Frozen embryos do not have a right to life, the High Court ruled today.
In a landmark decision, Mr Justice Brian McGovern found the term "unborn" refers only to a foetus or a fertilised egg implanted in the womb.
The judge insisted it was not the role of the courts to decide when life begins.
In a complex 26-page ruling, he found the constitution had made no provisions for the protection of embryos stored in fertility clinics.
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/?jp=CWIDOJCWEYKF
Aren't these two statements contradictory?Originally Posted by Marx
I absolutely agree, in terms that they are not human beings. We cannot preserve and revear every potential period a woman may have.
The Dept of Health is preparing legislation for assisted reproduction Harney has announced.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/1115/embryo.html
I think this judgement is flawed in many ways. Legislation is the answer...
Life is a beautiful magnificent thing, even to a jelly fish ~ Charlie Chaplin
I agree that frozen-embryos should not be considered human-life prior to the foetal state. It is nonsense to force a man to become a father against his will, with all the financial implications thereof.
RTE REPORTER: The high court has just ruled that an un-implanted ferilitized embyro is not protected by the Irish constitution. Ans so, we turn to a man who has probably never had sex, and thinks that masurbation hurts the man in the sky and his son for comment. Archbishop?
EMINENT IRISH BIOLGISTS: But...but...
(cue music)
ARCHBISHOP:
There are Jews in the world.
There are Buddhists.
There are Hindus and Mormons, and then
There are those that follow Mohammed, but
I've never been one of them.
I'm a Roman Catholic,
And have been since before I was born,
And the one thing they say about Catholics is:
They'll take you as soon as you're warm.
You don't have to be a six-footer.
You don't have to have a great brain.
You don't have to have any clothes on. You're
A Catholic the moment Dad came
Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.
....sometimes you just have to laugh - don't you?
I agree with the ruling that an embryo does not have a right to life, which in practice would appear to mean a right to the process that would result in birth. Pro-life campaigners surely don't want to argue that embryos have a constitutional right to access a womb, do they?
I also agree with the judge's statement that embryos are deserving of special respect, which I take to mean that they should not be used as a means to any end other than being born, i.e. for medical experimentation.
What I don't get is why the consent of the father is required. If a married couple are trying for a baby but they break up shortly afterwards because the man meets someone else, surely the man doesn't have the right to demand a termination of the pregnancy because he objects to being a father? (Obviously Irish law wouldn't support him, but that's a different argument.) I know the events involved are telescoped into a much shorter period, but the principle involved appears to me to be the same. No?
No they dont have a right to life. If you want to follow this line of logic then every time a man masturbates/has a 'wet dream' or a woman has her menstrual cycle without conceiving then we are wasting lives.
I am sick to death of these so called pro lifers whining about 'Gods will/plan', 'the sanctity of life', blah blah blah....
I have one word for the next pro lifer who waves a pic of an aborted foetus at me or a picture of an infant with the disgraceful blurb 'dont use me for spare parts....'
Go adopt you F****** moron.....
The end....
If I could mass-sterilise the planet, I would. Seriously.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
With abortion illegal, is it also a nonsense to force a woman to becoma mother against hers?
Politcal compass Nov 2006
Economic left/right: -6.88
Social libertarian/authoritarian: -5.13
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote