Reason #143 Why I Don't Give Money to Harvard

Generally alumni newsletters are filled with rosy portraits of a university on the move, desperate for alumni dollars to empower the forward progress.  I received one such newsletter yesterday from Harvard, but the promised progress is headed toward "Brave New World" environs.  The university reports that "after more than two years of intensive ethical and scientific review," Harvard researchers "have been cleared to begin experiments using Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT) to create disease-specific stem cell lines in an effort to develop treatments for a wide range of now-incurable conditions afflicting tens of millions of people."  The "intensive ethical review" resulted in a decision that ova donors will not be paid.  As for the ethical questions surrounding that whole destruction-of-human-life problem, the lead researcher explains that:

"[A]ll human cells, even individual sperm and eggs, are 'living.' The relevant question is 'when does personhood begin?' That's a valid theological or philosophical question, but from the scientific perspective, this work holds enormous potential to save lives, cure diseases, and improve the health of millions of people. The reality of the suffering of those individuals far outweighs the potential of blastocysts that would never be implanted and allowed to come to term even if we did not do this research."

So personhood is a valid theological or philosophical question, but not of concern to science?  Or it is a concern, but can be trumped if the greater good is served?

Rob