Fetal tissue research and you

What are you smokin'?

 

no,
trade a childs life for mine?
no.

 

No. Ask someone to carry a child to be aborted? That is not only murder...it is premeditated murder. I can't see God being pleased with that.

There are mother's who will get pregnant and carry the child full term to help a sibling with bone marrow etc., I see absolutely nothing wrong with that because both children survive.

 

Would I use it? Yes.

Would I create a pregnancy - mine or someone else's - for abortion so I could get the fetus for my own medical reasons? No.

I also have moral problems with people who have children for bone marrow purposes. If you're going to have a child, have a child because you want to have a child. Don't have a child to save someone's life and then love and raise it as a by-product. That's pure selfishness that happens to have a happy ending.

 

In in favor of fetal tissue being used for research. Even if we discount fetal tissue made available from elective abortions, there's plenty of fetal tissue availabe from medically necessary abortions, ectopic pregnancies, and miscarriages. SO long as the mother gives consent to donate the fetal tissue, I see this as a non-issue.

 

There is no such thing as a medically necessary abortion, Johnv!

No, Sister Unchained! I would not! Cannot! Must not! And raise my children to believe the same things about what I believe about this topic as I do! God bless your heart, Gina! Keep standing! And I'm convinced that the only way to keep standing is to keep falling at Jesus' feet!!

Your buddy,
Brother David

 

Amen! Amen to all you said! Nor would I!

Diane

 

David, they are very very few, but there are such things as medically necessary abortions (maybe a few hundred a year in the USA?). There are some instances where it is the child's life or the mother's, and normally the mother's is opted for.

One example is that of pernicious vomiting when the mother is pregnant. This means the pregnancy is causing her to vomit up EVERYTHING for the entire time. IV's can help to a point, but the problem can be fatal for the mother -- in which case both the mother and child die.

For instance, in Michigan in either 2000 or 2001, there were about 26 thousand abortions and only 33 of them were deemed medically necessary.

This is very different from the idea of 'medically necessary' being a matter of the mother's state of mind, etc. I think Michigan probably has some pretty good guidelines over what is deemed medically necessary, whereas other states don't.

But definitions aside, there ARE instances when the mother will probably die if the pregnancy is not ended. Barring catastrophic accidents, however, these cases are generally identified within the first three months of the pregnancy. It is still a killing, and it is still a tragedy, but at the point of triage when a decision must be made about the life of the mother, an abortion may be called for.

This is NOT abortion on demand in any way, shape, or form however.

About the tissues from that child -- it's still a baby. And yet, I have signed a donor card allowing my organs -- if they are any good at all then -- to be used in transplants. I will not be living in my body then.

But can I make that decision for a little one who was actually killed so someone else might live? I don't know. I pray I will never have to be in that sort of situation.

Gina, I think you are taking your scenario from the latest Readers' Digest, right?

 

No Supplanter, you don't kill your foot cells when you walk. You do, however, slough off those that are already dead.

 

That's simply not true, as has been stated, but rather than debate that, let's stick to the topic.

No, I would not favor of someone willfully getting pregnant for the premeditated purpose of having an abortion. But to reiterate what I posted earlier, I'm against the governmental banning of fetal tissue research. It should be noted, however, that people have gotten pregnant for reasons more frivolous than the scenario you've presented.

 

Gina, I would use such a cure because the fetus had already been aborted and the tissue was available, yes. I would oppose abortion in order to derive such a cure. Not legally, but morally.

 

I was supposed to have a point? Besides the one on top of my head???