A new documentary shows why we need to "stem" the tide of embryo-destructive stem-cell research.

When Pope Benedict XVI visited the United States in April of 2008, I had the chance to attend the opening ceremony at the White House South Lawn.

President Obama, on March 9, 2009, signed an important executive order that vastly expanded federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research and crossed a significant and troubling ethical line.

I write this fresh from debating bioethicist Peter Singer on "Can we be moral without God?" at Singer's home campus, Princeton University.

Laws like those in Germany and Italy, while they would not stop every injustice done to embryos, could go a long way towards stemming the tide and assuring that further forms of laboratory barbarism and human exploitation do not become commonplace.

Whenever longstanding laws are reversed, and practices come to be sanctioned that were formerly forbidden, it behooves us to examine whether such momentous legal shifts are morally coherent or not.

Various medical conditions can affect a womans ability to carry a pregnancy, and at times even threaten her and her childs life.

One recurrent theme in bioethical discussions is the idea that each of us possesses a basic awareness of the moral law.

The First Things article "AIDS and the Churches" underscores a sad reality in the HIV/AIDS community: that communication and dialogue are ferociously difficult no matter what the intent.

One argument that is often made to justify destroying human embryos begins like this: