01:00 AM EST on Wednesday, February 23, 2005

THE DEBATE OVER the humanity of embryos has honest voices on all sides. But there are also dishonest ones. Hypocrisy happens when high moral principle crashes into political expediency. Such conflict helps explain the hash Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has made of his policy on stem-cell research.

Embryonic-stem-cell research offers great promise for curing diabetes, Alzheimer's and other devastating diseases. But it can't be done without destroying embryos.

My position is easy to explain: An embryo is not a human, or even close to being one. So I have no problem with using -- and destroying -- these specks of cells for research. And if Harvard University wants to make the cells through therapeutic cloning, that too is fine with me.

Others disagree. They see embryos as inviolable human life. This view deserves respect, but anyone who holds it must follow the argument to its logical end. If scientists have no moral right to destroy a fertilized egg, then neither should fertility clinics, which routinely discard unused embryos.

No "pro-life" politician has had the guts to shut down fertility clinics. Nor has anyone proposed requiring that every embryo created by in-vitro fertilization be implanted in a woman's womb -- and brought to full term as a baby.

Romney professes to believe in the sanctity of embryos and to support embryonic-stem-cell research at the same time. There is no way to square these irreconcilable views. So he fudges, turning moral logic into a smoking nine-car wreck.

Here's what Romney says: "Lofty goals do not justify the creation of life for experimentation and destruction." So no, Harvard may not make embryos for stem-cell research. However, Harvard may use frozen embryos left over from in-vitro fertilization -- with the permission of the embryos' "parents."

In other words, infertile couples have the moral right to create and destroy embryos, but medical researchers do not. If his true concern were the sacrosanct humanity of embryos, Romney wouldn't let anyone destroy them.

But this isn't really about the humanity of embryos. It's about the motives of the people who created them. From a moral standpoint, Harvard's motive -- to find life-saving treatments -- compares nicely with that of couples wanting to have babies.

So much for moral principles. What about the politics?

Romney is a Republican with national ambitions. Republicans wanting a presidential nod must speak to the anti-abortion wing of the party. Coming from Massachusetts -- the poster state for liberal and pro-choice views -- Romney must speak twice as loud.

It's not pretty when a politician distances himself from the people who put him in office. Romney has never hidden his anti-abortion sentiments, but he has also kept a promise not to impose them on the people of Massachusetts. Until now.

In addition to forcing others regions' abortion politics on his voters, Romney has committed a kind of economic treason. Boston is a biotech leader. California, New Jersey and several countries already allow therapeutic cloning. (This is cloning for purposes of research, not making human beings.) Cloned cells are more useful than fertility-clinic embryos because they are an exact genetic match of the research subject. By barring therapeutic cloning, Romney has put his state's research centers at a competitive disadvantage.

Some conservative commentators have ignored -- or not noticed -- the logical mess in Romney's stem-cell policy. Instead, they have praised him for breaking with the godless people of Massachusetts. And they often point to his personal situation as a sign of his sincerity and courage.

Romney's wife has multiple sclerosis, a disease for which stem-cell research might find a cure. Thus, the Romneys appear willing to make a grand sacrifice in defense of embryos.

But they are not. The Romneys can rest assured that this research will be done. It just won't happen in Massachusetts. Some reporter should ask Romney this question: If researchers in Britain or New Jersey find a cure for Mrs. Romney's devastating disease using cloned cells, will he approve of her taking the treatment?

Many people want it all ways. They want cures for disease. They want help for infertile couples. But they don't want embryos destroyed in the process. Pretending that all can be had may be good politics, but the price is intellectual fraud.

Froma Harrop is a Journal editorial writer and syndicated columnist. She may be reached by e-mail at: fharrop [at] projo.com