ABSTRACT
On the assumption that agency is necessary for a being to have claim rights, it remains possible to argue that the human embryo is the possessor of rights that generate duties of agents towards the human embryo. Even outside Gewirth’s framework, this kind of argument presents problems when used to grant rights to the human embryo. In principle, the idea would be that the human embryo is a stage in the development of a human agent, and during its development acquires properties necessary to being an agent. It might be argued that to show disregard for the life or well-being of the human embryo shows a disregard for the life of human beings generally. By permitting harm to be caused to human embryos, we brutalise ourselves and make ourselves less sensitive to the rights of human agents. In applying the Principle of Generic Consistency, many details remain to be worked out.
