ARE ALL FETUSES NOT CREATED EQUAL? :

Clone tissue transplant success (BBC, June 2, 2002)

Scientists have successfully used cloning technology to grow tissues for transplant in cows which will not be rejected.

A US team have been able to engineer miniature kidneys and small "patches" of heart tissue from cloned cells and successfully test them in cows.

They said that the fact that the sophisticated immune system of the cow did not reject the tissue provides hope therapeutic cloning could also be carried out on humans without rejection.

But the technique is unlikely to be used in humans because legislation prevents organs being removed from mature foetuses.

Here's your slippery slope : if you can abort a nine month old fetus for no reason at all (partial-birth abortion), why can't you abort it to harvest a potentially life-saving organ? Why should the Courts require that the former be allowed, as a right, but forbid the latter? What coherent moral argument can be made for so differentiating between these two fetuses? Posted by Orrin Judd at June 4, 2002 7:45 AM