So the moral argument cannot be based on the fact of the destruction of the embryos but must be based on some other grounds. For the life of me, I cannot figure out what those might be.
Sent to New York Times
Friday, January 19, 2007
Stem Cell Research
Yuval Levin omitted one important fact in presenting his argument against the harvesting of embryonic stem cells because harvesting could not be accomplished without destroying the embryos (A middle ground for stem cells, New York Times, January 19th., 2007: A27). The missing fact is that the embryos used are created in the course of fertility treatment and will be destroyed in any case.
So the moral argument cannot be based on the fact of the destruction of the embryos but must be based on some other grounds. For the life of me, I cannot figure out what those might be.
Sent to New York Times
So the moral argument cannot be based on the fact of the destruction of the embryos but must be based on some other grounds. For the life of me, I cannot figure out what those might be.
Sent to New York Times
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment