{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Annotated Bibliography final

Annotated Bibliography final - Annotated Bibliography...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Annotated Bibliography Brownback, Sam, Mark Souder, Carl Hook, and Richard Doerflinger. “Government Stem Cell Research?” Congressional Digest 2.42 (2001): 235-255. ERIC. Web. 31 Oct. 2009. In the article “Government Stem Cell Research” four officials who oppose stem cell research as a whole are giving their thoughts on what stem cell research will lead to with the U.S. Government’s possible funding. The authors include two conservative politicians, Sam Brownback and Mark Souder, hematologist Carl Hook, and National Conference of Catholic Bishops representative Richard M. Doerflinger. All of the before mentioned authors were trying to persuade their audience at the hearing on Opportunities and advancement in Stem Cell Research heard by the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on labor, health and human services, and education as well as publishing this article to inform the general public of America. Congress was trying to pass a bill which would allow the government to fund research on embryonic stem cell research. This research involves raising an embryo to a certain age, killing the embryo, removing the stem cell from the embryo, then adding the DNA of another human into the denuclized embryo in order to produce a clone of the human who’s DNA was added. Scientists would then grow this individual with the exact same DNA as somebody else in order to harvest organs needed in order to be transplanted as a perfect fit in the original human being (Brownback 235). These select officials chose to argue that the federal funding of this type of research is not to be implemented because they all agree that basically murdering a human being to better the life of another is illegal, immoral, and unnecessary. Richard M. Doerflinger of the NCCB gives us good evidence on why they think this way toward the research, “It (the research) is illegal because it violates an
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
appropriations rider passed every year since 1995 by Congress. That provision forbids funding research in which human embryos (whether initially created for research purposes or not) are harmed or destroyed outside the womb… This proposal is immoral because it violates a central tenet of all civilized codes on human experimentation…the embryos to be destroyed by researchers in this campaign are at the same stage of development as embryos in the womb who have been protected as human subjects in federally funded research since 1975… Finally, this proposal is unnecessary because adult stem cells and other alternatives are already achieving some of the goals for which embryonic stem cells have been proposed, and new clinical uses are constantly being discovered” (Brownback 249). This being said, if the government were to use taxpayers’ money to fund research which involves killing human beings it would be regarded as unconstitutional and politically incorrect.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}