Can anyone explain to me why there's opposition to research with embyonic stem cells, when the embryos being used for research are going to be discarded anyway and not used for reproduction?
I don't see this as any different than organ donation. If a parent's child dies, that parent is entitled to say the child's organs can be re-used to help others. If a parent no longer needs the surplus embryos, why isn't it that parent's right to allow the embryo to be used to help others?
It puzzles the heck out of me.
It seems the opposition is misplaced - if a person is against destroying surplus embryos, that person should be against in-vitro fertilization, since that's what creates the surplus embryos anyway.
See my post #19. BTW, I'm an Air Force brat,too.
There's a completely legit reason why embryonic stem cell research is absolutely and morally wrong. And while it's rather complicated (not to mention difficult to explain), I'll do my best to try to put it in plain English...
Ia. The keys to understanding these lies in several places--namely being Scripture, Catholic teachings through the ages, papal documents (e.g. encyclicals and pastoral letters) and the Magisterium. Though, a recent gift given to the Church by Pope John Paul II is the Theology of the Body, which combines these and more into a coherent strengthening of why the Church teaches the way it does.
Ib. Directly related to this is the principle that all that God creates is very good in and all itself.
II. This includes sexual activity, which is a continuous sign of the marital sacrament; and children, which are gifts from God Himself.
III. God, the Author of Life Himself creates each life--it is He who formed each of us into who we are. From the moment of conception, it is He who has ordained that soul, gave it the right to Life and bestowed upon it the very same human dignity that you and I carry. These three things are present in every human at the time of conception--they are given by God, and it is only He, in His infinite wisdom, who has the authority to take it away.
IV. While an embryo may not necessarily have the ability to survive in this world on its own--or completely resemble a human being, it is undoubtedly in the process of being shaped by God.
V. Embryonic stem-cell research is then not only denying this person their dignity (and their right to life), it is also man denying the awesome grace and love of God and instead grasping for some of His power.
Finally, these reasons are a significant part of why Catholic teaching holds that in vitro is morally wrong...
(NYer, wagglebee; lj; et al.~ If I left something out or something's in error, feel free to jump in) 8^)
I don't see this as any different than organ donation. If a parent's child dies, that parent is entitled to say the child's organs can be re-used to help others. If a parent no longer needs the surplus embryos, why isn't it that parent's right to allow the embryo to be used to help others?
The fallacy of your analogy is that a parent doesn't decide to kill a child so that its organ(s) can be donated. To rephrase your last question, "If a parent no longer needs a child, why isn't it that parent's right to kill the child to be used to help others?"
When a human being is created, whether it is an embryo or farther along in development (a child or adult perhaps), no human being has the right to determine the death of that new human being.
It seems the opposition is misplaced - if a person is against destroying surplus embryos, that person should be against in-vitro fertilization, since that's what creates the surplus embryos anyway.
Many, including the Catholic Church, who oppose embryonic stem cell research do oppose in vitro fertilization.