Might makes Right

This editorial is basically the same as the one linked in the next post.

The closing paragraph doesnt make sense to me. The author is upset because someone is deciding that some must suffer so that others won't die. Yet this happens all the time, the government imposes restrictions and burdens on individuals for the good of others. The author seems to argue that the root of the problem is that a minority is imposing religious beliefs. But if there is a consensus, then the minority is subject to their decisions. OK, so whats the difference? That might makes right, well then lets stop worrying about aiding third world nations, lets stop protecting the weak. If they don't have power, lets do with them as we wish. Hooray for the majority.

The root of all of this is whether an embryo is a human life. We don't know for sure. "Religious fantatics" argue that an embryo becomes a human being so lets err on protecting it. Stem cell research proponents say, well we don't know so lets destroy them because people are sick around us. The latter seems to lead to a total transgression of innocent life.