Artificial Conception

How to Talk About Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Once again, medical experimentation is being carried forward on those who are not judged to be “full persons” and are not granted “the same rights and respect that others [enjoy].”

This time, though, it’s performed on those whom the legal system won’t even grant a lawyer: the human embryo.

Because embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) doesn’t have the starkness of other pro-life issues, some people may not realize what an urgent issue it is.

My wife, a former AIDS and cancer-research technician at Johns Hopkins University, put it simply: When it comes to ESCR, “the problem isn’t the cells, it’s the person you have to kill to get the cells.” And that’s what’s wrong with embryonic stem cell research as it stands today: It’s fatal.

This research doesn’t use human beings as guinea pigs, but rather as clay pigeons.

Many senators and representatives with otherwise impeccable pro-life records—such as Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah)—actively support ESCR.

As Senator Hatch put it, “Human life begins in the mother’s womb, not a petri dish or a refrigerator.”

For others, there’s an admittedly uncomfortable trade-off at work—a utilitarian belief that since benefits will (we’re assured) result from ESCR, it is therefore morally acceptable, especially since the embryos are “going to be destroyed anyway.”

And, of course, those who are already pro-abortion are going to dismiss those who oppose ESCR as religious fanatics.
[Eric Pavlat, LifeNews.com, 9Sept06]