"The image conjured up by some comments is of fully formed, half-human, half-animal monsters," Blakemore writes, adding:
The Pink Triangle Trust issued a news release earlier this week. And you can see some of the pros and cons of the Bill in this Guardian report by Aida Edemariam.Yet a major feature of the bill is that it forbids any attempt to make such things. A key technique acknowledged in the bill, already permitted under existing law, is the formation of "cytoplasmic hybrids", involving the insertion of the nucleus of a single human cell (for instance from a patient suffering from a genetic disease) into the empty egg of, say, a rabbit. The resulting cell, although it does not result from fertilisation and its genetic material is almost entirely derived from the adult donor, has the characteristics of an embryo. It divides and, most significantly, stem cells can be collected from it for research. The bill would prevent such "human admixed embryos" from being maintained for more than 14 days . . .
Meanwhile, you may be interested in an article in Scotland's Daily Record on Wednesday saying that O'Brien is now emerging from the shadow of his homophobic predecessor, Cardinal Thomas Winning, the previous leader of Scotland's Catholics. Winning, says the paper, "became a high-profile backer of the campaign, promoted by Stagecoach millionaire Brian Souter, to keep Section 28 – the law which banned the discussion of homosexuality in schools".
No comments:
Post a Comment
We welcome lively and challenging comments. However, please try to stay on topic, be polite and do not use abusive, racist or sexist language, and do not incite your readers to violence or other antisocial behaviour, or your comment will be deleted. This isn't censorship: it's a case of staying within the bounds of decency and having an eye to the law, although we realise the law will be different in different countries.
We do not bar anonymous comments at the moment, but we would prefer that those commenting play fair and use their name or at least a regular nom de plume. It does show a confidence in your convictions. We know, too, that it's easy to use a false name and be effectively anonymous, but, again, we appeal to your sense of good practice. Even a wacky nom de plume is better, since at least readers will come to know that contributor and maybe remember her or his previous comments.
Blatant commercial advertising will be removed.
Comments should not be construed as necessarily the policy or opinion of the Pink Triangle Trust.
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.