In this Internet Wired Magazine news story, stem cells taken from a gestating embryo has greatly reinvigorated aged cows.
I have long maintained that once embryonic stem cell research really gets going, someone will decide the easiest way to get desired cells from a cloned embryo is to simply "allow nature to take its course".
The first thing to develop are heart cells. I see no problem with harvesting those. However, where do we draw the line? Lung tissue, which develops in the last couple months of pregnancy, could also be "harvested". However, this would clearly be killing an unborn human being for the benefit of a living one.
This is what ethicists call a "slippery slope".
One might argue that taking an unborn human life to save an existing valuable human life is justified. Would sacrificing a mentally-retarded unborn fetus to save Albert Einstein be justified?
I don't worship at the altar of egalitarianism. However, there is something important to be said about the value of every human life. Equality stands as a safeguard for every one of us.
I'll post the link here in this posting and attempt to copy and paste the entire article in the next.
http://www.wired.com...w=newsletter_to