Tag Archives: jocelyn gunter

The Benefits of Pursuing Stem Cell Research

Leave a reply

Jocelyn Gunter

Since the fall of mankind, disease has been rampant in the world. Today, it is the leading cause of death in the United States. Diseases like cancer, heart problems, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and others have affected millions of people. For most of these diseases, no cures exist. Some are treatable but affect the patient for his/her whole life. In recent history, scientists have discovered a possible cure for these diseases, which is a tiny organism called a stem cell. The research of stem cells has been very promising, but more still remains to be learned about them. Every day, researchers come closer to real cures. Stem cells and the research of them have positively influenced the course of American history and should be continued so research may further benefit medicine and society.

To begin, a definition of stem cells is needed. Stem cells are a universal cell, specifically called the precursor cell. The cells contain information on the genetics for all of the cells in the human body (Solo xii). Stem cells are the basis for every type of cell in a multicellular organism. From these tiny cells come all other cells, like heart, lung, skin, tissue, blood cells, etc. There are three main types of stem cells. The first is embryonic. Embryonic stem cells are found in embryos and have the ability to differentiate into or become any cell found in an organism. These stem cells are the ultimate stem cell because of their universal ability to differentiate into any type of cell, but they have also caused much controversy in the scientific world, which will be discussed later. The next type is adult. Any stem cell from an organism after it is no longer an embryo is considered adult. Adult stem cells can be gathered from bone marrow, the brain, digestive system, heart, pancreas, skeletal muscle, skin, and umbilical cord blood, to name a few locations (Panno 42-43). Adult stem cells are just as useful but not as universal as embryonic. This is because adult stem cells can only differentiate into a cell from where the adult stem cells were taken. For example, stem cells taken from bone marrow can only be used to create bone and blood cells. The last type of stem cells is induced pluripotent cells. An induced pluripotent cell is a differentiated cell, like a skin cell, that has been converted to resemble and contain the same properties of an embryonic stem cell (Panno 74). These cells play an important part in the ethical controversy of embryonic stem cells because induced pluripotent cells could replace embryonic stem cells without the ethical controversy.

The research of stem cells has only been around approximately 50 years. Stem cells were discovered in the 1960s by Drs. Earnest McCulloch and James Till of Canada (Morgan 18-19). This discovery began the intense research of stem cells. Despite the intense research, it took almost forty years after the discovery before the first human stem cells were collected. In 1998, Dr. James Thompson at the University of Wisconsin collected the first human stem cells from a five-day-old embryo donated by in vitro fertilization with parental consent (Panno 33). He used the stem cells to create stem cell lines, which are still used today (Morgan 34). The stem cells from the embryonic stem cell lines can still be used today because of a special characteristic of in vitro stem cells. These stem cells have the ability to grow and divide while retaining their basic cell characteristics over an indefinite period of time (Panno 27). Collecting and growing stem cells are only the first steps for the stem cell research process. While being grown in cultures, the cells are tested to determine what type of cell it will differentiate into. This step is called directed differentiation. During this phase, the cells are exposed to several growth factors that determine different types of cells. These growth factors are naturally occurring in the body, like hormone or a protein. For example, one factor could produce neurons, skin, liver, pancreas, muscle, bone, kidney, or heart cells. Another factor could create cartilage and smooth or striated muscle cells; while another factor produces insulin-producing pancreatic cells (Panno 51-53).

For these processes, adult stem cells create another step. All cells taken from an embryo are stem cells, but not all cells taken from the body are stem cells. The cells taken are a mix of several kinds of specialized cells and stem cells. To separate the stem cells from the specialized cells, researchers use a machine called a fluorescence-activated cell sorter. Fluorescent dye is mixed in with the cells, and stem cells have certain markers that are picked up by the dye. The machine identifies these fluorescent markers and separates the stem cells from the other cells. The machine can separate one stem cell from 100,000 other cells in less than an hour (49). After the adult stem cells are separated, they can be grown in cultures and tested for differentiation. Once the stem cells are tested to determine what they produce, they can be used for beneficial medicine.

However, stem cells cannot be used to benefit medicine if the research is not supported by the citizens of this country. America protests against stem cell research, especially public funding of stem cell research. People should begin to more actively advocate for stem cell research and for the funding of research because of its opportunity to tremendously improve medicine, the availability of successful cures for diseases, the costs of living with a disease, and other medical treatments. Stem cell research needs to be advocated for because the improvement of medicine requires funding to evolve and change and there is no better time than now to investigate the healing properties of stem cells with all of the modern technology available to researchers. Stem cell research could help improve the lives of those currently around us that are affected by medical issues, like my boyfriend who has Type 1 diabetes, and through stem cell research, therapies could be available for our future spouses, sons, daughters, grandsons, or granddaughters who may have a medical problem.

To prove stem cell research should be pursued, I will confirm the following three arguments: stem cell research is beneficial to the search for cures for life-threatening diseases, stem cell research can be beneficial to other medical uses outside of diseases, and stem cell research could effectively reduce the cost of living with a disease and yearly medical bills. I will also refute the following three counterarguments against my thesis: stem cell research should not be pursued because of embryonic stem cell research, stem cell research should not be pursued because it is used for cloning, and stem cell research should not receive public funding.

My first argument is stem cell research is beneficial to the search for cures for life-threatening diseases. Stem cells are the origin of all specific cells in the body and can be stimulated to create these specific cells or replace them, and since diseases are caused by malfunctioning cells in the body, stem cells could be used to replace these malfunctioning diseased cells as a possible cure for the disease. Stem cell research could positively impact the chances for cures for cancers, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, and Parkinson’s disease.

Cancer is a disease that kills the body through the spread of tumors that eat away bodily systems. There are hundreds of types of cancer. Many of these cancers have no cure, only temporary treatments. These treatments, like chemotherapy and radiation, weaken and damage the body to kill the tumors, if the treatment works. Stem cells are possible alternatives because of their ability to heal and replenish cells in the body, instead of destroying the cells.

For example, leukemia is a cancer of the blood. Leukemia affects thousands of people, mainly children. The typical treatment for leukemia is chemotherapy focused on killing off the tumors being formed in the bone marrow, where the body produces new blood cells; the bone marrow is then replaced with a healthy bone marrow transplant from either the patient or a donor. Bone marrow is full of stem cells, and the transplants only work because of the stem cells. The stem cells rebuild and replenish the damaged bone marrow by differentiating into bone marrow cells and therefore revive its ability to create new white, red, and bone cells. Dr. E. Donnall Thomas first started working on this cure in the 1950s in the United States. He performed the exact cure for leukemia explained above and found it to be very successful. His research has saved many lives and fifty to ninety percent of people diagnosed with leukemia survive. Around 15,000 American cases and counting have been successful using his cure (Morgan 24).

