Posted on 02/25/2006 7:02:18 PM PST by cpforlife.org
Human Embryo Is a Child, Says Bishop Sgreccia
Promotes Bioethics Congress of Pontifical Academy for Life
VATICAN CITY, FEB. 24, 2006 (Zenit.org).- The embryo, even if it is not being nurtured in a maternal uterus, is a child, said the president of the Pontifical Academy for Life.
Bishop Elio Sgreccia said this in a press conference regarding the upcoming congress "The Human Embryo Prior to Implantation: Scientific Aspects and Bioethical Considerations," organized by the Pontifical organization in the Vatican on Feb. 27-28.
"In any case, the embryo is a child: a boy or a girl, that has a special relationship with his parents and, for those who are believers, also has a special relationship with God," said Bishop Sgreccia in the Vatican press office.
The meeting brings together in the New Hall of the Synod 350 experts, among whom are scientists, doctors, researchers, theologians and bioethicists.
The human embryo maintains its status as a child, clarified Bishop Sgreccia, even when it is manipulated or destroyed, thus becoming a "crucial" question "both for anthropology as well as ethics."
The bishop, who was accompanied by scientists, explained that the congress will also pose the question: "Does the position that the Catholic Church has assumed have scientific arguments and, therefore, from the ethical point of view, can it be defended today?"
"We believe we have sufficient and valid arguments and we want to propose them," he said.
An individual
Professor Adriano Bompiani, gynecologist and director of the International Scientific Institute of Rome's Sacred Heart Catholic University, explained that knowledge of the phases of development of the embryo enables one to offer an ethical response to what happens in the maternal womb.
In the first embryonic cells biology attests the existence of an activity, of individuality, to the point that it goes so far as to propose the definition of a statute for the embryo even before its implantation in the uterus, protecting it from manipulations, especially from all kinds of destructive experimentation, explained the scientist.
Professor Kevin Fitzgerald, associate professor of Genetics at the Oncological Department of Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., added that, implicitly, the congress poses another question: "Can we legitimately prevent a disease by selecting out those individuals who have the genetic basis for the disease?"
"This question echoes back to the eugenics movements of a century ago when we faced this same general idea," he replied.
He continued: "The practice of prenatal screening establishes the principle that parents may choose the qualities of their children, and choose them on the basis of genetic knowledge.
"This new principle, in conjunction with the cultural norm just mentioned, may already be shifting parental and societal attitudes toward prospective children: from simple acceptance to judgment and control, from seeing a child as an unconditionally welcome gift to seeing him as a conditionally acceptable product."
"1. Human life begins at contraception "
Is this a really good Freudian slip, or merely a typo? ;-D
BTTT
yeah...ok, got me. Typo! ;-)
You want my take? OK.
I don't believe that a fertilized egg is a human.
I don't believe that 256 cells are human. I shed this when I scratch an itch.
I do think that folks who forbid condoms, or other birth control methods, are nuts. Scientologist nuts.
When does life begin? I am not sure, but it does not involve cells, IMO. Hard question, but I'll go with the pope innocence for now. Has to be kicking. His words, not mine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.