Some recent news and/or opinions on embryonic stem-cell research and the beginning of human life:

First, Dr. William B. Hurlbut, a member of the President's Council on Bioethics, talks to beliefnet.com about the "moral peril of embryonic stem-cell research" and some ideas on how to get around it. Here's an excerpt:

Federal legislators recognize that a large number of the people that they represent believe that human life begins at fertilization. It’s self-evident. Biologically human life begins at fertilization. I don’t see how anybody could argue with that. It’s not an issue of whether it biologically is alive. It’s a question of when we assign moral worth to something.

My personal feeling, after agonizing over this as a member of the President’s Council on Bioethics, is that we should assign moral worth to the full continuity of human organismal existence from natural fertilization to natural death.

Read the entire article here.

Next, the upcoming Missouri human cloning ballot initiative is causing quite a stir in that state. The measure seeks to constitutionally protect embryonic stem-cell research and ban human cloning. During remarks made at "Christians Against Human Cloning," an August 28th rally sponsored by Vision America, a pro-life organization for pastors, Archbishop Raymond L. Burke called the initiative "one of the most outrageous attacks on human life." Read more here.

And finally, more from Missouri.

The main speaker at an August 24th forum sponsored by Asleep Know More and the Salt Fork Pachyderm Club, W. Scott Magill, an obstetrician and gynecologist, said the stakes for the November ballot were high.

"This is a political issue. It's a moral issue. It's today's Roe versus Wade," he said. "This is an issue that will affect the future of humanity."

Dr. Magill went on to say:

"This is a political issue. It's a moral issue. It's today's Roe versus Wade," he said. "This is an issue that will affect the future of humanity."

Magill said he believes the amendment text is full of misleading information and the number one deception is that it appears to ban human cloning but would actually create a loophole allowing cloning-related research to continue.

Read the entire article here.

I still don't understand what we're supposed to do with the thousands of extra frozen embryos left over from in vitro procedures. If it's immoral to use them to potentially save existing human lives, are we supposed to just leave them in the freezer indefinitely? Or will we someday toss them out with other biological waste?

O, brave new world, the questions grow more complex, and the answers ever more unsatisfying.