Headlines
We stand for life not death - the babies we are fighting for
MPs vote for embryonic stem-cell research and saviour siblings
‘"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:
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
On Tuesday, 20th 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 20th May 2008:
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
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