Speaking of strawmen....
You make it sound as if a child would be sacrificed on an altar.
IIRC, fetal stem cells would have to be obtained before the fertilized egg divided enough to be recognizable as human - IOW, your argument is somewhat like saying an egg and a chicken are the same thing...
Secondly, the embryoes were deprived of life long ago. I'm not saying that was right, and I'm not saying any more embryoes should be killed, but should that sacrifice be totally in vain, or should some good come of it?
The children are sacrificed on the altar of convenience.
How do you pro-aborters live with yourselves at night, when it's quiet and you're alone with your thoughts and your conscience??
Fetal stem cells are removed from the dead fetus, the result of elective abortions. A common practice of harvesting these fetal stem cells is partial birth abortion.
Embryonic stem cells are stem cells harvested from embryos. Most of which come from in-vitro clinics. However there is now a move to clone these embryos to provide further "research material".
Adult stem cells - found in everything from bone marrow to the pancrease, liver and brain, are not only readily available - but proven to be effective treatments. There is no need to end a life using these stem cells.
What many of us are fighting against is the belief that the deliberate destruction of a human being so that another may benefit is morally wrong.
The slippery slope some of us talk about in this discussion has a lot to do with the thinking behind the statement often made: That the embryos were deprived of life long ago, so why not test them and see how it turns out. If they were dead, they would not be viable for anything. Many, if not all, of them are frozen in time, literally.
My thinking on this is very personal, and it goes back to this thought: The argument that "they're already dead, so it's okay to test them until they prove beneficial" is a thin one. We are already being told - not by doctors or scientists - but by politicans and celebrities that embryonic and fetal stem cells WILL HELP SICK PEOPLE GET BETTER. It is the same argument I've heard that "well the abortion already happened, so there is nothing we can do about it, so let's just use the tissues." It isn't as black and white as that.
There is no evidence of any benefit to using fetal or embryonic stem cells to treat any disease or disability or injury, and it saddens me to hear it used: when I am the direct target. Should I sacrifice another so I may have a little less discomfort?