The bottom line is that people like myself are not going to stop until, at the very least, unborn children have more value than a Canadian kidney,” he said.
Dr. Sneddon went on about kidneys, too, as he argued the pro-choice side of things. (see the comments section)
[He] relied heavily on an analogy of a mother whose son needs her kidney to survive, and that she has the right to deny her son her kidney as her rights to her body part trumps his.
Now back to embryonic stem cell research. Contrary to what Bill Clinton thinks, the embryo is a fertilized egg, and the the earliest form of human life. How do their rights get trumped in the name of scientific research? Even if there had been any sort of success story regarding embryonic stem cell research — and I’ve been looking, believe me — how would one person’s, say, cerebral palsy treatment justify destroying an embryo to harvest its stem cells?
Clinton really kills me when he suggests that using those embryos which would otherwise stay on ice indefinitely for medical research is a pro-life position. Running scientific experiments on human beings is what Hitler did! Should we then say that it was more noble that these humans — the Jews — be used for the advancement of science rather than be sent straight to the gas chamber? That is, in fact, how the doctors in Auschwitz justified experimenting on human beings.
It was really a way of exploiting a human resource which they deemed to be already lost. They thought. “Well, they’ll be dead tomorrow, so let’s use them today.” (2:32 into the film)