I'm personally astounded at the story (BBC link here) being covered today about the Catholic churches' comments on the Embryology Bill currently going through the UK Parliament.
... frankly, they are quite simply wrong on this. There seems to be an almost complete blind-spot (when it comes to certain Catholic church representatives) to the fact that a huge percentage of female eggs are lost in the natural process of conception anyway?
6 comments:
Hi Andrew,
Your point about the biological high likelihood of loss of female eggs is not really relevent to the arguement. The issue is the "presumed consent" to the taking of these cells, which some, Catholic or not are not comfortable with. The Cardinal has deliberately used provocative and perhaps unhelpful language in this debate, but these issues have wider relevance that just
the Catholic position on Life issues and the main issue here is one of consent.
The BBc Article States: -
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, which was passed in the House of Lords on Wednesday night, allows cells taken from incapacitated adults and children on the basis of presumed consent to be used for embryo research.
Tom
Thanks for the comment.
I take your point, but not sure I completely agree.
Some 5,800 objections were raised to this Bill - 5,600 of them related to the principle that 'human embryos' should be afforded the respect due to adult human beings. I'll leave it to you to judge how many of those objections were instigated by the Catholic church?
So, I would contest that the natural loss of female eggs is relevant to the arguments - many of the objections fail to recognise that a high percentage (I think its around a quarter?) of all female eggs are naturally lost. I doubt if the same objectors consider every such loss the equivalent of the death of an adult human being, yet that's how they phrase their objection to the use of enbryos for research.
All that said, I do accept that the 'consent' issue has been contentious also!
Andrew
Thanks Andrew for the reply. Such issues do polarise opinion as we know and the debate the richer for it!
Not known for being an apologist for the Catholic Church, I dont concur that 5,600 objections were "instigated" by said body.
I just think a lot of people are not comfortable with this legislation.
Your point about natural loss of eggs, is again not relevent, as my point is objection related to "presumed consent". To some a zygote is human life and to actively presume that it is not a
factor in "harvesting" ( technical term! ) is, in my opinion, wrong.
Also embryonic stem cell research might have its place, but that arguement is far from conclusive or concluded,at this time. Mature stem cell work
has undoubtable scientific and medical merit and there are no arguemetns from any sane quarters on this research.
So the debate needs to be had, but not as progressive/conservative divide as some politicians ( not you! ) would have it!
Isn't democracy great!
UNDOUBTED of course!!!...UNDOUBTABLE...im my dictionary perhaps!! ;-)
Tom
Thanks for the further comments ...
... I won't add any more about the science, but it is indeed true that 5,600 (or so) of the 5,800 (or so) objections were a "postcard campaign" run by the Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child (SPUC).
Andrew
More than members of SPUC are campaigning over this. "Presummed Consent" is the issue.
Post a Comment