A political post

[puzzle_me]

One of the above pictures is a human blastocyst, the other is an amoeba. Can you tell the difference? Do you think our President could?

If you put a baby into cryogenic storage, it will die. If you take a blastocyst out of cryogenic storage, it will die. How can you consider something a human life if it dies when you unfreeze it? While I might not agree with it, I can understand why someone considers a developing fetus a human life, but I cannot understand why someone can consider a blastocyst a human life.

Comments

[akakd.livejournal.com]

Considering (in my understanding, anyway) the vast majority of these frozen embryos are never called into service as an actual baby, or even an actual fetus, I simply cannot fathom how the administration's position could possibly be based on anything even resembling logical analysis. They'd really rather these embryos be tossed in the garbage than be used in experiments that could save the lives of millions of people who are already alive? Huh?

Maybe I'm just being overly simplistic, but to me this is a definition of a no-brainer.
(Reply to this)

[pearmeson.livejournal.com]

Many pro-lifers are against in-vitro techniques that leave extras for this very reason.

They also don't ever want there to be even the potential for a _market_ for them, and they reason that using up the "garbage" embryos would lead to a demand for more. They may also draw a distinction for themselves between "not allowing a potential life to develop" and "destroying that potential life."

I don't think it makes sense either...