“We are unfashioned creatures, but half made up, if one wiser, better, dearer thanourselves — such as a friend ought to be — do not lend his aid to perfectionate our weak andfaulty natures.” Human beings, science and morality. Though true in our knowledge, does ithold to our nature? Advancements that have been seen as milestones in humanity and in lifegenerally have been stem cell research.To enumerate, assuming that for the sake of argument that is morally proscribed to obliteratehuman embryos. It does not follow that all research with Human Embryonic Stem Cells inResearch (HESCR), as it is sometimes permissible to benefit from moral wrongs. There is muchthat can be attributed to benefits in HESCR such as the alleviation of pain from aggressivediseases and medicinal benefits.Moreover, myself in fact. I agree to the fact that (HESCR) is necessary for humanalleviation of pain and of disease. Though the argument can be made that this type of researchis immoral, the benefits in fact are much greater than the argument. For example: when callinginto question the harvesting of victim’s organs who have recently passed, and transplantsurgeries making the attempt for the operation, there is nothing remotely objectionable orcontroversial about this. Such as it was in the case of Frankenstein, he was a conversation fordebate in terms of science and morality because he like, many of the deceased in popularculture do not struggle with they came into existence but how they were treated afterwards.This argument is one of the most important in regards to science and morality becauseit presents one that affects us from birth, for argumentative purposes this conflicts greatly withscience and morality. It is a sensitive topic but it is one that is needed to be addressed more sothat the general mass population can be readily educated on this topic. To conclude, Homosapiens, biology and our human morality, though it is presented to be truth, does it hold to ourfragile nature?