Print Сite this

Fetal Rights vs. Stem Cell Research


When we look at Western civilization as socio-cultural phenomenon, it will appear that, throughout its history, religion (particularly Christianity) always acted as counter-productive factor of cultural and scientific progress, closely associated this civilization. That is – religion always strived to erect obstacles, on the way of science broadening people’s intellectual horizons, because “holy fathers” understood perfectly well that, people freed of religious prejudices, will eventually be able to recognise the members of Christian clergy as who they really are – social parasites. This continues to be the case even in 21st century, despite the fact that in the eyes of educated citizens, the Christian dogma has been deprived of any validity long time ago. This is the reason why countless “experts on morality”, scream bloody murder, every time the issue of legalization of human cloning and cell stem research becomes the subject of public discussion. After having murdered millions of people, during the time of Crusades and Inquisition, today’s Christians had put on a mask of “defenders of morality” and “embryos’ spokesmen”, while seriously believing that it is up to them to define what is “moral” and what is “immoral”. Therefore, we can say that Bible thumpers’ hysteria, triggered by recent groundbreaking discoveries in the field of genetics, which made it theoretically possible to find cure for cancer and to even reveal the secret of immortality, is absolutely irrational in its essence. Science might not have answers to all questions (yet), but the answers it has are absolutely veritable, whereas religion does not provide people with even a single answer of any practical value, in regards to the existential challenges, these people have to deal with on daily basis. Moreover, it is religion that always resorts to science, in order try to substantiate its notions, and not the other way around (“scientific creationism”), which would have been the case if religion had an objective value. The validity of this statement is best illustrated within a context of self-proclaimed guardians of public morality, trying to put an end to stem cell research in this country, as such that violates “embryos’ rights”(!). In his article “Embryonic Stem Cell Research and Religion: The Ban on Federal Funding as a Violation of the Establishment Clause”, Larry Pittman provides us with the insight on what causes public controversy, regarding stem cell research, in the first place: “Stem cell research is controversial because the embryos from which the researchers extract stem cells are destroyed during the extraction process. Some religious groups believe that the destruction of the embryos is immoral because embryos, even at the five-day developmental stage, have the same value as post-birth humans. In other words, these groups believe that human life and existence of the soul begin at the conception of an embryo during the initial fertilization process” (Pittman, p. 131).

We will write a
custom essay
specifically for you

for only $16.05 $11/page
308 certified writers online
Learn More

If Bible thumpers bothered to educate themselves on the basics of political science, in time free from discussing “world’s injustices”, they would know that human embryos could not have any rights in the first place, because civil right or freedom is not something given, but rather taken. Those who oppose the stem cell research, can never get tired of referring to it as immoral practice, since they believe that human embryos have “soul”, despite the fact that being “experts on spirituality”, does not allow moralists to come up with clear definition as to objective subtleties of “soul”. According to these people, using embryo’s stem cells for medicinal research constitutes a transgression against foetuses’ “free will”, with the thought that their continuous attempts to criminalise the practice of voluntary euthanasia (another field of Bible thumpers’ “professional” excellence), also represents a violation against the “free will” of people affected by incurable diseases, never occurring to them. Michael Moore’s article “End Embryo Research?”, provides us with better understanding of the level of Bible thumpers’ argumentation, which is being utilized by them to slow down the pace of scientific progress. In it, author quotes Cardinal Thomas Winning, Archbishop of Glasgow, who while referring to stem cell research, said the following: “We are being duped into believing that by destroying human embryos, we can conquer diseases like Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, diabetes and childhood leukaemia and repair hearts, livers, kidneys and so on” (Moore, p. 946). If anything – it is Christian religion the dupes people on the fact that they can be cured by praying extra-hard to Jewish tribal God Jehovah and to his illegitimate “son of man”. The wealthy members of Christian clergy, like Winning, understand this fact very well, which is why they prefer to undergo medicinal treatment in Swiss private clinics, rather then relying on prayers, when they become ill – unlike ordinary “lambs of the herd”, the self-appointed representatives of God on Earth, never suffer from the shortage of money. In his article “The Holy Touch”, Andrei Zolotov suggests that those religious leaders who whine about the “evils” of stem cell research the most, do not seem to think of the practical results of such research as being utterly immoral, when being applied to themselves: “The fact that the head of the Russian Orthodox Church Alexei II goes several times a year to an unidentified Swiss clinic is never publicly announced, but it is widely known in church circles” (Zolotov, 2007). Therefore, it makes absolutely no sense that American respectable politicians seriously consider the arguments of “professional moralists”, while coming up with legislative initiatives, in regards to stem cell research, because these people cannot even be considered as mentally adequate. Just as neo-Liberals, who can never stop whining about “racism”, as something that keeps them occupied, Bible thumpers can never stop discussing the “evils” of empirical science reaching new heights, simply because they do not know how to do anything else. Stephen Baird’s article “Regenerative Medicine: A Growing Future”, leaves no doubt as to the fact that it is namely stem cell research, which will serve as empirical foundation for medicinal science in the future: “Research on stem cells is rapidly advancing knowledge about how an organism develops from a single cell and how these healthy cells can be used to replace damaged cells. Stem cells are one of the most fascinating areas of biotechnology today and, like many expanding fields of scientific inquiry… Scientists around the globe are researching various types of stem cells for their enormous potential to regenerate lost tissue, thereby revolutionizing the treatment of a variety of diseases” (Baird, p. 10). Watchdogs of “morality” can do all they want, in order to prevent scientists from indulging in stem cell research – they can hold “pro-life” public rallies, they can place explosives under the cars of their opponents, they can pray God for progressive scientists to be struck with a lightning bolt; yet, they will ultimately prove themselves as being unable to reverse the course of scientific progress, just as Christian Inquisitors had proven themselves incapable of preventing people from realization of the fact that it is Earth that revolves around the Sun, and not the other way around.

