Bill D: "So...given this situation, the ***ONLY*** possible answer to questions like abortion and harvesting stem cells is...If you don't like it, don't participate! And do not presume to tell others how they should behave in their own personal lives"

Ok, but how does one not participate when one is forced to? For instance if the taxes I pay go towards such programs, then I am being obliged to participate by others who believe such programs are morally Ok, or who do not have any moral viewpoint on the matter but approach it with 'cold logic' ("I need this body part for a better world -in my terms - and therefore I will take it").

The people who advocate such programs, and moreover, who insist tax money should be spent on them, are indeed obliging others to live in a kind of society not to their liking. When the same people poo-poo the objections of those opposed to these programs, they in turn are 'presuming to tell others how to behave' and what values to have.

Perhaps such people could show their mutual respect by ending tax support for these programs and insisting they be a matter for private funding by individuals who agree with them. I would still disagree with the programs, but at least I would feel my own participation was no longer obligatory through my taxes.

At the end of the day the kind of society we live in is the result of the negotiation of all our beliefs and wants. Sometimes we work it out like gentlemen through votes and democracy (though politics is often a very dirty business and far from democratic) and at other times people have clubbed or shot it out. We don't want murder in our midst, so we make rules to try and stop it. We don't want open robbery, rape etc., and likewise make rules to stop them. We feel our society would be less civilised and moral if murder, rape and robbery were freely allowed and unpunished.
Some people want abortion, others feel this is murder (except when it is the unintentional byproduct of medical procedures etc., to save the mother's life and health) and would prefer to see it banned from our society. They feel our society would be more civilised etc., without it.

So what do you do if a lobby group wants to lift the ban on homicide? Do you just say "yeah, it's a free world, each to his own'? and don't presume to tell others what to do? Afterall, if the ban is lifted that means you'll be free to kill whomever you like too, so it could work in your favour too (seen in the most rational logical way).