Would you refuse -- for your parent, your child or yourself -- a treatment for a terrible ailment because it was developed with embryonic stem cell research?

Would you want your doctor to keep you in the dark about such a treatment because he or she is morally opposed to it?

Before I get into the arguments about the ethics of embryonic stem cell research, I wanted to get those questions out there. The issues at hand are not just arguments for scientists, politicians, clergy and theologians. These are questions that you and I may one day face.

On Friday the White House confirmed with Mark Memmott at The Oval that on Monday President Obama will address the Bush administration restrictions that limited researchers using federal funds to just 22 embryonic stem cell lines, while there are 1,000 or more available today.

And unquestionably, there are some tough calls ahead. Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) is certain that the same goals of medical science and research can be reached with adult, cord blood, and pluripotent stem cells. He said,

Taxpayer dollars should not aid the destruction of innocent human life.

But the Rev. Thomas Reese a senior fellow, Woodstock Theological Center, Georgetown University and a Jesuit priest who is squarely opposed to abortion, points out that Obama could put limits on this research. Such limits may make it "less ethically repugnant" by moving toward what he calls "middle ground."

Embryos for research should only be excess embryos from fertility clinics, embryos which were going to be destroyed anyway. It should be forbidden to buy, cell or create embryos expressly for research. Researchers should show that their work could not be done with any other form of stem cell -- yet. But their goal should be to move toward using only non-embryonic stem cells, Reese suggests.

I've never seen anyone move to middle ground on this issue. Have you? Do you think such suggestions could work?

Or are we Americans, legendary for impatience, in such a rush to find treatments or cures for dread diseases that we want research to proceed on every scientific front right now?

Consider: Not everyone has the same understanding of the status and value of the embryo. Not every culture, religion and philosophy is in alignment on the ethics of research that destroys embryos.

And consider where this is all headed -- toward medical treatments or cures.

This brings me back to my opening questions. If this research is eventually successful in the lab, those questions could be coming to home to all of us. Would you accept the benefits of research you opposed?

Photo by Andre Penner, AP: A researcher holds small test tubes filled with embryonic stem cells.