spermless embryos are here
By Diogenes (articles ) | September 10, 2005 8:37 AM
So long, dad. Scotland takes the next step (from the U.K. Telegraph):
Human embryos have been created in Britain without using sperm for the first time. The "virgin conception" embryos, which mark a new way to grow a woman's cells and tissues for a vast range of treatments, were revealed by an Edinburgh team. The development is the second time in as many days that the nation's scientists have pushed back the boundaries of reproductive science.
The scientist in charge of the project knows what he's doing:
Although some scientists had thought that the use of "parthenotes" in this research would sidestep objections from pro-life groups, Dr De Sousa said that this was not the case. "Someone who has a pro-life outlook will regard any usage of eggs and embryos for non-reproductive purposes as objectionable."
For "objectionable," read "wicked."
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach five million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
Our Fall Campaign
Progress toward our final 2013 goal ($16,046 to go, assuming receipt of matching funds):
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: Oliver Plunkett -
Sep. 14, 2005 10:22 PM ET USA
Janet, I appreciate your comment. I think of Jer 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; before you came to birth I consecrated you." The resultant embryo is the creation of an evil act but I feel an ungodly creation. It is both the victim and result of a horrific evil. Additional research and destruction of the embryos is a continuum of the intitial crime. I don't think the two (act and result) can be separated. Basically, we should not play God. I pray for their souls.
Posted by: Janet Baker -
Sep. 13, 2005 10:30 PM ET USA
Oliver, please be very very very careful. The notion that the resultant embryo is not human could well play into the hands of those who would justify using the embryos for experimentation. We'd need a moral theologian with expertise in this area to give some guidance as to whether or not the resultant embryo is human. I'm not so quick to assume they aren't. If they are human, they are the tragic victims of obscenity, but are not the obscenity themselves.
Posted by: -
Sep. 10, 2005 3:52 PM ET USA
And yet this kind of human, who prides itself on its intelligence, does not think that the conception of Jesus is possible.
Posted by: Oliver Plunkett -
Sep. 10, 2005 11:10 AM ET USA
God has already given parthenogenesis to the world. It occurs in some fishes, several kinds of insects, and a few species of frogs and lizards. It does not occur in mammals due to their imprinted genes - genes whose expression is determined by the parents that contributed them. Therefore, as parthenogenesis does not occur in mammals, the resultant "human" embryo is non mammalian, non human and an obscenity in front of God.
Posted by: Vincit omnia amor -
Sep. 10, 2005 10:22 AM ET USA
"'virgin conception' embryos" - can you say "end times?"