Why not use them to SAVE lives and cure diseases?"
With all due respect, think of how you woulde come off if your argument were this:
"Folks, we are talking about old feeble people who are sick and who are going to be dying soon anyway. Why not kill them and used them to SAVE lives and cure diseases?"
Or this argument: "Folks, we are talking about young children who have very serious illnesses that are going to kill them soon anyway. It makes not sense not to kill them now if doing so would save lives and cure diseases."
I think both of THOSE arguments are monstrous. Human beings are worthy of the highest respect and dignity. We just do not kill some to cure diseases for others. Any research that does that is monstrous -- the "cure" -- killing some humans -- is worse than the diseases it purports to overcome. Look at the monstrous barbarity our own government carried out against a group of black men ion the South in the 20th century. They wanted to see what would happen if men, without their knowledge or consent, were injected with syphillis.
You don't treat humans that way, unless you have first concludes that some humans are not worthy of the same dignity that you yourself have simply because you are a member of the human species.
I don't care if the human cells -- cells which, by the way, every person reading this once was -- are 1/1000th or 1/10000000000th the size of a human hair. YOu don't destroy them to do research. You just don't
By the way, I am not Roman Catholic. I'm Presbyterian.
> Why not kill them ...
We are not, so far as I know, talking about creating embryos in order to kill them and harvest their cells. We are talking about embryos that have already been killed. So your analogy does not hold, any more than someone opposed to kidney transplants would have a valid arguement about Americans murdering people for their organs.