Josh Brahm comments on this week’s news:
I argued in that talk that my primary concern about human cloning is not that it’s “playing God,” but that we will dehumanize the new human being we’ve “created” in the lab. Notice the way the NPR article talks about the living, human embryos that were created, the same embryos that because they were able to live for several days, made the experiment a success:
The experiments involve creating and then destroying human embryos for research purposes, which some find morally repugnant. The scientists also used cloning techniques, which raise concerns that the research could lead to the cloning of people. (emphasis mine)
The pro-life argument is that human beings are valuable, or “persons,” from the moment they begin life as a unique organism. This article only uses the word “person” to refer to human beings that are cloned and then allowed to live until birth.
And should cloned humans be assigned any worth or dignity?
You have to scroll down to the bottom of the article to read the worst assertion from the lead scientist:
But Mitalipov dismisses those concerns. He says the embryos he created aren’t the equivalent of a human being because they weren’t fertilized naturally.
Don’t miss this. The sole reason given that the cloned human embryos aren’t valuable is because they weren’t fertilized naturally. Why in the world should I believe that matters?
The things my nightmares are made of…by