The whole embryonic vs adult stem cell controversy is such a ridiculous set-up by the pro-abortion folk, who just want an excuse to conceive babies to be slaughtered on general principle. Truly, to enshrine the principle of baby/fetus slaughtering as the standard.
The entire problem is that we do not agree with you that an embryo has rights or a "soul", and by definition if it is an embryo it is not a fetus yet. Just because you feel strongly about it does not make us "ridiculous" nor do we want an excuse to slaughter anything.
You can rant about it all you want...
Second, for those potential therapies most likely to be successful with "embryonic" stem cells, there are millions of viable, non-controversial sources of stem cells available each year that harm not a hair on any baby's head: umbilical cords...which are currently disposed of as biohazardous waste.
...but you are not changing any facts. You might also note that embryos do not have hair to be harmed.
I'm in favor of using all available sources of stem cells. Embryonic stem cells wouldn't even work AFAIK for these kinds of treatments (in the OP) without immunosuppressants, the whole point being using the patient's own adult stem cells avoids that problem. However, that doesn't mean that there is no possible future use for embryonic stem cells that won't be able to be satisfied by other stem cell sources. And for people like me who don't think an embryo has "rights" or a "soul", there is no downside to allowing and funding embryonic stem cell research, if scientists deem it useful. If they don't think embryo-derived embryonic stem cells are useful, they can always use stem cells from other sources and both you and I will be happy.
You simply don't know if stem cells derived from adults can be reprogrammed to be sufficient for any future medical stem cell therapies. It may turn out that even umbilical cord derived pluripotent stem cells are not quite the same as embryonic stem cells from a several day old embryo. That's what we in Baby Killers Anonymous object to: your desire to slam doors when we don't know what's behind them, on the basis of moral and ethical judgments that
we don't share.