From Opponents of Stem Cell Research, an Embryo Crusade

[revprez]

From Opponents of Stem Cell Research' date=' an Embryo Crusade

 

By PAM BELLUCK

Published: June 2, 2005

 

Randy and Julie McClure had three children who were long out of diapers and no plans for more when they heard about a program called Snowflakes, which arranges for women to become pregnant with embryos left over at fertility clinics.

 

"We really felt like the Lord was calling us to try to give one of these embryos, these children, a chance to live," Ms. McClure said.

 

Mr. McClure, though, disliked the fertility business, which he felt created extra embryos that were often destroyed or aborted. He feared that paying fees to receive the embryos would be helping an industry "that I have real problems with."

 

He consulted a Southern Baptist church elder, who advised him, " 'If you want to free the slaves, sometimes you have to deal with the slave trader,' " Mr. McClure said.

 

With that, the McClures, who are in their 40's and live in Bellevue, Wash., decided to take 13 embryos from a fertility clinic in Austin, Tex. They had a son 10 months ago and became part of an unexpected alliance that conservative Christians have been forming with the world of test-tube babies.

 

That alliance was on prominent display last week when, to protest a bill supporting the use of embryos for stem cell research, President Bush appeared with the McClures and 20 other Snowflakes families, kissing the babies, some of whom wore T-shirts that said "former embryo," or "this embryo was not discarded." Federal and state lawmakers have held similar appearances.

 

People on this part of the political spectrum have begun calling the process "embryo adoption," echoing the phrase that Snowflakes uses instead of "embryo donation." The Health and Human Services Department has termed the process embryo adoption in certain grants. Bills that would formally call it "embryo adoption" have begun to filter into statehouses in California, New Jersey and Massachusetts, states that, not coincidentally, are at the forefront of legalizing and encouraging embryonic stem cell research.

 

The adoption terminology irritates the fertility industry, abortion rights advocates and supporters of embryonic stem cell research, who believe that the language suggests - erroneously, they maintain - that an embryo has the same status as a child.

 

But for some conservative Christians, that is precisely the point....[/quote']

 

More here.

 

Rev Prez

[john5746]

I think the parents of the embryos should have the final say as to what happens with them, either adopted or used for scientific research, if someone will not adopt them within a reasonable time, then they should be used for science.

[revprez]

I think the parents of the embryos should have the final say as to what happens with them, either adopted or used for scientific research, if someone will not adopt them within a reasonable time, then they should be used for science.

 

Which is no different than the authority given to parents over their born children, except perhaps in your definition of reasonable terms (i.e., time) for destroying the embryos. I propose we at the very least treat embryos as we would any other potential organ donor, even if we don't grant them personhood status. There is no inconvenient or unhealthy pregnancy attached, just a frozen embryo in storage.

 

Rev Prez