Another use of stem cells is a cure for diabetes. Diabetes is the failure in the pancreas. The pancreas stops producing cells that create insulin, called β cells or beta cells. Diabetes occurs in two types. If a person has type 1 diabetes, the pancreas cannot produce insulin. If a person has type 2, the pancreas does not use insulin properly. Type 2 is normally due to bad diet, high sugar levels, and being overweight. Type 1 is more common in children and type 2 is more common in older adults. The disease can be lived with, but if not managed properly, it is extremely dangerous and even deadly.

The National Institute of Health in the United States has discovered a way to cure diabetes, specifically tested on lab mice, with embryonic stem cells. Embryonic stem cells are collected and turned into β cells and then injected into the patient. Many successful research trials on mice with diabetes have been performed, but in 7% the stem cells have created untreatable cancerous tumors. Because of this 7%, no clinical trials for humans with diabetes have been performed, but these trials could be around very soon if scientists can find a way to use the treatment without creating tumors. Pursuing advocacy and funding for stem cell research could help that “if” become a “when” because more funding means more research opportunities and a better chance of discovering the answer to the tumor problem with this specific treatment. Other research groups are trying to find a cure with adult stem cells and/or induced pluripotent stem cells. The researchers collect adult stem cells from the patient, and differentiate the cells into β cells by stimulating the genes in the stem cells to create β cells. Once the stem cells are β cells, they are injected back into the patient. The hope is the stem cells will colonize by producing more β cells through stimulation in the pancreas and revive the creation of β cells, curing diabetes in the patient (Panno 94). The same process would be used with induced pluripotent stem cells, but so far neither type of stem cell has fulfilled the hope of colonization, which is why there are no clinical trials with these stem cells yet, but scientists continue to work on colonizing the pancreas with stem cells.

The third disease is Parkinson’s disease, a neurological disease. It affects the elderly by attacking the central nervous system, affecting movement and causing tremors. Adult stem cells can be taken from the brain or somewhere else and then differentiated and injected back into the affected part of the brain. The stem cells have been shown to help improve the symptoms of Parkinson’s disease by improving the patient’s ability to control motor skills and lessening trembling in the limbs. Dr. Dennis Turner was diagnosed with Parkinson’s in the 1990s. His neurosurgeon, Dr. Michael F. Levesque, collected a small tissue sample from Dr. Turner’s brain and then identified and isolated the stem cells. He then grew the stem cells in his laboratory until there were hundreds of thousands of the stem cells and then injected the stem cells back into Dr. Turner’s brain. A year after the procedure, Dr. Turner reported his symptoms having lessened. In 2004, Dr. Turner addressed the U.S. Senate about his disease and the procedure, saying, “My trembling grew less and less, until to all appearances it was gone” (Morgan 47). The stem cell treatment helped lessen the trembling caused by Dr. Turner’s disease by replacing the cells in his brain affected. Stem cells could improve treatments for many other diseases, and cancer, diabetes, and Parkinson’s disease are just a few key examples of the power and hope stem cell research could provide in disease medicine and thousands of lives.

My second argument is stem cell research is beneficial because it can be applied to other medical uses outside of the treatment of diseases. Stem cell research can be used for vision problems, skin grafts, and organ transplants. Blindness and vision problems affect millions of people. Blindness is caused by damage of the cornea, the outer layer of the eye. Doctors take stem cells from the eye and then grow the stem cells into sheets of cells in a laboratory. The sheet is then placed back on the eye and held in place by a membrane that dissolves as the cells attach to the cornea. The stem cells trigger the eye to start repairing itself, helping heal the damage to the cornea. Patients who have undergone the procedure reported an improvement of sight in a few short weeks after the procedure (Morgan 42).

Stem cells can be used to fix damaged tissue and organs, like in the heart. Many problems affect the heart, but a major one is heart attacks. Heart attacks are caused by many things, such as blocked arteries, and cause damage to the heart tissue. Researchers are investigating a procedure using stem cells to help repair the damage caused by heart attacks. Stem cells are collected from bone marrow, differentiated, and then injected into the damaged heart in hopes of helping speed up a patient’s recovery (Morgan 44). Many patients need a new heart. Hearts, or any organ, are very hard to come by because a donated organ needs to be genetically similar to the person who needs it. If the organ is not genetically similar, the body may reject the transplanted organ because the immune system will think the organ is a foreign disease that needs to be destroyed. Finding a genetic match for someone who needs an organ is very complicated because every person’s genetic code is different, so patients can be on the Organ Transplant List for years, and some may never receive the organ they need.

Stem cells, in partner with 3D printing, could help solve this problem. A team from Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School has created beating human hearts by using 3D printed heart segments made from biological material and using it as a scaffold for stem cells. The 3D printing creates a foundation for the stem cells and the stem cells, which are taken from the patient who needs the heart, are injected into the 3D created heart segments and allowed to recreate through cell growth a new heart. Another way the hearts were created was by taking actual human hearts considered unsuitable for transplantation and immersing them in solutions of detergents that strip away the cells of the heart that cause graft-vs-host disease or GVHD. After the heart is immersed to prevent GVHD, all which is left of the heart is a blank canvas for stem cells, differentiated from skin cells, to grow and build on, which is exactly what the stem cells did. After a few weeks, the heart segments injected with induced stem cells had created an immature but normal heart. The scientists shock the hearts with bursts of electricity and the hearts started beating. This research could be used to eliminate the transplant list and eliminate any worry of GVHD because the skin cells would be taken from the patient, therefore the new heart would have the same cellular structure of the patient (Andrews par. 2-7). This process could be used to create many different types of organs, using 3D printing and an individual’s stem cells. Because the own person’s stem cells would be used, the need for an organ with similar DNA and long wait times would be no longer exist.

Stem cells can also be used to help with paralysis. Paralysis is when one loses complete nerve and motor control of a part of his body or his whole body. Paralysis occurs because the spinal cord or part of the spinal cord becomes damage or destroyed. Paralysis can occur because of many things, but in many cases it occurs because of an accident. Car accidents, falls, and sports accidents are common reasons for damage to the spinal cord and nervous system that are not genetically caused. Stem cells could be used to repair the spinal cord. This would be done by differentiating the stem cells into nerve cells.

An example of stem cell therapy being used for paralysis is Kristopher Boesen. Kristopher became completely paralyzed from the neck down after his car lost control and slammed into a tree and telephone pole. He was given the chance by doctors to try stem cells to possibly help improve his paralysis. He received ten million stem cells from in vitro fertilization. These stem cells were injected into his cervical spinal cord. After only three weeks of therapy, Kris began to show improvement and after two months he was able to write, answer the phone, and operate his wheelchair. He regained function in two spinal cord levels. Kris became the first paralyzed human to regain control of part of his body through stem cell therapy. Doctors keep experimenting in hopes of possibly improving his paralysis to the point he regains full control of his body (Aldrich par. 1-9).

My third argument is stem cell research could effectively reduce the cost of living with a disease and yearly medical bills. Diseases place an enormous financial burden on families. For some, the only way one can afford to pay to treat the disease is through medical insurance. Without the medical insurance coverage, the family or individual would be unable to afford to treat and fight their disease. Stem cell treatments would still be costly because it takes money to harvest stem cells, differentiate them, and place them back into the body, to pay the doctors and to pay for the machines and tools used to separate and differentiate the stem cells, but in the long run, it would be cheaper than the current treatments for most diseases. It would be less expensive because by paying for the stem cell therapy to eliminate the disease or medical issue, one will not have to pay anymore for the supplies to keep up with the disease or medical issue. A ball park figure, because many of these treatments are still in clinical trials and therefore not FDA approved or legal to be distributed to the public, is $10,000 per therapy treatment with an average of three to four treatments. Some treatments may be less and some may be more, but around $30, 000 for the total treatment. Currently, treatments are not covered by insurance because many are not FDA approved, like a cure for diabetes. Insurance companies cannot legally cover these treatments until they have the FDA stamp of approval (“How much?” par. 2, 4).

For example, diabetes can cost an arm and a leg, physically and figuratively. Diabetes can cause damage to a diabetic’s body, like nerve pain or vision impairment. Diabetes requires many costly supplies to manage. Insulin, for example, is expensive and the price continues to rise, along with the prices of pumps, shots, and other medical bills. According to the Sacramento Bee, a ten milliliter vial of insulin cost $ 254.80 in 2015, and the amount of insulin is less than a month’s supply of insulin for an adult. Diabetes cost America $101.4 billion in 2013 and on average an individual with diabetes personal’s expenses is about $13,700 per year (Buck par. 1,3,5). Insurance covers a lot, but the costs can still hinder a diabetic and their family. Through stem cell research, a cure for diabetes could be found, which would reduce the cost of living for the patient and reduce the damage diabetes could cause. A stem cell cure, although costing around $30,000 without insurance, would be less in the long run because if one lives for 70 years with diabetes, the cost of living would be around $960,000, not including inflation. A stem cell cure could save an individual with diabetes $930,000. The cure would be expensive upfront but save close to a million dollars for an individual. A million dollars is an enormous amount of money, something a stem cell cure could fix, along with the stress and exhaustion of living with diabetes. To me, looking for a stem cell cure is a sensible medical pursuit, even if you look only at the numbers.

Another example is cancer treatments. Surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, and transplants are all costly procedures because of the cost of anesthesia, paying the doctors, and the tools and materials required. In many cases, these costly procedures also produce a significant amount of damage to the body. Radiation destroys cancer cells, but it can also cause damage to normal, healthy cells. Chemotherapy can also destroy healthy cells, and it can severely destroy the immune system, making a patient more susceptible to other illnesses. Surgery alone is expensive, and for many cancer patients, surgery is futile as an attempt to rid the body of cancer. Surgery may be able to remove a cancerous tumor, but it will not for sure stop the cancer from coming back in another part of the body. Transplants can require a long wait time on the organ donor transplant list because of the need for finding a match with similar genetics to the patient. The transplant also runs the risk of failing because the body may not accept the transplant and attack the transplant. Stem cell therapies from stem cell research could be a key to transforming the medical world by supplying more efficient and less expensive treatments and cures for diseases and other medical issues.

The first counterargument I will refute is stem cell research should not be pursued because of embryonic stem cell research. A majority of the world, specifically conservatives, believes research that uses and destroys the human body, especially the usage of embryos in research, is unethical. Some types of stem cell research, like embryonic stem cell research, use aborted embryos and unused embryos to conduct stem cell research. For embryonic stem cell research, embryonic stem cells are taken from aborted babies with parental consent or from embryos created by in vitro fertilization. In vitro fertilization normally occurs when a couple is attempting to become pregnant and needs the help of doctors. This process creates hundreds of embryos, and the couple normally uses only one. This means hundreds are thrown out. Instead, stem cell researchers, with parental consent, use the in vitro fertilized embryos to research on. This is an ethical and moral problem, especially for Christians, because it is not the correct treatment of God’s creation. As a Christian and a conservative, I do not believe embryonic stem cell research is ethical or moral. I do not believe embryos should be used for research, even if the embryos are being thrown out. The use of embryos in research is a mistreatment of God’s sacred view of children, whether born or not, fully developed or not. However, I support non-embryonic stem cell research, which is the answer to this argument and controversy.

To resolve this controversy, researchers started using and still are using adult and induced pluripotent stem cells. Although adult and induced pluripotent cannot be as flexible as embryonic stem cells, they are still successful and researchers are trying to use these stem cells more in their research to find cures and treatments so the need for embryonic stem cells in stem cell research can be erased.

An example of a way adult stem cells are being more widely used is through the storage and usage of umbilical cord blood. Umbilical cord blood is a combination of immune cells and stem cells which can be saved from a child’s birth from the placenta. The umbilical cord blood can be frozen and stored in a cord blood bank to be used if the child ever needs it. The stem cells, which are adult stem cells because when the cord blood is collected the child is no longer an embryo, can be used as possible therapies if the child ever acquires a disease. The cord blood could also potentially help the parents of the child because of similar DNA. A use of cord blood is in diabetic treatments.

