Hypothetical Response

Eduardo, thank you for playing devil's advocate.  The hypothetical reminded me of the scene in the movie Sophie's Choice, in which Meryl Streep's character was forced by the Nazi's to choose between her son and her daughter.

As Eduardo notes:  "there is obviously a difference between choosing whom to save and actually intending to cause harm to something or someone."  And, those who advocate abortion in the name of choice and the destruction of nascent human life in the name of science advocate harm to human life in its earliest stages in order to bring about some other perceived good.  Eduardo is "not aware of an argument (even by people who support stem cell research and abortion) that unborn human beings are not entitled to any respect or dignity at all."  Certainly advocates of abortion and the destruction of embryos for scientific purposes afford unborn human beings less respect and dignity than is afforded animals in our culture.

Setting aside the obvious difference between choosing whom to save and actually intending to cause harm, doesn't the choice between infant and blastocysts turn largely on one's emotional attachment or in some people - depending on their psychological makeup - on utilitarian calculations.  Most people would choose the infant because they have grown more attached to the infant.  But suppose the infant had a disease and would be dead within the week anyway, might some be tempted to make a different choice. 

I have four children and each has a bedroom.  If we had a fire in the house, and I could only save one and I had an equal chance of saving each one, I would be forced to make a truly tragic choice that would haunt me the rest of my life?  How did I choose?  How did I distinguish? Why did I choose the one I did?  Did I love this one more?  Did I feel sorry for this one more?  Did I think this one was less capable of helping themselves?  A physchologist would benefit finanicially from my anguish.

Reading Tort cases in law school and during my clerkship year was not good for me and my active imagination.  Suppose I had two children in my car, one mine and the other entrusted to me by a friend.  You can see what is coming.  A car wreck.  Only one can be saved.  Who do I save.  My heart wants to save my child.  I am much more attached to my child, and based on this distinction (coupled with a sense of duty because God has entrusted me with this precious life), I'd prefer my child's life over the other child.  On the other hand, my friend has entrusted me with his precious child, and I have a duty to my friend to take care of his child.  Which do I choose in the moment?

I agree with Eduardo (for the reasons he gives and the one's articulated above) that although the hypothetical is relevant, it is a bit silly.

As to the second part of his post offering (again in the spirit of debate without owning them) reasons why the unborn human organisms (or some set of the unborn) possess less dignity and worth than other human organisms, I'll respond later by quoting from a forthcoming article by Robert George.