Assume this moral position: from the moment of conception, a human zygote is a human being. We know there are people who have this very black-and-white understanding in the abortion debate.
Any harm done to a fetus or embryo is morally equivalent to doing the same to a born human, and should carry the same legal/moral burden and consequences.
But, if this is the case… there are over a million frozen embryos in the United States. The majority of these embryos were created to help would-be parents having difficulty conceiving. Helping people who want to be parents… be parents. Several embryos are created if the extracted ova allow for it, since their implantation success rate is not guaranteed, and miscarriages can happen.
Embryos that are not implanted… are kept frozen.
This… isn’t a theory. This is reality: there are over 1 million embryos kept frozen, with no intent to let them become born humans.
And given that they exist, is it morally practical to try to argue that they are still fully human, and entitled to protection under law?
If those embryos are fully human, and should have the same rights and protections as other humans under law, and the same moral consideration… what should be done with them? Whose responsibility should it be to pay the bills and rent to keep them frozen? To inspect them to ensure they are not damaged? To litigate on their behalf if they are harmed?
Sir Tainley