It probably was a surprise

to few last week when scientists at the Jones Institute for Reproductive

Medicine in Norfolk, Va., spoke publicly about being the first group in

the world to create embryos for the sole purpose of harvesting stem cells

for use in medical research.

The scientific community, Congress,

President Bush, bioethicists, and religious leaders had been debating

the merits of providing federal funding for embryonic stem cell research

for months. The public announcement by the Jones Institute researchers

brought the discussion to a whole new moral and ethical level, a place

that many people believe has crossed the line.

According to published reports,

the Jones researchers collected 162 eggs from 12 women who gave informed

consent and were compensated for the procedure. The eggs were artificially

inseminated with donor sperm. From the 162 eggs, 50 embryos were produced.

Forty embryos were then destroyed, and the coveted stem cells were harvested

and maintained in a culture.

Up until last week, the only

sources of embryonic stem cells were the donated, unused frozen embryos

of couples seeking treatment for infertility that were already slated

to be destroyed. To create a human embryo for the sole purpose of destroying

it for its valuable stem cells was believed by most in the scientific

community to be unethical, including those in the National Institutes

of Health, who are seeking federal funding for stem cell research, but

under strict federal guidelines and regulations for acceptable practices.

Ironically, the Jones Institute's

own ethics committee concluded that it was their "duty to provide

humankind with the best understanding of human development," apparently

These are the biomedical issues

of our time. For some, embryonic stem cell research represents the worst

of mankind's potential to violate the sanctity of human life. For others,

particularly patients with cancer, diabetes, Parkinson's disease, spinal

cord injuries, and Alzheimer's, stem cell research represents the hope

for a restorative cure.

Essentially this has become

a battle of wills between those with religious beliefs and those without,

between those who believe that life begins at conception and those who

believe that life, and any inherent "rights," begins at birth.

Fundamentally, doesn't so much in our collective conscience eventually

come down to these differences?

Leading the call for stem cell

research are some influential people who capture the hearts of the American

public. Michael J. Fox is the spokesperson for Parkinson's research, Alex

P. Keaton, the lovable teenaged economic prodigy of wholesome TV (back

in the day of wholesome TV).

Christopher Reeve is a Superman

who used to be capable of leaping tall buildings in a single bound before

he fell victim to a riding accident that left him paralyzed. Now he is

a withered body with a boundless spirit who uses his position of influence

to lobby for funded research in treating spinal cord injuries.

Ronald Reagan is dying from

Alzheimer's. We can only speculate as to what his voice would have lent

to this debate as he no longer has the capacity to tell us.

Try as I might to put myself

in to the shoes of someone who is suffering from a debilitating injury

or life threatening disease, I cannot. "There, but for the grace

of God, go I." But as I search my soul, and my understanding of God

and humanity, I cannot help but believe that this is an abomination to

our Creator.

Inevitably, I find myself drawn