Stem cells -- tiny little miracles that could fit on the head of a pin -- possibly hold the key to treating degenerative illnesses like Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, heart failure and spinal chord injuries. These cells are the building blocks by which tissues in the body are created, and in recent years, biologists have discovered that the human body could potentially regenerate itself when stem cells are used to repair organs.

So, where is the controversy? While the stem cells of full grown adults can be tested, the most productive stem cells seem to be those that are taken from excess blastocysts, created for in vitro fertilization, that are about to become embryos. Needless to say, pro-life groups are outraged, but while the Pope has asserted that injury or death of a human embryo “is not morally acceptable” even though it may advance research that would cure or treat disease, a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll revealed that 72 percent of white Catholics favor stem cell research.

Currently, scientific studies are at a virtual standstill because President Bush has put a hold on regulations that would permit federal funding for stem cell research. As Bush tries to make up his mind on the issue, Republicans on the hill are aiming to set an example for the president by swaying to the other side of the political spectrum. In his two decades as senator, Orrin Hatch has been opposed to abortion, but when it comes to stem cell research Hatch claims, “I have searched my conscience. I just cannot equate a child living in the womb… with an embryo in the freezer.”

So, the question arises, can a person be pro-life and support stem cell research? Should blastocysts be used to conduct this research? Should the government fund embryonic stem cell research?