Umbilical cord blood may save the life of Lucy Hinchion, an almost two-year-old Australian girl who tested positive for possibly becoming a Type One diabetic, like her older sister. Lucy’s mom decided to save Lucy’s cord blood in hopes of possibly helping her diabetic sister. However, Lucy received a transfusion of her own cord blood in hopes of preventing or delaying the onset of Type One diabetes. Umbilical cord blood could potentially prevent many, like Lucy, from developing life-threatening diseases (ASweetLifeTeam par. 1-3). Therefore, although embryonic stem cell research is deemed unethical by many, including myself, stem cell research as a whole should be pursued because there are other ways to conduct stem cell research that does not include embryos. The counterargument of stem cell research being unethical will no longer exist because with adult stem cells, embryonic stem cells are not needed in the research. When the embryonic research is removed, the controversy goes away because the research is no longer dealing with the problem of unethically using embryos and the increased usage of umbilical cord blood as a stem cell therapy contribute to the rise of adult stem cells and decline of embryonic.

The second counterargument I will refute is stem cell research is used for cloning, which is immoral. Many are afraid with the usage of stem cell research, specifically embryonic stem cell research, scientists will be able to create new animals, humans, or make identical ones. Cloning is unethical, in a Christian point of view, because of the issue of whether or not the clone has a soul or is a real person or animal. I do not believe any research involving the creation of new animals or people by modifying cells is ethical. Stem cell research is not unethical because it is using the stem cell’s ability to become any type of cell and its ability to recreate over an indefinite period of time. Unlike cloning, stem cell research does not create a completely new animal, species, or person through genetic modification. Stem cell research enhances and changes gene coding already present; it does not create a new complete organism.

Cloning became a possibility with embryonic stem cell research because scientists hoped to use the cell specific clones to avoid GVHD but also cure a patient whose cells are diseased. The clone’s cells wouldn’t cause GVHD in a patient because the cells would have the same unique cell surface (Panno 62). However, so far in history, there have only been a few successful clones and one was a cloned sheep, nowhere near a cloned human being. The cloned sheep did not live for long. The sheep was named Dolly and created from stem cells in 1995. She lived for only six years, when her research team euthanized her. Dolly was euthanized because her DNA was not correctly protected from being destroyed, which caused her to age rapidly (Panno 86). Cloning should not be an issue in stem cell research because of its unsuccessful history and because of the discovery of adult and induced pluripotent stem cells. Induced pluripotent stem cells were discovered by Drs. James Thomson and Shinya Yamanaka in 2007 (Holder and Morrow par. 4). “Cloning died with the discovery of induced pluripotent stem cells, which are patient specific, easy to create, and don’t require human eggs or embryos” (Panno 73).  Induced pluripotent stem cells also alleviate the worry of GVHD, because the induced pluripotent stem cells come from the patient’s cells, like skin cells. “Induced pluripotent stem cells, with their indefinite potential, have already made therapeutic cloning and human embryonic stem cell research obsolete” (Panno 87).  Controversies come with any scientific research, but it shouldn’t stop the research of an amazing possibility to make human life better. The future of cloning is bleak to nonexistent, and the future of embryonic stem cells becomes bleaker as scientists continue to research and experiment with adult and induced pluripotent stem cells.

The third counterargument I will refute is stem cell research should not receive public funding. Because current stem cell research utilizes embryos, many Americans are not willing to have their tax money spent on funding this research. However, as proven before, there is a way to research stem cells ethically with little or no need of utilizing embryos. The use of adult stem cells and induced pluripotent stem cells could make stem cell research more ethical and less controversial. Another way to make stem cell research more ethical is to actually have the research publically funded. Public funding can occur in many ways, like through tax dollars, but another popular way is the funding public universities receive for scientific research, like stem cell research. Public, and some private, universities actively participate in groundbreaking research. For example, the University of Virginia is known for her research on diabetes and possible solutions to diabetes, like stem cells. As a high school senior headed to college, I am excited for research opportunities and these research opportunities are a great way for college and future college students to public advocate and receive funding for a cause they believe in, like stem cell research. For others, they can donate money and support the funding of public university research. We can also advocate for more public funding from institutes like the National Science Foundation or National Institutes of Health. By bringing stem cell research into a more obvious public light, stem cell research will be under more scrutiny. This allows the American people to better understand what researchers are accomplishing and hold them to the legal policies the government, specifically the courts, places on the research. Publically funding and advocating stem cell research would allow the people to have a better knowledge of the research and the people could help hold the research to a more ethical standard than it currently is being held to through private funding only. Public funding and support of stem cell research would also allow research to be more productive and increase the chances of cures being found more quickly because more people funding and participating in the research increases these opportunities for discovery and a breakthrough.

“All life deserves our reverence and respect; stem cell science has the potential to improve countless numbers of lives; and the best way to be sure that research is conducted with the highest scientific and ethical standards is to encourage public debate, public funding, and public oversight,” Mary Tyler Moore said on stem cell research, the ethical controversies, and public awareness. If stem cell research becomes a public research operative, and not a private one, it could be scrutinized at a closer level and held to a higher standard of research and respect than it does with private funding.

Stem cells and their uses can and continue to radically improve medicine and the study of diseases. If the research of stem cells is continued and publically funded and overseen, it can flourish into a life-saver for many patients and families. Stem cells can reduce the medical costs for patients of any disease and greatly improve their lives. Americans should be the greatest advocates of stem cell research, because stem cells have enhanced American history and will continue to change medical history. We should follow in the footsteps of Nancy Reagan and Michael J. Fox who publically voiced and championed the stem cell cause. Consider the words of Nancy Reagan on stem cells and her husband suffering with Alzheimer’s:

And now science has presented us with a hope called stem cell research, which may provide our scientists with many answers that have for so long been beyond our grasp. I don’t see how we can turn our backs on this. There are so many diseases that can be cured or at least helped. We’ve lost so much time already. I can’t bear to lose any more (Kaplan par.9).

Stem cell research is so very promising for medicine and cannot be abandoned.

As Americans, we can advocate for stem cell research in many ways. First, we can use our right to freedom of speech to advocate by sharing the tales of benefits of stem cell research on social media, in articles, and by word of mouth. We can make donations to centers that fund stem cell research, like we make donations to places like St. Jude’s Research Center for Cancer. We can use our voices to write to our state government leaders, like senators, and convince them to vote for laws for stem cell research. We can vote for laws championing stem cell research. We can pursue careers in medical research and become part of a team of researchers who study stem cells and apply them to medicine and encourage the next generation to do the same. We need to be innovative and vocal because stem cell research is important to medicine and may be the key to saving so many people, including those who mean so much to us and are affected by medical issues. Be loud, be honest, and go out and support stem cell research and the funding of it.

