posted on Jul, 22 2004 @ 08:39 AM
There have been many voices of dissent in this matter, mainly on ethical grounds. For example,
Josephine Quintavalle, of the group Comment on Reproductive Ethics, said: "We are absolutely appalled. It is grossly unethical, and grossly
"This decision has been taken behind closed doors without any consultation with the public. The HFEA, who are unelected and unrepresentative, think
they have the expertise to make a decision on behalf of the nation."
And Professor Jack Scarisbrick, national chairman of the pro-life charity Life, said: "We have gone yet further down the slippery slope in creating
human beings to provide 'spare parts' for another."
It’s a tough call where ethics are concerned. The right-to-life groups have understandably been most vehement in their protests. I haven’t
yet found anything about the various churches’ reactions to this.
On compassionate grounds, it MAY be more difficult to argue the case against the technology. But I fear abuse in the future, even although the
present regulations are strict. Are we “interfering” with Nature too much?