human embryos. which one would you save if you had time to save one? what is the morally correct decision and why?
2007-12-15 12:42:01 · 5 answers · asked by stephanie 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
Clearly the three year old child.
The Petri dishes with embryos would not be viable without a lot of other equipment to feed them, these would clearly not be portable. Also, unless the embryos were clearly labelled "Human Embryos", at the size they were, they could be from any animal, not just human. You certainly would not risk your own life, as well as that of a child, on a chance that they were human and viable. The choice in this case is easy. What if there was a baby in a nursery incubator and a three year old child to choose between?
Just as a point of clarification. "Morally correct" implies that there is a "morally incorrect".
Morals are never that "black and white".
.
2007-12-15 13:50:05 · answer #1 · answered by Labsci 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You save the three year old child, that is the only living one of them and the viable human embryos may not ever have life.
2007-12-15 20:49:42 · answer #2 · answered by Bob 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋
That's a simple question, which pretty neatly encapsulates the silliness of the 'anti-stem cell' position. Only a lunatic would bypass the living child to save the three potentials.
2007-12-15 20:57:18 · answer #3 · answered by John R 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
The three year old child of course, that one has the best chance of living a full and happy life.
2007-12-15 20:52:07 · answer #4 · answered by writersbestfriend 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
the three year old, definitely. you don't even know if the embryos will ever live
2007-12-15 21:02:45 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