I firmly believe that one's understanding of the sanctity of life can not help but inform one's philosophy of adoption. If one has a distorted understanding of the preciousness of every human life, I would argue, adoption becomes less of a pressing issue.
Charles Krauthammer's January 12th article is entitled: "Stem Cell Miracle? An Advance This Side Of Bush's Moral Line." It is well worth your time and can read it at Jewish World Review: http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/krauthammer011207.php3
While I disagree with several parts of the article, I think he is write to see Bush's stand against stem cell research as holding the line "against the wanton trampling of the human embryo." Here are the final paragraphs of the article:
"If it is proved that these are the Goldilocks of stem cells, history will record the amniotic breakthrough as the turning point in the evolution of stem cell research from a narrow, difficult, delicate and morally dubious enterprise into an uncontroversial one with raw material produced unproblematically every day.
"It will have turned out that Bush's unpopular policy held the line, however arbitrary and temporary, against the wanton trampling of the human embryo just long enough for a morally neutral alternative to emerge. And it did force the country to at least ponder the moral cost of turning one potential human being into replacement parts for another. Who will be holding the line next time, when another Faustus promises medical nirvana if he is permitted to transgress just one moral boundary?"