There's a lot of controversy surrounding stem cell research and its become an issue in this year's Presidential campaign. So let me throw my two cents into the mix.

First off let me tell you that I am pro-life when it comes to the abortion issue and that my stance on the abortion issue heavily influenced by stance on stem cell research. I believe that life begins at conception and that once that life is conceived it has rights equal to that of the mothers. So, from my perspective, the only issue left open for debate is the question of when conception occurs. This is something I've given a lot of thought, and here's where I'm at on it.

I do not believe conception occurs until the female egg has been fertilized by the male sperm and the resulting embryo has attached itself inside the mother. Many fertilized embryos are rejected by the female's body resulting in no pregnancy. If I were to believe that conception begins at the time the egg is fertilized I would then have to recognize that the mother's occasional rejection of said embryo is a natural abortion. Saying that life begins once the embryo is attached inside the mother is the more logical stance.

So when it comes to stem cell research I have to say that I really don't have much of a problem with it. The embryos being use aren't, by my definition, alive. Living portions of human tissue, yes, but not a living human being. If they were taking embryos that had already attached themselves in the mother and using them for experiments I would have a problem with that.

But that isn't what is going on.

So that's my stance on stem cell research based on my rather limited knowledge of female anatomy and the reproductive process. But this is a newly found stance on this issue so I'm open to discussing it. If you think I'm off base by all means explain to me how I'm wrong in the comments. If you support my conclusions feel to put that down as well. I want to learn more about this issue and discussing it with my readers seems to me to be the best way to achieve that.