Embryonic Stem cells

[11mc22]

a debate with myself with some points taken from youtube users and some from Sam Harris

1 against: potential human life

for: through the process cloning all our cells could be potential humans

2 against: Embryos and blastocysts are human ever since sperm meets egg

for: a few cells are not a conscious being. No nervous system, no brain; not human.

3 against: why don't we make everyone unconscious and harvest their bodies

for: turning conscious people into unconscious and non-living thing would be an act of murder.

4 against: what if no one forced that person to become unconscious should we harvest their bodies?

for: they have experienced life and they have hopes and plans for the future. A blastocyst has never been in contact with other beings or shared any relationships with anyone else.


I have problem with 4 though because you can counter it by saying

what used to be a conscious being is no longer conscious, it has no hopes and dreams while knocked out.

Or

a conscious being made relationship with others, now that it is unconscious why don't we harvest it?


any thoughts? Maybe you can correct some mistakes I might've made.
Add any new arguments for or against?

[Travis Retriever]

for:  Could cure several diseases, saving lives using cells that were going to die anyways.

[11mc22]

There is also that argument where since the blastocyst or the embryo is biologically human the embryo should have the same right because it can become an adult.
But a sperm and and egg cell also has also the equal potential to become an adult. The only difference is that the sperm and the egg just don't have the genes for it.

But if that was the case, the embryo wouldn't meet the conditions to become an adult either because it is fertilized in a petri dish not in a mother's womb.

kinda like what surhotchaperchlorome said