Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hiredgun
If the lives of our adult, fully human soldiers are worth the possibility of whatever we think we're achieving in Iraq, is the use of a few dead fetuses not an acceptable price for the possibility to preserve life by fighting disease?
|
I'd say that there's one big difference between those two situations: consent.
The people in the armed forces - as it's currently all-volunteer - all consented to be enforcers of United States foreign policy. You could say that they didn't consent to this particular war - and perhaps there's a good argument there - but there is basic, general consent. An embryo cannot consent. I don't see the donor's consent as being sufficient for life-discarding medical research, just as I wouldn't consider consent from the parent of an infant sufficient (which is not to say that there aren't differences between the two situations, just not any relevant differences in my view).