“The Morality of Killing Human Embryos”

Here are bullet points which summarize “The Morality of Killing Human Embryos”  by the philosopher Bonnie Steinbock:

Are embryonic stem cells persons? Do they have moral status?
Some things don’t have moral status—rocks—some things have more status than others—people than fish.
People have moral status because they’re homo-sapiens.
But when do they become human organisms?
Some say at conception, but this is at odds with the facts of modern biology.
Biologically, a genuine and unique organism presents itself at implantation—at about 14 days.
And biological humanity does not imply moral status—as the examples of extraterrestrials and persons in vegetative states show. Some humans aren’t people, and some people aren’t humans.
One could object to #7 by asking why should we limit moral status to persons.
Might there be a middle ground between the biological and personhood views of moral status?
We may think of moral status as corresponding with having interests or a stake in something.
A being must have interests to have moral rights and status.
Non-conscious beings do not have interests, nothing matters to them.
And we do have a good idea of what it’s like to be conscious—conscious beings have interests.
Embryos do not have consciousness or interests and hence no moral status.
What about the argument that it was in one’s interest not to have been killed as a fetus?
Steinbock counter that one never was an unconscious fetus, one comes to be when one is conscious.
Steinbock also argues that it does not matter to you if you are aborted before you are conscious.
At any rate, embryos outside of bodies have no future.
Most of these embryos have no future even if implanted.
Cloned embryos have no chance of have a future, hence they are even less morally problematic.
It is morally acceptable to use embryos in research because they have no moral status.