Individual’s life cannot have value as “thing in itself”, as Bible thumpers imply. In fact, if anything on this planet can be referred to as being truly cheep; it would be the value of one’s life. There can be only so much oil, gas, and food, but “human resources” are fully self-renewable, because people tend to indulge in sex on continuous basis, despite Jesus’ insistence that men should be preoccupied with waiting for his “second coming”, after having their genitals cut off. The Earth is being overpopulated as we speak; therefore, Christians’ promotion of the concept of human embryos as entitled with “soul”, which implies that they cannot be used in scientific experiments, is not only grossly unscientific, but also socially-counterproductive. Before expressing their “valuable” opinion on the issues they could not possibly understand, due to their low IQ, Christians should have first dealt with the consequences of their “morality” being utilized in Africa. In his book “The Death of the West”, Patrick J. Buchanan says: “Great folly of Christian doctrine was probably never as glaringly revealed as by the insane policies the Christian churches implemented in the Third World. These churches oppose contraception, sterilization, and abortion among their members. This results in exploding population growth which is further abetted by the medical care and food provided by the same churches” (Buchanan, p. 60). Being mentally deviated individuals, “moralists” could have benefited from stem cell research more then anybody else, because by participating in such research, scientists might be able to come up with the answer as to how eliminate the possibility of children being genetically affected by their parents’ existential inadequateness.

The rise of genetics as scientific discipline had proven that the answers to social, political, and cultural problems lay exclusively in the field of biology. In its turn, this undermines the most fundamental tenets of neo-Liberalism and political correctness, as it explains why Liberal wishful thinking does not correspond to the objective reality. This is the reason why, despite their “open-mindedness”, “lefties” often side with Bible thumpers, especially when the issue of stem cell research is concerned. In its turn, this explains why we need to disregard political or religious doctrines as useless and even harmful, for as long as the ideas, associated with these doctrines, do not relate to the notions of empirical science. The main problem, associated with stem cell research, is not whether it is capable of benefiting humankind, but whether the results of this research will be utilized exclusively by few rich moneybags, as opposed to the majority of ordinary citizens.


Baird, S. (2008). Regenerative Medicine: A Growing Future. The Technology Teacher, (67)8, p. 10-15.

Buchanan, P. (2001). The Death of the West: How Dying Populations and Immigrant Invasions Imperil Our Country and Civilization. New York, Thomas Dunne Books.

Pitman, L. (2006). Embryonic Stem Cell Research and Religion: The Ban on Federal Funding as a Violation of the Establishment Clause. University of Pittsburgh Law Review, (68)1, p. 131-90.

Get your
100% original paper
on any topic

done in as little as
3 hours
Learn More

Moore, M. (2000). End embryo research? The Christian Century, (117)26, p. 946-7.

Zolotov, A. (2007). “The Holy Touch”. Centre for Defence Information. Web.

Cite this paper

Select style


StudyCorgi. (2021, October 21). Fetal Rights vs. Stem Cell Research. Retrieved from


StudyCorgi. (2021, October 21). Fetal Rights vs. Stem Cell Research.

Work Cited

"Fetal Rights vs. Stem Cell Research." StudyCorgi, 21 Oct. 2021,

1. StudyCorgi. "Fetal Rights vs. Stem Cell Research." October 21, 2021.


StudyCorgi. "Fetal Rights vs. Stem Cell Research." October 21, 2021.


StudyCorgi. 2021. "Fetal Rights vs. Stem Cell Research." October 21, 2021.


StudyCorgi. (2021) 'Fetal Rights vs. Stem Cell Research'. 21 October.

This paper was written and submitted to our database by a student to assist your with your own studies. You are free to use it to write your own assignment, however you must reference it properly.

If you are the original creator of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal.