate. That requires a good working knowledge of the subject and a one sided answer does not begin to make for a good debate.

Proper research requires many sources, not one. It requires valid sources, not unsupported opinions. Opinions based on fact must be supported by actual research sources.

Needless to say, it is fine to have opinions, but true research requires a lot more. And the term junior expert on this site is nothing more than the number of questions answered, not the quality.

If you have anything further to say, that is up to you, but as far as I am concerned, this conversation is closed.

It is wiser to find out than suppose.
- More Maxims of Mark, Johnson, 1927

The person who posted wanted information about logically valid arguments against stem cell research. Not hyperbole about an entire overview of the arguments about the subject. Let them argue for themselves (in the class room) in philosophy class about the subject. I do not think they wanted to read other people's arguments for or against stem cell research. They wanted to develop their own arguments.

The problem is you are not at all answering the person's question.
You did not present an alternative to stem cell research, that is what they wanted. Try to answer the question asked of you. Unless someone has been living in a cave (see aristotle) they know there exists debate about the subject. But debate for or against stem cell research was not the subject of the posting, the subject of the posting was what logically can be an alternative argument to stem cell research, since obviously the person asking the question did not know any philosophical, ethical, moral, et cetera arguments that are "not for" stem cell research. They were seeking not to validify stem cell research, but instead to find any other position that would not make them seem silly.

If you want to ask a question for or against stem cell research, then make a separate post. They were seeking information about alternatives, not for us to write their class homework assignment for them.

Debate on here was never the purpose of their question, and that is why the debate is over, because it was never a debate. They wanted information, not dialog, not diatribe.

You are wrong. I presented information that you did not, and the information was related. The persons assigned to the other team can use the information you presented, but they are not here posting on askmehelpdesk.com
Perhaps they will read your reply, and use it, but we have no way of knowing.
They showed they have a working knowledge of the subject to the point that were not aware of any valid reasons against stem cell research, and asked for options that were different, since they are required by class to try to present a defense of a position i.e. they needed information.

Askmehelpdesk.com is primarily about providing information to people who ask.
You have provided more ammo for the other side in their formal class debate, I am saying they might not like, or want such input, especially since they asked for just the opposite of what you provided. I gave them at least one source they did not have, after a 30 seconds Google search. My purpose was to give them what they asked for, any information source that has a possibility of being in contrast to the other position. I found research that is cheaper, faster, requires not else, but the person on whom the work is being done. EX: logically if you can run a car on by products of the car, why would you go to a service station and buy fuel. A solar powered/gas hybrid car that can either run completely (enough energy for one source to fuel all the time) on gasoline or on solar power would be cheaper, and better to run on solar power all the time, because it would be free(which is cheaper than gasoline), readily available (uses nothing that the car would not be exposed to/or have with it on an average day).
Logically can you see why free (not paying for anything from anyone else is better than getting stem cells because they do cost something).
Availability is higher, because they can just remove more fat cells from the person, instead of waiting for fed ex or whoever to deliver more stem cells. The fat cells are right there with the patient, all the time.

Sorry, I thought for a minute, senator was a title askmehlpdesk.com gave you.
I wanted to know how many posts I had to have before I could be that.
For your information askmehelpdesk.com does not keep the old posts count from askme.com so no matter how many years people have answered questions they have to start over on the number.

It is not what you know that hurts you, it is what you know that ain't so.

Hey, well... I guess why some people wouldn't want to do it is because it's taking one cell and making an artificial being out of it. Essentially, some people, would believe if you do that with ever organ in the body-wouldn't u basically be playing god by actually making a person? I'm for it, but I know some of the reasons people aren't. And frankly it wouldn't hurt anything-just, for some people it goes against their religious morality.