Works Cited

Aldrich, Meg. “Experimental Stem Cell Therapy Helps Paralyzed Man Regain Use of Arms and Hands.” USC News. 8 Sept. 2016. Web. 10 Feb. 2017.

Andrews, Robin. “Beating Human Hearts Grown in Laboratory Using Stem Cells.” IFL Science. 21 March 2016. Web. 5 April 2016.

ASweetLifeTeam. “Toddler Reinfused With Own Umbilical Cord Blood in Attempt to Halt Type 1 Diabetes.” ASweetLife, 09 Jan. 2017. Web. 20 Feb. 2017.

Buck, Claudia. “Diabetes has become one of America’s most expensive diseases.” The Sacramento Bee. 5 Feb. 2017. Web. 10 Feb. 2017.

Holder, Julie, and Dwight Morrow. “Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells: A Model For Transforming Drug Discovery.” Drug Discovery World. 2010. Web. 20 Feb. 2017.

“How Much Do Stem Cell Treatments Really Cost?” The Niche. N.p., 05 May 2016. Web. 11 Mar. 2017.

Kaplan, Sheila. “Nancy Reagan: A ‘True Champion’ of Alzheimer’s Disease and Stem Cell Research.” StatNews, 6 Mar. 2016. Web. 10 Feb. 2017.

Morgan, Sally. From Microscopes to Stem Cell Research: Discovering Regenerative Medicine. Chicago: Heinemann Library, 2006. Print.

Panno, Joseph. Stem Cell Research: Medical Applications and Ethical Controversies. New York City: Facts on File, 2010. Print.

Solo, Pam. The Promise and Politics of Stem Cell Research. Westport: Praeger, 2007. Print.

An Outdated Theory

Leave a reply

Jocelyn Gunter

The book On the Origin of Species was the spark of the theory of evolution. This book single handedly uprooted people’s ideas on science and how the world came to be. Although Darwin’s ideas were not accepted the moment the book was released, it became a huge influence in the world of science. It also challenged many people’s ideas, values, and thoughts on science, and also religion. Evolution is science without a Creator, unless one wants to call fate a god. It challenged the long-standing Christian creation and denied God. With the rise of evolution came the rise of atheists and the absence of God in everyday life. Evolution is still very influential today. It is a staple in public school science, and many scientists and scientific communities are evolutionists and atheists. They are now so popular if one does not conform to their ideas, he is threatened and shunned by the scientific community.

The Origin of Species covers Darwin’s ideas and thoughts on evolution through his studies on the Beagle and other past experiences. His evolution eliminated the need of a divine being to create new species. He believed new species came about through species adapting constantly and constantly evolving to their environments. His main points of major focus in the science community are of natural selection and survival of the fittest. Darwin believes Nature selects the species best at surviving and has the best character traits to continue on. This idea applies to all organisms. These ideas stood the test of science when they were published because modern science did not know much about DNA and genes. However, today much is known by DNA and genes are more is being discovered and researched daily. The study of genomes has shown some holes in Darwin’s ideas.

First, nature may have a sort of influence on the survival of animals, but it can’t control DNA. DNA is hereditary and an offspring could have numerous combinations of the parents’ chromosomes. One parent could have several dominant and recessive genes and the offspring could end up with some or none. Sometimes, depending on the gene, the parent could carry a disease that has never affected them but affects the offspring. An example of this is diabetes. Parents can carry the gene that causes Type 1 Diabetes in their genome, but it may never affect them during their life. The child, however, may be passed this gene and the gene affects him. This gene could only affect every other generation, yet the gene stays within the family line. If natural selection was real, then nature would have removed that gene or the gene would not be passed on to generations. The gene passes on, so natural selection does not apply. Nor does survival of the fittest, because someone with diabetes may not be the fittest, yet they can survive and pass on the gene to their descendants.

The genome shows holes in his reasoning. Modern medicine does this also. Today, one can get a cure for a disease and survive, but she is not the fittest. A cancer patient can survive through drugs like chemotherapy, but the outcome usually is the lack of an immune system. This leaves the person very vulnerable to disease, but she survives. Or another example, like the diabetes gene, would be a family’s tendency to have a type of cancer. Despite cancer killing off some of the family tree, the trait carries on and it is not the trait of the physically fittest. Those who are not the fittest continue to thrive and survive, disproving Darwin’s theory.

Another example of how evolution does not apply today through modern science is people born with mental illnesses. They are not the fittest, yet they survive and pass on the trait of the illness. Nature does not pick out the trait or pick off the weaker being, because if that was the case, wouldn’t the world be a perfect race? No one would have diseases, illnesses, or messed up genes. The human race, the animals and plants, would all be perfect or coming closer to perfection, but instead people find ways to keep around those who are not as fit as themselves. Human kind has become like Nature, by being able to decide who lives, who dies, and what a child will look, have, and act like. Natural selection is definitely not prominent in today’s society and is outdated compared to today’s science.

Another reason Darwin’s evolution is not relevant or right is how Darwin believes animals, such as wolves, fight against one another to survive and eat. In actuality, wolves live in a pack and hunt, eat, and survive together. They only fight between other packs, but they are not on their own for survival. They have a whole pack behind them. It is not one-on-one like Darwin seemed to express.

Another example of how evolution is not right is no one can prove Darwin’s ideas on how the organic, sentient world began. He believed everything came from a single cell. Scientists cannot prove how everything could have come from a single cell, nor can they explain or prove where the single cell came from.

The last argument of proof could easily be thrown against creation, but no one, not even science can explain exactly how everything was made, because no human was there. Rather than fake proof, Christians just trust in their faith and in Genesis 1. It may not be “factual” enough for science, but the story of the event is from the canonical Bible, which has been proven to be very factual by history and science. It is a better source of proof than failing to explain how everything came from nothing on its own means.

Besides evolution being an outdated theory in today’s world, it has always been a harmful theory to Christianity. Before evolution, the explanation of how everything came about was God. When evolution began to take the world by storm, God was pushed out of and banned from science by the majority of the scientific community. This was because Darwin was one of the first people to outwardly speak on the theory there was and is no need for a Creator to create new species. Nature took God’s place and role, and the world came about from nothing and then magically from a single-celled organism. Because of things like the rise of evolution, God and Christianity are rapidly being banned from daily staples in America. Teachers at public schools cannot teach Creationism or pray or really talk about God. Christian students are banned from praying in school, but Muslims can stop to perform their daily call to prayer during school. Since Darwin published his observations and theories, there has been a major shift in religion and morals and values in America.

