Embryonic Stem Cell Research Persuasive Speech

In 2009, President Barack Obama used an executive order to lift certain limitations on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research (“Embryos and Unintended Consequences”). In 1973, the United States legalized abortion with the landmark supreme court case Roe vs. Wade. According to The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research, stems cells are, “a renewable source of tissue that can be coaxed to become different cell types of the body.” Embryonic stem cells in particular are, “stem cells derived from embryos that develop from eggs that have been fertilized in vitro—in an in vitro fertilization clinic—and then donated for research purposes with informed consent of the donors” (Stem Cell Basics III). The conflict of what is considered “ethical” in regards to unborn human
Most of the controversy surrounding embryonic stem cell research stems from the idea that the destruction of human embryos is equivalent to killing a human being. While I do believe human life is sacred and should be protected at all costs, I also believe that if there’s a way to cure millions of people of disease then we should assess how we should go about doing that. To me, curing grandpa’s lung disease using four to five day old blastocysts seems like a reasonable option in comparison to letting him die and rendering the embryos utterly useless as they’ll sit in a freezer or be eventually thrown away. Right to Life Michigan argues that scientists shouldn’t use embryonic stem cell research because 90% of couples choose to use their embryos for future pregnancies (If They Say… You Say…). In reality, the government requires complete disclosure to the couple and their consent before scientists can do anything with their embryos (National Institutes of Health Guidelines on Human Stem Cell Research). The benefit of helping sick and ailing people is exponentially greater than letting embryonic stem cells sit and collect