Yep, that is exactly the thrust of our Constitutions "rule of law". NO religious tests for office, and "Congress shall make no law" pretty well says that the precepts/'establishments' of religions are not to be respected by government codemaking/legislating.
All legislation has a moral component Paine. Eliminating seamoles belief system is a tad authoritarian if you get my drift.
Sure, criminal law is based on an ancient moral code; the golden rule, common to ALL cultures & beliefs, even paganism & atheism. -- In that we agree.
Seamole seems to want ~his~ particular religions morals to be codified. -- 'No way', if you get my drift.
Seamole is consistent in that he recognizes the fact of the death of those embryos that are created by AI.
So what doc? -- We agree the embryos die.
We disagree that the embryos are viable human beings, protected by our constitutional rule of law.
Why do you support any moral code, ancient or new, pagan or Jewish or Christian?
I learned the golden rule at my mothers breast. - "Don't bit the tit that feeds you". - It works, so I support it.
Why do you support your moral code, hoc?
Because, as you said (btw, you copied a lot that was not my post), "It works."
The only way to protect the inalienable right to life is to refrain from discrimination as to which humans are to be given protection - as in "equal protection under the law."
The only scientific definition of human being is to use the species classification. Simple biology. Any *other* definition is a moral discrimination.