Embryonic Stem Cells Argumentative Essay

646 Words2 Pages

Embryonic Stem Cells: Our Moral Duty to Persons

In the Bioethics book, the Magisterium of the Church argues against the use of embryonic stem cells and refers to it as “the first ethical problem”. The main argument supporting the claim that its unethical to destroy human embryos goes as follows: (1) It is morally impermissible to intentionally kill innocent human beings; (2) the human embryo is an innocent human being; (3) therefore, it is morally impermissible to intentionally kill the human embryo. While this is a valid argument that follows the form modus ponens, it is not sound, thus I argue that the use of embryonic stem cells is permissible.
I think the objections to the argument in favor of stem cell research provided by Mary Ann Warren’s view of personhood–consciousness, self-awareness, self-regulated behavior, communicative ability, concept of self–is permissible for the use of embryonic stem cells. Her argument as follows; (1) If something has none of the five traits of personhood, then its not wrong to kill the thing; (2) embryonic stem cells have none of …show more content…

It doesn’t imply that all research with human embryonic stem cells is impermissible, it can be permissible to benefit from moral wrongs; like benefiting from the organs of murder or drunken driving victims to save a transplant patient. I think that embryos are partial members of the moral community. Viewing the embryo as a person rules out not only stem-cell research, but all fertility treatments that involve the creation/discarding of excess embryos. But if its immoral to sacrifice embryos for the sake of curing or treating devastating diseases, it is also immoral to sacrifice them for the sake of treating infertility. I think giving parents the opportunity to have a child through the use of embryos is a noble and moral cause. In a sense, the embryos are never truly destroyed, as they will live as part of someone else or their own

Open Document