New fertility laws say dads not needed to make babies

**Major Tom** · 17th-May-2007

New fertility laws say dads not needed to make babies

A major relaxation of IVF rules was announced by ministers today.

The changes will make it easier for single people and lesbians to receive fertility treatment on the NHS.

The move, which is part of a shake-up of laws on the use of human tissues, will also allow the creation of " Frankenstein" embryos - human and animal cells mixed together - for medical research.

Under current laws, fertility clinics have to consider the baby's need for a father before providing treatment. But today's draft Human Tissue and Embryos Bill says this is no longer necessary.
.....

Health Minister Caroline Flint said today she been persuaded by the arguments from the science communities and MPs.
.....

Other measures in the draft legislation include:

• Couples in same sex civil partnerships should have equal rights as parents in traditional marriages.

• The regulation of internet sperm services.

The Government is also recommending a change to the rules over the use of frozen sperm and the issue of withdrawal of consent.

So thats another generations of kids who will have their future destroyed by being brought up with no father in their lives then...

The reaction to this news in the comments is pretty negative:

It's a profound disgrace that children will be condemned to suffer a life without the love and protection of fathers.
- Calum B, Manchester

This is a disgrace and will in effect make men second class citizens. An equal world it is not!
- Simon, York

Why should an adult be able to impose their lifestyle choice on another human being? Where is the child's rights in all this? These children have as much right as anyone to have a father in their life. Why do we the public not get a chance to say what we think instead we have to put up with the likes of Ms Flint who I didn't elect making random decisions for us?
- Ali, UK

When the evidence is already plain to see - dysfunctional families and children are far more likely when there is no traditional family life. That means we already know the best environment for children is to grow up nurtured with a mum and a dad. I am frankly appalled at the way the traditional - God given - family framework has been systematically devalued.
- Linda Jenner, Bristol

Most in the government don't care if men become second class citizens. Some of them want it.

**Tyrael** · 17th-May-2007

Who's legalizing this crap? Feminists probably and manginas. It's absurd. I don't think that the majority of citizens favor this so this policy doesn't reflect the will of the people. We should start getting viable artificial uteri.

Anyway this policy needs to be turned back. I will vote for radical muslims to crush feminism once and for all. I'll vote for Abdullah, Mohammed, Ahmed, Aziz etc anytime instead of feminists. I'll happily live under sharia law instead of feminism. They at least protect men's rights. I consider it the lesser evil.

**Yan Yan** · 17th-May-2007

Thanks MT.

The comments at least implied that the reading public is smarter than the people that churn out the material.

My favourite was:

Why should an adult be able to impose their lifestyle choice on another human being? Where is the child's rights in all this? These children have as much right as anyone to have a father in their life. Why do we the public not get a chance to say what we think instead we have to put up with the likes of Ms Flint who I didn't elect making random decisions for us? - Ali, UK

This poor guy wants to be western liberal but can't stomach the anti-family rhetoric.

Since I still pay tax to the UK, I'm overjoyed to see a picture of Caroline Flint - (my) Health Minister ( I don't get out much). Tanned skin, a few wrinkles but not ashamed to show a little bit of cleavage for the press. Yuk!

But since it's 'The Mail' we can assume that the selected comments were just as skewed as the reporting.

**bachelor tom** · 17th-May-2007

Quote from Tyrael

Who's legalizing this crap? Feminists probably and manginas. It's absurd. I don't think that the majority of citizens favor this so this policy doesn't reflect the will of the people. We should start getting viable artificial uteri.

Anyway this policy needs to be turned back. I will vote for radical muslims to crush feminism once and for all. I'll vote for Abdullah, Mohammed, Ahmed, Aziz etc anytime instead of feminists. I'll happily live under sharia law instead of feminism. They at least protect men's rights. I consider it the lesser evil.

Agreed, I'm beginning to think a religious tyranny is no worse than a secular one, though it might be harder to get a drink

**ACLAF** · 25th-May-2007

Strange that men aren't needed to make the babies, but somehow I can't possibly imagine that they'll stop being forced to pay for the babies.

Slavery isn't really dead, it's on vacation.