My hypothetical condoning of the targeting of a children's hospital did include a terrorist figure who posed an immediate and grave threat...that the killing of innocents as an unintended consequence would be justifiable for serving the 'greater good.'
But my BF spun this around (devil that he is) to question me on how I could be against stem cell research if I could condone the sacrifice of innocents for the 'greater good' in matters of warfare.
When you say that the 'difference is in the intent'...isn't the intent of stem cell research, to the proponents, a noble cause?
In the case of the innocents in the hospital, the intent would not be to kill the children - the intent would be to spare them if possible. In the case of the innocent human embryos which would be the source of embryonic stem cells, the intent would be to kill them for the benefit of others.