With the death of Christopher Reeve, a quadriplegic to whom Sen. John Kerry referred in Friday’s presidential debate as one reason why embryonic stem-cell research should be allowed in the United States, stem-cell research has once again taken on great visibility in the American political agenda.

Friday, former Vice President Al Gore and other embryonic stem-cell research advocates attended a conference in Seattle, where Gore made a promise to fight for its legalization so that American doctors could work towards cures for debilitating and deadly diseases.

The unfortunate turn, however, is that this controversy often strays from its possible unprecedented medical benefits and turns to the moral questions behind the practice. Anti-abortion activists condemn it because embryonic stem cells are collected from human embryos.

Yet the fact remains, government has no place in legislating morality. With such polar differences on the issue of embryonic stem cells, the government would be smart to leave the discretion to the citizen themselves. In other words, one should have the right to reject all medical practices derived from embryonic stem-cell research based on their moral beliefs, while those who choose to accept any such treatments should have that right as well.

A common misconception about embryonic stem-cell research is that abortions must occur in order to collect the cells. In actuality, the practices of fertility clinics across the country are creating an excess of embryos that go unused.

These embryos, potentially invaluable to paralysis and diabetes sufferers, are ultimately thrown away under the current law.

When speaking of the potentially astronomical increase in the quality of life that these unused embryos may hold the key to, simply throwing them away is beyond a tragedy.

Let us not absentmindedly dispose of the resources that we possess due to a conflict of morality. We deserve the best medical treatment available. Let’s make that a reality.