Amos,

Your argument reverts back to "aborting", when, as far as I can tell in this discussion, it has been asserted, and not disproven, that abortion is not a viable means of harvesting usable stem cells.

That leaves us with (as regarding fetal stem cells) embryos that are the result of someone's wish to have a child and producing more embryos than necessary to fulfill that selfish wish.

One might contend that those embryos are not yet children, but...

1. the burden of proving that something is not a life should fall to those wishing to end the life -- not to those who wish nature to take its course.

2. if the premise that an embryo is not a human life is accepted without the proof of when it "becomes" a life, then it will equally follow that any fetus, at any stage of development, may be harvested for the benfit of others. After all, that is the premise behind abortion on demand -- that no fetus, no matter how developed, is a human life.