This shift shows the direct correlation between how evolution is detrimental to Christianity and to the community. If one does not agree with evolution and the popular opinion in the scientific community, the person is shunned and discredited. It is also shown through students raised in public schools. If they have no Christian influence, then they grow up believing strongly in evolution and are nearsighted with their conclusions on the world because they have only been taught one thing their whole lives. They haven’t seen other views on the world and very rarely do these students do their own research. Many scientists who were raised this way only discovered another worldview and were led to Christ by their research. Actually observing and studying the world around can prove evolution wrong, but very few people, other than scientists, are willing to do their own research. This narrowmindedness taught through their high school education is a disadvantage to them in the real world. Unlike public school students, those of a private Christian school, like Summit, have the ability to explore other opinions and worldviews like evolution and make their decisions and judgements about the world because they have a broader and more in-depth view of the world. Evolution and the results of it in the community do not offer these experiences like a school where research on worldviews is encouraged.

Evolution has lost its touch with the modern world, science, and medicine. It should either be changed or thrown out. It makes no sense why it has the effect it still has today. The only explanation is the required teaching of evolution in the public school system. Evolution has hurt the community, education, and the morals of this country.  It is a theory with no actual proof behind it. They cannot prove the theory on the world coming from nothing and single-celled organisms just randomly appearing. They haven’t been able to find the right concoction that would have been available in space to create that first organism. Professor Louis Bounoure, the Director of Research at the National Center of Scientific Research, said the following about evolution: “Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless.” Evolution is being proved more and more as a useless theory, especially because there is no scientific proof. On the other hand, Creationism has a proven history book behind it, the Bible. It is time for America and the scientific community to wake up and realize evolution is only a theory with no proof and is being discredited more and more as science and medicine progress.

Bibliography

Bounourne, Professor Louis. “Quotes against evolution.” BibleWheel.com. BibleWheel.com, 3 Sept. 2012. Web. 9 March 2016.

Crime on the Mississippi

Leave a reply

Jocelyn Gunter

During the nineteenth century, crime was a significant part of life on the Mississippi River. It was a frontier without much law enforcement, so the crime rate was very high. Crime was seen in daily life, and this theme is used by Mark Twain in The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. It is a significant part in the story of Tom’s childhood and his journey to adulthood. The crimes start off small and grow into worse and worse crimes as the story continues. Twain investigates many different types of crimes, from petty to crimes that would earn one a life sentence today.

 In the nineteenth century, America expanded through purchases like the Louisiana Purchase made by Thomas Jefferson. This new land was a new frontier, yet to have been thoroughly explored and very unpopulated. Because the new frontier was so vast and was slowly being populated, a prominent law enforcement system was not seen in the significantly spread out cities. Because of this lack of a justice system, criminals were very active in the frontier and the crime rate was very high because one could get away with the crime. A significant type of crime that occurred frequently on the Mississippi was piracy. Pirates were numerous along the waterway and committed crimes from stealing to murder. Pirates vandalized, robbed, captured, murdered, sunk ships, and sold goods. The owners were deceived or ambushed, and the pirates accomplished this by using the river to their advantage. They would use caves, rocks, cliffs, bushes, islands, river narrows, rapids, swamps, and marshes. Pirates played on the black market and vandalized foreign ships and sold the imported goods on the black market. Although this vandalizing of foreign ships helped the American economy in the frontier, it was still a common criminal activity on the waters of the Mississippi River.

In The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, piracy and treasure come into play toward the end of the book. First, Tom and his friends commit petty crimes leading up to the crimes that lead to the piracy. Some of the first crimes Tom commits are playing hooky from school and deceiving his aunt. This very first “crime” Tom commits appears in the first chapter. His aunt suspects he skipped school to go swimming, and Tom lies to his aunt about why his hair is wet. He almost gets away with the deception, but his cousin gives him away. His next crime is deceiving once again. Tom tricks his friends into doing his chore for him while also gathering trinkets from his friends. He deceives and steals from his friends. This shows part of Tom’s character. He is smart and uses his intelligence to outsmart people.

Tom and his friends desire to be criminals, another way crime is seen in the story. Tom wants to be a pirate and find treasure. Later on, Tom and his friends play Robin Hood, and the boys wish they could be outlaws for a year. Crime is also seen by Tom. Tom witnesses Dr. Robinson, Injun Joe, and Potter dig up a corpse in the graveyard. While the three adults are committing this crime, the men begin to argue because Potter demands for extra pay from Dr. Robinson. Dr. Robinson knocks out the drunken Potter and Injun Joe attacks Dr. Robinson with Potter’s knife, stabbing and killing Dr. Robinson. When Potter comes to, Injun Joe tells Potter he killed the doctor because Potter’s knife is still in the doctor. Potter believes Joe because he is still dazed and Injun Joe covers up his tracks. Tom witnesses three crimes: grave robbing, murder and lying.

Tom, Huck, and Joe Harper fulfill their dream of being pirates one night when they sneak off to Jackson’s Island. For this journey, the boys commit another petty crime. The boys steal some bacon to bring with them on the journey, and, after they eat the bacon, they reflect on their actions and feel remorse. One can see as the book progresses the crimes become worse, from lying to actually stealing something. Although the crimes are small, Twain shows the influence of choice in crime and the effect of a new unconquered, unsettled frontier and its main source of life, the river, have on one’s childhood. This effect can be seen on Twain’s childhood, and then the influence of his childhood in The Adventures of Tom Sawyer.

The Adventures of Tom Sawyer plays on many realistic crimes as the book progresses from Tom’s childhood to his adulthood. His dreams of being a pirate, an outlaw, being Robin Hood and looking for buried treasure turn to Tom and his friends encountering real outlaws, real criminals, actual crimes, and stolen treasure. Instead of playacting out these “heroic” roles, as the boys grow up, they begin to see the world as it really is. They begin to realize being pirates is not that great of a life. They realize outlaws are serious, real criminals who could harm them at any moment. The boys are faced with reality toward the end of the book and have to decide between good and evil. Tom has to choose whether or not to keep his mouth shut about the fact Injun Joe killed the doctor, not Potter. Huck has to decide to save Widow Douglas from being murdered by Injun Joe.

