Isn't the resultant embryo in effect a clone? If so, aren't the scientists simply abusing yet another technological ability to clone humans using a different method, only to "cannibalize" these people for their parts?
I don’t trust these ghouls one bit. They are simply using semantic gymnastics to confuse the public’s perception of reality. Case in point: ”Researchers from the US bio-tech company Stemron have produced embryos capable of providing stem cells, but which can never become human beings.” If they are embryos and can “provide stem cells,” then they ARE HUMAN BEINGS ALREADY!!!
Just because they “develop abnormally when implanted, or fail to develop at all” does not make them less human. We have no right bringing these embryos into existence in the first place. It is utilitarianism at it’s most un-godly!
And with all the emerging alternatives that are not “cannibalistic” there is NO need. They seem permanently stuck in the “playing God” mode!
You can do parthenogenesis either way, with 46 chromosomes, in which case, yes, it is effectively a clone. However, parthenogenesis is typically used to indicate the stimulation of a haploid gamete, with 23 chromosomes in the case of humans, in which case, it is not a genetic clone of the original organism.
Just because they “develop abnormally when implanted, or fail to develop at all” does not make them less human.
But these are things that have no potential to ever become human. This is not like normal development, where ordinarily things work out fine, but occasionally something goes wrong and you get a genetic defect or two - there's no reason to believe that these can ever develop into fully-fledged humans. It's akin to removing a finger and then artificially keeping it alive in a laboratory - yes, it has human genes, but no matter what happens, that finger never going to grow up and be a human. It'll always be a finger, and parthenotes will always be parthenotes, not humans.