The Great Stem Cell Debate

Link: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0%2c9171%2c641157%2c00.html

Kinsley, Michael. “The False Controversy of Stem Cells.”Time Magazine.TIME Inc., 23 May

2004. Web. 12 September 2011.

In “The False Controversy of Stem Cells,” author Michael Kinsley enlightens readers on the much-debated topic of stem cell research. His main objective is to highlight the similarities between the usage of embryos in fertility clinics, abortions, and stem cell research. He makes the valid point that stem cell research is considered more highly controversial (especially when compared to fertility clinics), even though the differences are minimal. Kinsley uses this argument to support stem cell research.

For those who are unfamiliar with the stem cell debates of recent years, stem cell research involves the use (and, many argue, destruction) of human embryos. It can be viewed along the same lines as abortion, except the embryos used are only a few days old.

Kinsley argues that stem cell research is unfairly portrayed. He makes a major point of comparing it to in-vitro fertilization. Fertility clinics create far more embryos than they actually need. When a couple finishes in-vitro, their extra embryos are either destroyed or frozen indefinitely.

To highlight the connections between fertility clinics and stem cell research labs, Kinsley uses the example of United States representative Dana Rohrabacher, who changed his mind about Bush’s research-restricting policies after his wife successfully used in-vitro.

Kinsley’s article is strongly biased. He argues that because stem cell research is controversial, fertility clinics should be as well. He also points out that embryos are incapable of any feelings or emotions and that “the lives of real people desperately awaiting the fruits of stem cell research are being weighed against a purely symbolic message.”

However, Kinsley does offer a small exception. He says that anyone who strongly opposes both abortion and fertility clinics has a right to also oppose stem cell research. “If not,” he concludes, “please get out of the way.” By ending the article this way, Kinsley more strongly emphasizes his pro-research opinion. He also attempts to compromise with the opposing side. Because of this, his intended audience can be either people who oppose OR support the research.

The points made in this article are very true. Many people do not consider them before deciding they are against stem cell research. For them to oppose one and not the other is unfair. Morals should be the same no matter what the subject. Some people may find that if they looked at the similarities between stem cell research and in-vitro fertilization, they would be more willing to accept the research that could ultimately save or improve thousands of lives.

Stem cell research and its many debates greatly interest me. There are many different sides to the controversy, and I enjoy collecting opposing points of view before forming my own opinions. For these reasons, this would be a good topic choice for my personal research paper. I believe stem cell research to be a good topic for others as well. Due to its highly controversial nature, there is a wealth of information available. Furthermore, it is an interesting topic that must be further explored before beliefs can be formed.