The realistic crimes seen in The Adventures of Tom Sawyer can be seen in the history of the Mississippi River. Twain, as he was growing up, encountered an uncivil frontier with that many outlaws. Twain witnessed two murders when he was a boy: the first one he watched a local man murder a cattle rancher, similar to Tom witnessing the murder of Dr. Robinson. These childhood experiences can be seen in The Adventures of Tom Sawyer through Tom’s adventure into adulthood and Huck’s adventure into adulthood as well. The effects of the history of the Mississippi River are prominent in the themes of this story. Twain brilliantly uses his personal experiences, like growing up in a town without strict law enforcement, to create depth to his story on the adventures of boyhood and the transition into adulthood.

Bibliography

“Mark Twain.” http://www.biography.com/people/mark-twain-9512564. A&E Networks Television. Web. 06 Dec. 2015.

Pitts, Kathy Root. “The New Southern View Ezine/Scenic and Historic Mississippi Pirates of the Mississippi.” http://www.newsouthernview.com/pages/nsv_shm_ms_pirates.html. The New Southern View. 21 Feb. 2012. Web. 06 Dec. 2015.

Twain, Mark. The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. Minneapolis: The American Publishing Company, 1876. Print.

Only Good on Paper

Leave a reply

Jocelyn Gunter

In the pamphlet The Communist Manifesto, authors Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels spell out the beliefs, motives, and hopes of the Communist party. Communism, in its essence, is the abolition of social class, freedoms, and private property. The goal of the Communist party is to have the proletarians or the lower class overthrow the bourgeois or upper class. The Communists believe the lower class is oppressed by the upper class and it is time for the lower class to say no more and become free from the bourgeoisie.

Communists believe once the lower class is free, the proletarians will be in charge and rid societies of social structures and social classes that have plagued the world since Roman days and before. Communists want to equal the playing field by throwing away social classes. They want to control the flow of everything, including private property and inheritance. Communists believe private property should return to the government after a person passes on, instead of it being passed on to the heirs of the dead person. Communists want to do the same with inheritance. This way everyone has the same equal opportunity for everything and no one man is inheriting a huge amount of land or money. In Communism, not only is everything “equal” but also money is shared. Money is taken from the wealthy or hard working people and given to the poor. It’s like a large scale version of Robin Hood. It also gives no incentive to the people to work or try their best to accomplish something because they are spoon fed by the government and don’t have to try for anything. Communism is basically the opposite of the glorified American dream.

Communism not only wants to rid society of classes and freedom, it also wants to rid society of religion, family, education as it is currently, countries, nationality, eternal truths, and all morality. The want to abolish religion, family, eternal truths, and all morality should be a red flag right away to Christians and dissuade them from this type of social structure. Christians should be careful of Communism because it directly goes against what Christians believe. Christians believe religion is an important part of life, all morality and eternal truths are from God and are necessary in life to live like Christ, and family is a God-ordained thing created by Him and vital to our essence. Humans crave relationships, and family is the most important relationship after God. Communism wishes to destroy all of that, so Christians should strongly disagree with Communism. Communism takes away vital parts of human life, parts that make up who we are as humans.

Communism is a nice idea, but it only works on paper. First, the proletariat overthrow of the bourgeoisie does not end oppression. The proletarians may not be oppressed anymore, but they become the people they despised. They become the bourgeois. They become the oppressor. The bourgeois becomes the oppressed. This doesn’t end anything. The cycle of oppressed and oppressor only continues and only the roles have changed. Communism wants to throw off the past, but they are just continuing it. The lower class people of feudalism pushed their way into the bourgeois and became the bourgeois and another people group filled in the empty place and the cycle continued. In the same way, what the Communists wish to do is just continuing the cycle.

Second, something as large as every country switching class roles through revolutions would take much time and, in many cases, turn into chaos and anarchy. Revolutions can take many years to complete the goal. Economies would fail because of the turmoil and war and spending going into the revolutions. The whole world would be in chaos because of the failing economies, therefore the economic structure of the world would fail also. Countries would shut down, limiting the resources being exported and imported into the country, depriving the country’s people along with the rest of the world. Along with the world economy being shut down, countries could spin out of control amidst a revolution and go into anarchy. The lack of a leader and control in the country could really run a nation into the ground. Overthrowing another class through revolution may seem easy, but it is easier said than done. Then again, it seems Communism wishes to ruin the world through a worldwide social upheaval. Changing social structures and styles of government takes time and money, which a lot of countries do not have. Communism only seems to take place in countries with revolutions, which is why they want social upheavals to occur, so Communism can take root. John F. Kennedy said, concerning Communism, “Communism has never come into power in a country that was not disrupted by war, corruption, or both.” Communism is only a good theory, but it is has many, many faults. Any form of government has faults, but Communism is the faultiest because its beliefs and hopes only work in theory. Proof of this is countries like Russia, where the people are oppressed and controlled by the government. They have no freedom and, until recently, have been very behind the rest of the world economically and technologically.

Finally, Communism believes in equality among everyone. All wealth is shared among the people of the nation. Property will be socially or commonly owned, given, and shared by the government, not a private person. Production will not be privately owned, but socially shared. Everything would be shared and controlled by the government. The wealthy’s money would be shared with the poor. Hard working people would lose their money to those who are lazy and don’t work. The world and its people being equal is a nice idea, but the world would need to be a perfect place. The problem with this idea is the world is far from perfect, and because of sinful nature, there is no equality and people are constantly fighting for equality. Jesse Ventura said concerning the ideas of Communism, “The Communism of Karl Marx would probably be actually the best for everybody as a whole. But what he didn’t figure into was human nature, and that’s what corrupts it.” Sinful nature makes the idea of perfect equality and the world in harmony an impossible idea. Only when Christ returns with the New Jerusalem and sets up His thousand-year reign could something like the world being equal and perfect be possible. Sin nature means people make wrong choices, are imperfect, and struggle with being in harmony with one another. That is why there are wars and evil things and people, and why Communism just doesn’t work in the present age.

