What blindness, when science itself has realised many and great things about the magnificent and invisible, electronic system of the human body - the nervous system - already there, in its fullness, at conception; when they observe in every detail, the marvellous blue-print of a developing human being, which development continues until death.That is to say, the human being
is never a whole at any given moment in time
but, from conception,
is every developing, ever growing.
As a result of a general blind-eye to this truth, our own Australian Government has passed the infamous Prohibition of Human Cloning for Reproduction
and the Regulation of Human Embryo Research
Amendment Bill 2006
proposed by Senator the Hon Dr Kay Patterson.
It is hard to believe intelligent representatives of the Australian community would cast aside all caution and open the doors to desperate scientists who have failed miserably to show any result from their world-wide research and can only provide unfounded promises for great miracles of cure in some distant future.I can not think of any government action or duty
And even if they had found some progress in this horrific field of science - even then - they should not be allowed to proceed to experiment with human beings even though but days or weeks old - who are then murdered off!
It was only after the Prime Minister allowed this so-called conscience vote that made it possible for this ugly event, this Amendment Bill 2006, to succeed.
What is this conscience vote?
It seems that if a legislation touches on morals - especially controversial moral matters - then parliamentarians may be allowed to follow their personal principles or standards, as against obligatory voting according to party policy.
Now morals means Principles of behaviour in accordance with standards of right and wrong.
Is it then the case, that other decisions of government do not touch on morals?
that does not have a moral consideration.
How the government spends money certainly has a moral consideration. Wasted taxes and misspent funds and unjust budgets are certainly immoral.regards the matter under consideration
Or is it the case that some decisions of government are not considered to be as moral as others?
Again, I can not see how one government decision is less moral then another.
The murdering of the unborn is certainly a grievous crime against humanity but so is an education system that promotes artificial contraception; or approval of poker machines which rob from the poor to give to the rich; or spending funds on one part of the population which would have been better employed on another; etc. etc.
There is no decision of any government but that there is a moral consideration to be observed.
So why a conscience vote when it comes to something like cloning or embryonic research?
Not only is this conscience vote a back-flip political term that lacks reason or common sense, but it is witness that the political leader who allows it and the party that supports it,
of lesser importance
then other matters of government.
Can you ever envisage a Prime Minister or a political party declaring a conscience vote on a government budget?
No, you can't. It is even ridiculous to suggest such a thing - it is laughable.
But on something as vitally important as cloning and embryonic research where the leftover human body is trashed, we find our political parties having a conscience vote!!!
Mind you, I don't want to point the finger at the Australian Prime Minister Mr. Howard as if he were the one and only major figure in this government debate. He is the best thing we have on offer in the Australian political scene even though I believe Australia needs a new political party with a moral base.
The Prime Minister obviously bowed to very heavy pressure and this is most disappointing and discouraging but points to the probability that he had rebels in his party who would have defied him, anyway - as well as outside pressures which must have been extraordinary. I am not excusing his action: merely trying to fathom the reason for it, knowing that he voted against the amendment.
When it all boils down, the parliamentarians as a whole, in both Houses of Parliament voted for the shameful amendment.
Australians have cause for grief, disgust, pity and shock that their elected representatives did not have the guts; did not have the common sense; did not have the wisdom for caution; did not have the moral capacity, to withstand the pressure to oppose this pathetic legislation.
Accidents on the roads.
Newspapers (I am informed) supported this awful legislation and shamelessly promoted public support for it!!
I say I was informed because I do not read newspapers for they, generally, can not be relied upon to report truth and facts which can be used as a reliable part of history - as I discovered when I was in the Outback reading week-old newspapers. Their printed points of view, personal and political bias and their sensationalism all too often have little to do with history!
But in passing a shop counter, I observed recent headlines of local newspapers which came out in support of a crusade to halt the large numbers of accidents on the road!! A very worthy crusade indeed, for dozens of people die each year!
I ask you!?
Thank you Sensible Politicians
For all those politicians in both houses of Parliament who voted against the insensitive amendment, I mention that Australia is indebted to you. We thank you for your sensible caution and for your moral fibre. We thank you for facing up to truth and for taking facts into consideration. We particularly thank those who were active in the halls of government, in promoting rejection of the anti-life amendment.
He wants nothing from us other than our love
So says our new and wonderful Pope Benedict XVI at the midnight Mass at which he presided (refer page 8 herein).