Human Embryonic Research - Essay Example

“Natural law…permitted: (1) if the action was good in itself or not evil, (2) if the good followed as immediately from the cause…, (3) if only the good effect was intended, and (4) if there was as important a reason for [the good] as for allowing the evil effect.”1 This proves, in effect, only that natural law allows for some freedom of interpretation, supposing that the good effect trumps the evil effect. Natural law does not go so far as to say, “Embryos are not feeling beings therefore they don’t deserve the same respect as human beings.

” Even though embryos are potential human lives in the sense that, yes, the sperm has joined the egg—this a baby does not make. An embryo goes through nine (9) months of gestation in order to form a fully-formed human being. Anything less is not considered—for all legal purposes—a person. Of course, one could rationalize that, sure, an embryo is just a person in an undeveloped stage. The fact is, if one can’t describe with words what constitutes a life, then one does not know what a life constitutes.

People can cry foul and say all they want about “it was the chicken before the egg,” but what they really don’t understand is that human life is a miracle in the making and it can’t be explained by natural law. . Human life comes in the form of a completely formed skeletal system, nervous system, and parasympathetic nervous system—and not a moment before. Embryos should be regarded as potentially sentient beings. One can tell if embryos can feel pain by doing research as to whether they can feel.

However, just because an embryo is sensitive and feels (is sentient)—that does not anywhere near begin to approach the argument that an embryo is indeed a rational being—it’s just nature. This does not mean that embryos are rational beings, because rational beings have free will. However, the fact that embryos are absent of having free will does not necessarily prove that they are rational beings either. Indeed, it would be very difficult to prove that embryos are rational beings even though they are feeling or sentient beings.

It could be hypothesized that, since embryos might be able to move away from the heat or cold, that they can rationalize because they can tell the difference between hot and cold. However, whether this would just be a natural gut reaction or demonstrate the embryo’s ability to rationalize, that would be difficult to tell. Just because someone has an allergic reaction to histamines does not mean that the person is rational—it only means exactly that, that they are allergic to histamines. We cannot be making up stories about what we believe to be true about embryos—we must maintain the truth about what an embryo can and cannot do, and what an embryo is and what an embryo isn’t.

Until we have these definitions fixed in our minds as to what an embryo constitutes, we will never be able to have a polite discussion or even debate with people who are convinced that embryos are human lives incarnate. The debate may