Two Embryos Went Into a Church

Two Embryos Went Into a Church... is the beginning of an anecdote to which I catch my breath:

• What is a human being?
• When does life start?
• What is life?
• Is it ethical to create many embryos using only one and throwing the rest away?
• Is it ethical to use those extra embryos for scientific research?
• Are we euthanizing humans when we engage in such scientific experiments?
• What is the legitimate way to create such embryos - ovum & sperm or ovum & cheek?

These are some of the basic questions human society is struggling to answer. One side advocates a human life starts when fertilization occurs and a soul is created. Experimentation on such an embryo is unethical and amounts to murder. The other side says the embryos can be used to cure diseases and improve medicine and presumably they hold that a human is not yet evident in such an embryo.

Purpose:

The best I hope to achieve with this discussion is to ask questions and thereby point a small flashlight on a as-yet darkened landscape within which we walk. There are no clear paths through the terrain. It is filled with myriads of flora and fauna throughout the diverse landforms. There is ample opportunity to stumble.

Basic Activity:

The most basic activity of any discussion is the definition of terms. It is the first activity that must be carried out in order to properly set the boundaries of a discussion. Unfortunately, it is the activity least performed and by neglecting it, most discussions disintegrate into verbal "fisticuffs" and rants of "oh yea?!".

A start to that definition phase will be the use of, and definition for, the term "embryo". Most of us visualize a human shaped form with head, torso, arms and legs in an amniotic sac. But consider that in the first few hours of fertilization the cell(s) are growing and splitting in an amorphous aggregate called a blastocyst. The important point to consider is the emotional meaning associated with words. People fight to protect a human-form embryo, but maybe not a blastocyst.

Latest Developments:

The context of this discussion is the U.S. House of Representatives bill banning human cloning that would make it a federal crime to clone people to produce children or to create embryos for medical research. The ban passed on July 31, 2001, with a vote of 265-162 in favor of the measure. It would set fines of $1 million or more and up to 10 years in prison for violators.

I remain uncommitted as yet to one position or the other on this issue of human cloning. I belong to the school of scientific thought and easily lean to the side for medical research. However, the questions of what is a human life, when does it start, and does it have a soul catch my breath as I worry over 'just how' to explore those questions.

New Question:

During the floor debate on the bill Representative Jim Greenwood, a Republican from Pennsylvania, sarcastically pointed out that supporters of the ban claim that a cloned cell - the product of an ovum and a cheek cell - would create a soul and thus need protecting. Rep Greenwood advocates allowing cloning for medical research.

This raised my eyebrows. Rep Greenwood has raised an interesting question: