I was really looking forward to the Love Parade in Newcastle before the wankers cancelled it.
If you were in Newcastle at present you would be entirely familiar with the meaning of disappointment. As I write this, I should be getting gradually breathless with excitement at the impending festivities of the weekend. A festival celebrating the simple feeling of being carefree (although admittedly this carefree feeling is usually chemically induced, if one is entirely honest there are few natural highs around these days; when was the last time you unashamedly enjoyed yourself without some sort of artificial stimulant?) was to have taken place on Saturday. It was conceptualised as a free festival for all, comprising of dance music being pumped out throughout the city and a massive central gathering on the Town Moor. It was to have been a free party that would stick in the memory of all who didn't attend it (as I personally intended to destroy a great many brain cells and be left only with a vague feeling of bliss whenever the event was mentioned. I think I am grouped in the majority of potential attendees when I say this...). It was to have been the Love Parade. And it has just been cancelled.
Now then, I shall leave aside for the moment that this is a set of circumstances rich in imagery for me to invoke and (being honest) plagarise. A festival of Love among Mankind is called off due to the failings of bureaucracy, perhaps genuine fear about safety, coincidence and bad timing, and the petty machinations of people who are not exactly evil or bad but possess a kind of low grade unpleasantness that it usually manifested by a petty drive to ensure that their lives will continue tomorrow in much the same way as they did today. To quote a better man, the party has been called off because of a few fevered ego's whom, when we let them have their way, are making us pay a higher psychic price than we realise. I believe they are known as the Residents of Jesmond Dene.
Thus far I am perhaps being guilty of romanticising the Love Parade that will not be, so perhaps a more objective rundown of the event is required before I venture further. Essentially, a vast number of well known DJ's were going to descend on Newcastle. They would be accompanied by around about a quarter of a million partygoers. The party was to have started on the Tyne Bridge and, by means of a convoy of floats, wound it's way around Newcastle before settling on the Town Moor for some particularly energetic dancing coupled with imbibing vast quantities of alcohol amongst other things until 11pm. At this point, the DJ's were to have relocated to the large swathe of clubs around the city and the party would have continued (admittedly not quite as free as it had been up until this point. I believe one could expect to pay approximately £50 for a ticket to a typical event) until the wee small hours of Sunday. A vast amount of clubbers, both casual and hard core, would have been left exhausted but happy. Over £14 million of revenue in total would have been generated for the City of Newcastle. People from all over Europe would have converged on my home City in order to celebrate just how marvelous they felt and did I know where they could get any more of those wonderful little blue pills?
And it has all been called off at literally the last minute. Anyone who has booked their accommodation and travel in advance has lost their money. My friends and myself feel deflated, cheated even, at the casual way that and event that many of us had been looking forward too for months has been derailed. Love has turned to annoyance and sadness. So then, as we're all well-adjusted human beings, we need to find out whom to blame!
As always with these things, it is best to first examine the role of the organisers. In this case, Radio 1 and Newcastle City council. R1 have been advertising and promoting this event for months, so should we blame them for letting us down so badly? The council, despite having had the chance to plan for this since the beginning of the year, only started to do so a few weeks ago. Why didn't they start sooner? Also, the late entry of Newcastle Utd into the Intertoto cup meant that a European football match would take place in the city on the same day. Had the council put their plans in place earlier, it would have been a relatively simple matter to make a few adjustments for a match that would bring few away fans and, in all probability, few home fans as well (especially as we hammered the opposition 4 - 0 in the away leg! Shove it up yer arse FC Lokeren!!). As it is, the police quite rightly raised concerns that with 2 major events taking place on one day and no planning having been made for either of them, they could not make the necessary arrangements to guarantee a safe day for all concerned. The council found that they could not guarantee car parking spaces (and also faced internal opposition as the net cost would be £150,000 to do so). So for the want of some car parks and less than 200 grand the city has lost the prestige of hosting the event itself, millions in income, and made itself look something of an inefficient laughing stock.
So then, the whole thing smacks of basic and simple inefficiency on the part of the good burghers of Newcastle whom it would seem could not organise a piss up in a brewery. Or a New Years Party at the Quayside. Or a Millennium Bridge. Or an Internationally renowned Garden Festival. Erm...actually, they organised all of those events and buildings (and more besides) rather well and efficiently. In fact, the problem only seems to have arisen when it comes to events or buildings aimed specifically at the 18-25 age group in the case of the Love Parade, or at what I'll reluctantly term the working and middle classes as in the case of the opposition to relocating Newcastle United to a new ground a few years ago. In both of these cases it is my belief (and I do hope that you'll excuse my raging paranoia here...) that the actions of a very small minority played a major role. In the latter case, those residents of Jesmond Dene and attendant areas were active and vocal in their opposition of a relocation that had the support of the majority of the city. In the case of the Love Parade I suspect that they had no real need to be particularly vocal as they make up certain elements of Newcastle Council itself, particularly (I am hugely ashamed and disappointed to say) the LibDem councilors.
Now their opposition was nothing particularly active. They opposed by delaying and procrastinating on any sort of action relating to organising the event until it was too late to assuage the worries of R1 and the police (although happily I am not so naive as to deny that good old fashioned incompetence played it's part). Why did they do this? So that their peace and quiet, their everyday life would not be affected by such a huge number of (horror of horrors) young people descending on their homes. Some of them even complained bitterly that the drug crazed and violent (?) partygoers would be turning up at their doorsteps and being intimidating throughout the day. Well, firstly there is a bloody great main road separating the Town Moor from Jesmond. Secondly, why don't they raise these objections during the Hoppings Fair on the Town Moor every summer? Christ, that's an event that sees one of the biggest congregations of Gypsies and Travellers in Europe so you would have thought the bigoted buggers would be constantly up in arms about that! They want Saturday to be no different to the other 364 days in their year and they are getting their way. This leaves them free to indulge in their usual routines of gardening and mild adultery whilst the rest of us experience pangs of regret at the loss of an exciting and fun party.
And where does this lead us? Well in a way it ties back to one of my favourite bugbears of apathy. The only people who can be bothered to raise their voices are just this kind of horribly selfish middle/upper middle class gimp that infest Jesmond and areas like it. As long as the likes of you and I pay no attention to the day to day running of the areas in which we live we can look forward to many more disappointments like this one. I didn't have much of an impact persuading people to vote in the election when it was just our taxes and public services on the line. I'm hoping that the far more important issue of a bloody good party being ruined will perhaps spur more people on to being active in standing up for what they want. I live, as ever, in hope.
Tuesday 17 July 2001
Monday 16 July 2001
Race Relations
Something that has always bothered me about pro and anti-immigration groups is that huge swathes of either side have an inclination toward violence and intimidation. Which, to my mind, means the issue will continue to spawn violence. Maybe that's the point...
Now then, have you seen anything in the media recently about that most Western of traditions, the Race Riot? Currently it seems as if one can barely move through a dull, lifeless, post-industrial northern town without setting off a 3 day conflagration involving people of every colour and creed. In Oldham, Burnley, and most recently Bradford there has been a truly frightening wave of violence that reflects poorly on the British people and the dream of a multicultural society. I have already said pretty much everything that I want to say on the subject of racism in a much earlier rant, and I have nothing more that would add to or deviate from that. What does fascinate me to a large extent is the ideologies of those who are actively encouraging the violence. I refer not only to the National Front/British National Party/ Combat 18/ (insert any other generic name for racist thugs who deserve rusty nails dragged down their eyeballs), but to those who oppose them. Whilst this would also encompass all manner of minority pressure groups, I'm going to steer clear of commenting on them. Not out of any desire to avoid controversy, but because (for now) I know very little about their organisation and motivations and as such it would not be right for me to include them here. The organisation that I shall mention is one that I am familiar with if for no other reason than I was once a member; The Anti Nazi League.
For simplicities sake, let's narrow it down to 2 opposing groups; BNP and ANL. Whilst this precludes me from addressing all of the complexities involved in this issue, it makes it easier for me to type and frankly I'd do many things for an easy life. Both of these organisations have strong ideologies driving them forward. In the case of the BNP they originate almost entirely with the writings and "work" of Adolf Hitler. There are a few other influences as well, but as these were generally either influences on Hitler (in the case of Nietzche) or influenced by him (Jean-Marie Le Pen, David Irving etc.) you'll forgive me for putting these to one side.
The ANL also have their basis in Nazi Germany, albeit indirectly. There is a quote by a man named Pastor Niemoeller from that era that they have adopted as their slogan and their mantra;
"First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out, for I am not a Jew. Then they came for the communists and I did not speak out, for I am not a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out, for I am not a trade unionist. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me."
Which is pretty powerful stuff in my opinion, and was certainly instrumental in my joining the ANL. Their basic credo is to oppose the BNP, to be their antithesis and their nemesis for the benefit of the greater good. If the BNP are for it, you can be reasonably certain that the ANL are against it.
Before sallying forth to do battle with both of these organisations, I'd rather like to add a few side points about ideologies in general. I personally have met people who have and continue to have a strong influence on my life. However, the biggest influence on my life is Bill Hicks. A lot of his material provides the basis for my own personal ideology; in effect I live a substantial portion of my life according to the words of another man. The members of both the BNP and ANL are in effect living a substantial portion of their lives according to the words of another man.
The ANL have it easier in that respect for Niemoller's words are few, and it is always easier to know what one is opposed to rather than what one believes in. But as for the BNP...they willingly say and (if they get the chance) do the most stupidly barbarous things based on the words of a half-Jewish artist from Austria who only had one testicle. Not even well understood either if one comes down to it. They delight in spouting bile and hatred about "Paki's". Aside from the obvious point that a sure way to piss an Indian off is to call him a Paki, this is lumping together pretty much all the people of South Asia and the subcontinent. So far, so racist. But Hitler (on one of his many whimsies designed to prove the pre-eminence of the Aryans and to show their descent from a mythic race of super-men from Atlantis. Yes, really.) had declared that the people of Tibet, Nepal, and Kashmir (that I know of; their may be more) were Aryan people! He basically said that they were equal to the Germans in their racial purity (and I know that all notions of purity are bollocks but there you go). You'd at least hope that they'd go to the trouble of finding out just what the man actually said before committing acts of violence is his name, but it would appear not. Perhaps if the words of Adolf Hitler could be put into Topsy and Tim style books they might get it...
Anyway, what influence have these 2 organisations had on Britain's recent overflow of racial tension? Well to put it in a nutshell, if the BNP are the bullet in the head of racial harmony in the aforementioned 3 towns then the ANL have acted as the gunpowder. It is my belief that the riots (especially those that occurred in Bradford) would have been much less severe, perhaps even avoided altogether were it not for the ANL. Now this is not to say that the ANL turned up at all 3 towns with the intent of causing violence (although it would be naive to say that none of them did; the ANL has always been a loose coalition and so can include all sorts of elements other than peace loving anti fascists), but where they appeared, the violence followed. In Bradford the initial trouble centred on the impromptu ANL demonstration. The BNP thugs gathered to abuse them and a large gang of Asian youths (who were ostensibly there in support of the ANL) surged forward to attack them. Battle duly commenced.
Okay then; aren't the ANL simply fulfilling their purpose? They will stand up to the BNP come what may because of the words of Niemoeller, isn't that a good thing? Well, yes and no. Rather than looking at what happened with the ANL there, lets have a hypothetical look at what *should* have happened if they weren't...
Well, there are all of the BNP thugs all gathered together and...oh, look at that. The police have formed a cordon around them and are pummeling merry shite out of anyone who tries to get out or in (a sort of even-handed beating you might say). The people who want to get on with their day are doing so without interruption and the people who simply want a fight with the BNP are getting pepper sprayed and arrested. The BNP can go no-where and those who try to get out...are getting pepper sprayed and arrested! At the end of the day the BNP are peacefully dispersed and a police presence remains all night.
