Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-06-15-Speech-4-104"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060615.24.4-104"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"I totally oppose research on human embryos. I voted for the Gargani/Záborská amendments. These amendments were defeated. Because I believed it served the greater good, I then voted for Mrs Niebler’s amendments as recommended by Mr Gargani (and leading Christian organisations). I did so in the belief that this would have restricted research to stem cells extracted from the human embryo (i.e. the embryo has already been destroyed) prior to 31.12.2003 and that new human embryos could not be created and then destroyed for research purposes.
I did so in particular because the other two sets of amendments (Committee and Purvis) would be next to be voted on and seemed likely at that stage to be carried. This is the most unacceptable position for me. As both the Gargani and Niebler amendments were defeated, the next amendment (Committee) was passed as I feared. I voted against this. I am not at ease with voting for Niebler but it is a better ethical position than creating new embryos for destruction. Killing someone to take their liver for research is murder. Taking the liver of someone already dead for research is different but still raises huge moral/ethical questions."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples