Article Text
Abstract
It is argued that the policy of excluding from further life some human gametes and pre-embryos as "unfit" for existence is not at odds with a defensible idea of human equality. Such an idea must be compatible with the obvious fact that the "functional" value of humans differs, that their "use" to themselves and others differs. A defensible idea of human equality is instead grounded in the fact that as this functional difference is genetically determined, it is nothing which makes humans deserve or be worthy of being better or worse off. Rather, nobody is worth a better life than anyone else. This idea of equality is, however, not applicable to gametes and pre-embryos, since they are not human beings, but something out of which human beings develop.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Linked Articles
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- What’s in a name? Embryos, entities, and ANTities in the stem cell debate
- The unwitting sacrifice problem
- What exactly is an exact copy? And why it matters when trying to ban human reproductive cloning in Australia
- Human embryonic stem cell research debates: a Confucian argument
- Embryonic stem cell production through therapeutic cloning has fewer ethical problems than stem cell harvest from surplus IVF embryos
- Moral reasons to edit the human genome: picking up from the Nuffield report
- In vitro eugenics
- Reproductive and therapeutic cloning, germline therapy, and purchase of gametes and embryos: comments on Canadian legislation governing reproduction technologies
- Is there a ‘new ethics of abortion’?
- In the world of Dolly, when does a human embryo acquire respect?