K-Lo — I know you’ve probably heard this argument a zillion times because you follow this stuff far more than I do. But it’s always seemed to me that one strong motivation for pursuing embryonic stem cell research over less offensive techniques has been simply that it would make abortion “necessary.” I completely understand this isn’t a completely logical argument, but I think the reproductive freedom crowd is enamored with the idea of tying abortion to “progress” in as many ways as possible. The less it’s solely about lifestyle and the more it’s part of the larger technological-cultural momentum toward Something Better, the more easy it is for them to paint those who stand in their way as not merely “anti-woman” and “anti-choice” (a slogan itself designed to convey the alleged anti-modernism of abortion foes) but “anti-progress.” In other words, those other stem cell avenues aren’t merely less exciting — because compromise in such existential battles is always unexciting — they are less useful.

If abortions helped solve global warming, I’m sure lots of people would be not-too-secretly delighted.