[Yorick]

From what I'm reading, adult stem cell research is MORE effective than embryonic, has PROVEN scientific breakthroughs (unlike embryonic stem cell research) and doesn't destroy a human life in the process, thus having no moral concerns.

I'm not really seeing this factor addressed in the replies I'm reading (so far). All the arguments about medical breakthroughs, scientific advances etc. are behind ADULT stem cell research, NOT embryonic.

It seems to me, embryonic research is being USED as part of a broader initiative to undermine the sanctity of human life, rather than actually make medical breakthroughs - considering the aforementioned superiority of adult stem cell research. It also seems to be used to paint those against embryonic research as "anti-science" etc. to de-validate say, pro-life positions in general as being anti-science anti human welfare etc. despite the fact that science proves human life in-utero (the ultrasound) and the welfare of the mother's health (mental and physical) is part of a pro-life position.

I'd prefer to see just the facts discussed. Rape victims? 80%-84% carry to term as having the child substantially increases healing from the rape for example.
Choice? Most women report not HAVING a choice other than to abort. Meaning society and inertia pressure women into having no-choice.
Science? As said, science proves it's human life. It was enough for NARAL founder Bernard Nathanson (75,000 abortions to his name). Google him and read his story.

Without meaning to actually discuss abortion, I'm pointing out that the smoke-screen surrounding embryonic stem cell research appears to follow a similar pattern: ignore the scientific facts whilst using emotional arguments to misrepresent the opposing point of view.