I had to get up early this morning (before 4 early) and drive to San Antonio to fire weapons. I'm old and this stuff doesn't sit well with anymore. I'm tired and cranky. Go read Euripides, or And Sometimes Tea, or Beetle or anybody else on the right side of the blog. Or try a new one on the state of "a new phase of a very old war, " at Gates of Vienna.
I'll be back tomorrow or Monday after a good nights sleep...
But before I head to bed...
Are we inconsistant in our opposition to embryonic stem cell research and abortion while we remain largely silent on IVF?
Define embryos as human
Now is the time for pro-lifers to introduce legislation in their states regulating IVF and, with it, the creation and care of embryos. A bill introduced in the Georgia Senate this month had perfect model language. It would have limited the number of embryos implanted to the same number fertilized, up to a maximum of three. That would stop the practice of freezing human embryos and would curtail "selective reductions," the abortion of some.
Though that language did not survive, it remains a model for other states. The bill still importantly defines embryos outside the uterus as human beings, so court disputes must be decided in the best interest of the embryo, not either parent fighting over the embryo.
A movement in this direction is gathering force. Louisiana has had a law since 1986 defining ex-utero embryos as human beings with inherent rights. Embryos cannot be destroyed for research. Court disputes over abandoned embryos must be decided in the best interest of the embryo. At least five other states are considering legislation defining an embryo as a person. (more)