Communism sounds like a good idea, but that is as far as it goes. Communism doesn’t survive or work off the pages of this pamphlet. Communism destroys fundamental structures and beliefs. As Christians, we cannot accept Communism because it wishes to take away many things we hold dear and are vital to what we believe and hold as true. As the world, we cannot accept Communism now or ever because it is controlling, could put the world in more chaos than it is now, and it takes away rights we hold as true and God-given. Communism does not have a place in the present age or really in any age. Communism is very relevant and present today in the world, and the world needs to rebel against because it is not good for society, the economy, and the world as a whole. Christians and all people, in the United States or not, should listen to the words of Emanuel Celler: “Communism feeds on aggression, hatred, and the imprisonment of men’s minds and souls. This shall not take root in the United States.” Communism should not be allowed to take root and destroy our beliefs, rights, hopes, and dreams, because Communism is only good on paper.

Bibliography

“Quotes on Communism.” QuotesGram. Quotes Gram. Web. 12 Dec. 2015.

Only Good on Paper

Leave a reply

Jocelyn Gunter

In the pamphlet The Communist Manifesto, authors Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels spell out the beliefs, motives, and hopes of the Communist party. Communism, in its essence, is the abolition of social class, freedoms, and private property. The goal of the Communist party is to have the proletarians or the lower class overthrow the bourgeois or upper class. The Communists believe the lower class is oppressed by the upper class and it is time for the lower class to say no more and become free from the bourgeoisie.

Communists believe once the lower class is free, the proletarians will be in charge and rid societies of social structures and social classes that have plagued the world since Roman days and before. Communists want to equal the playing field by throwing away social classes. They want to control the flow of everything, including private property and inheritance. Communists believe private property should return to the government after a person passes on, instead of it being passed on to the heirs of the dead person. Communists want to do the same with inheritance. This way everyone has the same equal opportunity for everything and no one man is inheriting a huge amount of land or money. In Communism, not only is everything “equal” but also money is shared. Money is taken from the wealthy or hard working people and given to the poor. It’s like a large scale version of Robin Hood. It also gives no incentive to the people to work or try their best to accomplish something because they are spoon fed by the government and don’t have to try for anything. Communism is basically the opposite of the glorified American dream.

Communism not only wants to rid society of classes and freedom, it also wants to rid society of religion, family, education as it is currently, countries, nationality, eternal truths, and all morality. The want to abolish religion, family, eternal truths, and all morality should be a red flag right away to Christians and dissuade them from this type of social structure. Christians should be careful of Communism because it directly goes against what Christians believe. Christians believe religion is an important part of life, all morality and eternal truths are from God and are necessary in life to live like Christ, and family is a God-ordained thing created by Him and vital to our essence. Humans crave relationships, and family is the most important relationship after God. Communism wishes to destroy all of that, so Christians should strongly disagree with Communism. Communism takes away vital parts of human life, parts that make up who we are as humans.

Communism is a nice idea, but it only works on paper. First, the proletariat overthrow of the bourgeoisie does not end oppression. The proletarians may not be oppressed anymore, but they become the people they despised. They become the bourgeois. They become the oppressor. The bourgeois becomes the oppressed. This doesn’t end anything. The cycle of oppressed and oppressor only continues and only the roles have changed. Communism wants to throw off the past, but they are just continuing it. The lower class people of feudalism pushed their way into the bourgeois and became the bourgeois and another people group filled in the empty place and the cycle continued. In the same way, what the Communists wish to do is just continuing the cycle.

Second, something as large as every country switching class roles through revolutions would take much time and, in many cases, turn into chaos and anarchy. Revolutions can take many years to complete the goal. Economies would fail because of the turmoil and war and spending going into the revolutions. The whole world would be in chaos because of the failing economies, therefore the economic structure of the world would fail also. Countries would shut down, limiting the resources being exported and imported into the country, depriving the country’s people along with the rest of the world. Along with the world economy being shut down, countries could spin out of control amidst a revolution and go into anarchy. The lack of a leader and control in the country could really run a nation into the ground. Overthrowing another class through revolution may seem easy, but it is easier said than done. Then again, it seems Communism wishes to ruin the world through a worldwide social upheaval. Changing social structures and styles of government takes time and money, which a lot of countries do not have. Communism only seems to take place in countries with revolutions, which is why they want social upheavals to occur, so Communism can take root. John F. Kennedy said, concerning Communism, “Communism has never come into power in a country that was not disrupted by war, corruption, or both.” Communism is only a good theory, but it is has many, many faults. Any form of government has faults, but Communism is the faultiest because its beliefs and hopes only work in theory. Proof of this is countries like Russia, where the people are oppressed and controlled by the government. They have no freedom and, until recently, have been very behind the rest of the world economically and technologically.

Finally, Communism believes in equality among everyone. All wealth is shared among the people of the nation. Property will be socially or commonly owned, given, and shared by the government, not a private person. Production will not be privately owned, but socially shared. Everything would be shared and controlled by the government. The wealthy’s money would be shared with the poor. Hard working people would lose their money to those who are lazy and don’t work. The world and its people being equal is a nice idea, but the world would need to be a perfect place. The problem with this idea is the world is far from perfect, and because of sinful nature, there is no equality and people are constantly fighting for equality. Jesse Ventura said concerning the ideas of Communism, “The Communism of Karl Marx would probably be actually the best for everybody as a whole. But what he didn’t figure into was human nature, and that’s what corrupts it.” Sinful nature makes the idea of perfect equality and the world in harmony an impossible idea. Only when Christ returns with the New Jerusalem and sets up His thousand-year reign could something like the world being equal and perfect be possible. Sin nature means people make wrong choices, are imperfect, and struggle with being in harmony with one another. That is why there are wars and evil things and people, and why Communism just doesn’t work in the present age.

Communism sounds like a good idea, but that is as far as it goes. Communism doesn’t survive or work off the pages of this pamphlet. Communism destroys fundamental structures and beliefs. As Christians, we cannot accept Communism because it wishes to take away many things we hold dear and are vital to what we believe and hold as true. As the world, we cannot accept Communism now or ever because it is controlling, could put the world in more chaos than it is now, and it takes away rights we hold as true and God-given. Communism does not have a place in the present age or really in any age. Communism is very relevant and present today in the world, and the world needs to rebel against because it is not good for society, the economy, and the world as a whole. Christians and all people, in the United States or not, should listen to the words of Emanuel Celler: “Communism feeds on aggression, hatred, and the imprisonment of men’s minds and souls. This shall not take root in the United States.” Communism should not be allowed to take root and destroy our beliefs, rights, hopes, and dreams, because Communism is only good on paper.

Bibliography

“Quotes on Communism.” QuotesGram. Quotes Gram. Web. 12 Dec. 2015.