I can see why people might vote to create subhuman embryos to research serious diseases, even though there are no fruits to this research yet, and plenty of other therapies (e.g. adult stem cells) are proving really fruitful. However if in 10 years the cures for Alzheimers and MND that have been dangled like carrots over MP's don't materialise, I hope the government of the time has the nous to revisit the legislation. (Kevin Davis, for example, supports the idea of a 'sunset clause' which writes this into the legislation itself.)
I can understand a parent doing everything to save their own child, though to know for the whole of your life that you were only conceived for the sake of your brother, not just because you were wanted for your own sake - I'm not quite sure what that does to you. Ok it was true in a way for Jesus, but he was already around before he was born.
I fail to understand why the abortion limit has to stay at 24 weeks, when babies born before this date are surviving. Why should the law lag behind science in this case, whilst in the rest of the embryology bill it's doing the opposite. Most other European countries have limits roughly 10 weeks below this.
And the cobblers about the 'right' of parents to have a child without a father , well words fail me. The law is supposed to protect the vulnerable, not sponsor social experiments which are already failing. But we've already fed our kids into the mincer in so many other ways. Hey, Labour, leave those kids alone....
Update: this mornings' news headline on 5 live was the Chelsea and Man U fans arriving in Moscow. Never mind the ethics, feel the football.