Rhetorical Source/ Research Paper

I chose this source because it basically sums up the ethical conflict surrounding the research as a whole. From one side of the argument many of the people are dying due to the lack of a cure and the medical advancement that could be found in embryonic stem cell research is being obscured due to the ethical dilemma that the other side of the argument holds, the destruction of a human embryo. There are many pros and cons but the one big pro is obviously the medical advancement that could save many lives and the big con is that the research to obtain this medical advancement lies with the destruction of many human embryos in the process. It makes the topic really hard to decide on. On one hand you can save millions of lives and on the other hand you can destroy many human embryos and eventually save millions. Each side has ample ammo for argument which is what makes this dilemma so universal and hard to judge. Socially speaking everyone wants a cure but at the same time the destruction of human embryos is morally against what many people believe. Politically speaking their argument is fueled by the laws in place pertaining to the issue, whether certain politicians be for or against it. Ecologically it could mean lives saved and embryos destroyed; either way it does not play that major of a part in the dilemma as other aspects do. Scientifically it has all the significance any possibility could offer. A cure to a disease that takes millions of lives each year and counting could be one of the biggest scientific achievements of all time. I have yet to decide on the side that I will take on this dilemma. The rhetorical source shows both sides of the argument in plain light. I simply have to decide on which side to take through additional research and further thought on the subject.