| 
Church Letters
EMBRYOLOGY BILL—
VOTES LOST BUT THE CAMPAIGN CONTINUES
21st May 2008
Headlines
‘ "I am the Alpha
and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and
who is to come, the Almighty."' Revelation 1:8
Jesus said, "Father,
forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”'
Luke 23:34
‘ And we know that
in all things God works for the good of those who love him,
who have been called according to his purpose.' Romans
8:28
The
Babies we are Fighting For
|
|
20
week-old baby in the womb |
Liz
Goddard and son Will, aged seven months. He was born at
22 weeks and his mother was told he would die within 10
minutes. Today he is a healthy 10 year-old. |
Commons
vote for animal human embryonic stem cells and saviour siblings
On Monday, 19th May,
MPs voted in favour of the creation of animal human hybrid embryos
for research and the selection of human embryos to supply tissue
for sick elder siblings. Whilst this is disappointing, it is
not a complete surprise, given the current composition of Parliament
and the strength of the pressure put on MPs by the scientific
lobby, whose goal was to secure funding for their research from
the public sector. The myth they propagated that this research
would save many lives was believed and the evidence that adult
stem cells and umbilical cord blood stem cells offer a much
greater prospect of finding cures was ignored. We are convinced
that it will not be long before unethical research is abandoned
by the scientific community—as it was by the creator of Dolly
the sheep—because of its futility.
The debate can be read
in Hansard, beginning with the following link:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080519/debtext/80519-0004.htm#08051912000001
Edward Leigh MP spoke
powerfully against stepping into the unchartered territory of
creating animal human interspecies embryos when there is no
evidence that it will bring scientific advances. He told MPs
that no other country has authorised such practices. The vote
of 336 to 176 against a ban on animal human embryos can be found
at the following link:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080519/debtext/80519-0011.htm
.
An amendment which would
have banned ‘true hybrids', those made by fertilising a human
egg with an animal sperm, or vice versa, was rejected by 228
votes to 223:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080519/debtext/80519-0012.htm
David Burrowes MP sought
to move an amendment to ban the deliberate selection, during
the process of IVF treatment, of embryos who would be suitable
tissue donors for an elder brother or sister with a serious
medical condition. This ban was defeated by 342 to 163 votes.
The link to the vote appears below:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080519/debtext/80519-0020.htm
MPs
vote to keep the abortion upper time limit and abolish the need
for consideration of father in IVF treatment
On Tuesday, 20 th May,
MPs voted against lowering the upper time limit for abortion,
having abolished the requirement that clinics consider the child's
need for a father when giving IVF treatment earlier the same
evening.
Amendments to lower the
upper time limit to 12, 16, 20 and 22 weeks, were moved on the
floor of the House, but not one was passed, in spite of evidence
that more and more babies born at 22 and 23 weeks' gestation
now survive and go on to lead healthy, productive lives.
Nadine Dorries MP gave
an emotive and impactful speech in favour of lowering the upper
time limit to 20 weeks. She gave an account of a botched abortion
that she witnessed when she was working as a nurse:
"A little boy was aborted
into a cardboard bedpan, which was thrust into my arms. When
I looked into the cardboard bedpan, the little boy was gasping
for breath through the mucus and amniotic fluid. I stood by
the sluice with him in my arms, in the bedpan, for seven minutes
while he gasped for breath. A botched abortion became a live
birth, and then, seven minutes later, a death."
On BBC breakfast TV,
Nadine Dorries also made the point that the Government was not
listening to what people want, as three quarters of women and
two-thirds of GPs want the abortion rate lowered.
The BBC commented that
MPs generally voted along party lines. David Cameron MP supported
Nadine Dorries along with most Conservatives, whilst the Liberal
Democrats largely followed Nick Clegg MP by voting against
a reduction. The Prime Minister ensured that Labour MPs were
given a 3-line whip to attend the vote and few defied the party
line when voting on the issues.
Links to the votes as
recorded in Hansard can be found below:
Link to the beginning
of the abortion debate at column 222:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080520/debtext/80520-0013.htm
Link to the vote on lowering
abortion limit from 24 to 12 weeks, lost with a vote of 393
against to 71 for:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080520/debtext/80520-0021.htm
Link to the vote on lowering
abortion from 24 to 16 weeks (column 275), lost by 387 against
to 84 in favour:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080520/debtext/80520-0022.htm
Link to the vote on lowering
abortion from 24 to 20 weeks (column 278), lost by 332 to 190
votes: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080520/debtext/80520-0022.htm
Link to the vote on lowering
abortion from 24 to 22 weeks (column 286), lost with a vote
of 233 in favour to 304 against:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080520/debtext/80520-0023.htm
A new clause that would
have laid down a statutory duty to give women who have had a
test showing that the unborn baby has a substantial risk of
being seriously handicapped the offer of counselling and information
including the sources of help available to her was lost by 309
votes to 173:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080520/debtext/80520-0023.htm
The vote to retain the
requirement to consider the ‘need for a father' for the child
resulting from IVF treatment was presented by Iain Duncan Smith
MP in terms of defending the traditional family saying that
removal of this consideration would send the message that fathers
are less important than mothers. Geraldine Smith argued that
no-one seemed to be able to name any single women
or lesbian couples who had been refused treatment as a
result of the current provisions on the ‘need for the father'
(which will now be replaced with consideration of the need
for ‘supportive parenting').
Link to the start of
the debate on Tuesday 20 th May 2008:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080520/debtext/80520-0004.htm#08052039000001
Link to the vote on restoring
the need for a father in IVF treatment (this included the need
for a mother, due to the provision in the Bill for fast track
parental orders which will facilitate two-father families),
lost by 292 against to 217 in favour:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080520/debtext/80520-0012.htm
Link to the vote on restoring
the need for father in IVF treatment by adding to supportive
parenting the need for a father or male role model, lost 222
votes to 290:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080520/debtext/80520-0013.htm
Brief
Analysis of Campaign
It was good that the
Prime Minister came under so much pressure that he was forced
to allow Labour MPs to vote according to their consciences on
these ethical and moral issues. It was good that members of
the All Party Parliamentary Pro-life Group were able to lay
their amendments first and that the abortion amendments in favour
of lowering the time limit were voted on first and in the right
order.
Whilst it is disappointing
that Labour whips had imposed a "three-line whip" on attendance
for Labour MPs in the Commons for last night's vote, this has
at least enabled us to establish where the vast majority of
MPs stand on life issues. This information will be useful to
us in the future, both in terms of campaigning and in terms
of voting at the next election.
Another encouraging development
was that instead of pro-abortion MPs laying amendments to liberalise
the law, pro-life MPs were able to lead the offensive to reduce
the upper limit, whilst liberalisers could only seek to defend
the present law. Unfortunately, amendments to liberalise the
abortion law could still be laid and we must continue to pray
that this does not happen.
Public opinion and medical
opinion has generally been favourable towards us. See media
link below.
We have lost this battle,
but we must continue to speak up on behalf of light and truth
in this nation. We must not give up for the sake of the children.
The Church and the nation need to be aroused from slumber regarding
pro-life issues. Perhaps now that it is clear just how bad it
is we might do so. We need to keep praying.
‘ Arise, cry out
in the night, as the watches of the night begin; pour out your
heart like water in the presence of the Lord. Lift up your hands
to him for the lives of your children…' Lamentations 2:19
Link to the press coverage
today:
http://www.ccfon.org/media.php
Andrea Minichiello Williams
Public Policy Director
0207 407 6157
Lawyers' Christian Fellowship/Christian
Concern for our Nation
http://www.ccfon.org
http://www.lawcf.org
|
Church
News