Now then; that was an ideal world scenario. Due to the various different police forces not setting their houses in order, I'm not sure that the Asian community has sufficient trust in them to be as even handed as I'd described. Some may find the above description semi-fascist in itself. I would answer by saying that extreme times (and extreme organisations) call for extreme measures. Though I dislike it as much as the next man, a powerful police presence can sometimes be the best solution to a problem like this.
But thanks in part to the partly justified mistrust of the police from minority communities, the police do not have the mandate to do this. Instead, the ANL continue to provide a focal point for the violence, either knowingly or otherwise. I find myself applauding their intentions but (as by now you may have gathered) resenting the fact that they are still necessary. Is there really still such little trust and so much hate because of skin colour? Is this actually the 21st century or was there some kind of error when Julius Caesar re-did the calendar and this is in fact the 11th century? Either way, I repeat my earlier exhortation to sort the whole shitty mess out and get on with the important business of evolving as members of the human race.
Now then, have you seen anything in the media recently about that most Western of traditions, the Race Riot? Currently it seems as if one can barely move through a dull, lifeless, post-industrial northern town without setting off a 3 day conflagration involving people of every colour and creed. In Oldham, Burnley, and most recently Bradford there has been a truly frightening wave of violence that reflects poorly on the British people and the dream of a multicultural society. I have already said pretty much everything that I want to say on the subject of racism in a much earlier rant, and I have nothing more that would add to or deviate from that. What does fascinate me to a large extent is the ideologies of those who are actively encouraging the violence. I refer not only to the National Front/British National Party/ Combat 18/ (insert any other generic name for racist thugs who deserve rusty nails dragged down their eyeballs), but to those who oppose them. Whilst this would also encompass all manner of minority pressure groups, I'm going to steer clear of commenting on them. Not out of any desire to avoid controversy, but because (for now) I know very little about their organisation and motivations and as such it would not be right for me to include them here. The organisation that I shall mention is one that I am familiar with if for no other reason than I was once a member; The Anti Nazi League.
For simplicities sake, let's narrow it down to 2 opposing groups; BNP and ANL. Whilst this precludes me from addressing all of the complexities involved in this issue, it makes it easier for me to type and frankly I'd do many things for an easy life. Both of these organisations have strong ideologies driving them forward. In the case of the BNP they originate almost entirely with the writings and "work" of Adolf Hitler. There are a few other influences as well, but as these were generally either influences on Hitler (in the case of Nietzche) or influenced by him (Jean-Marie Le Pen, David Irving etc.) you'll forgive me for putting these to one side.
The ANL also have their basis in Nazi Germany, albeit indirectly. There is a quote by a man named Pastor Niemoeller from that era that they have adopted as their slogan and their mantra;
"First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out, for I am not a Jew. Then they came for the communists and I did not speak out, for I am not a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out, for I am not a trade unionist. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me."
Which is pretty powerful stuff in my opinion, and was certainly instrumental in my joining the ANL. Their basic credo is to oppose the BNP, to be their antithesis and their nemesis for the benefit of the greater good. If the BNP are for it, you can be reasonably certain that the ANL are against it.
Before sallying forth to do battle with both of these organisations, I'd rather like to add a few side points about ideologies in general. I personally have met people who have and continue to have a strong influence on my life. However, the biggest influence on my life is Bill Hicks. A lot of his material provides the basis for my own personal ideology; in effect I live a substantial portion of my life according to the words of another man. The members of both the BNP and ANL are in effect living a substantial portion of their lives according to the words of another man.
The ANL have it easier in that respect for Niemoller's words are few, and it is always easier to know what one is opposed to rather than what one believes in. But as for the BNP...they willingly say and (if they get the chance) do the most stupidly barbarous things based on the words of a half-Jewish artist from Austria who only had one testicle. Not even well understood either if one comes down to it. They delight in spouting bile and hatred about "Paki's". Aside from the obvious point that a sure way to piss an Indian off is to call him a Paki, this is lumping together pretty much all the people of South Asia and the subcontinent. So far, so racist. But Hitler (on one of his many whimsies designed to prove the pre-eminence of the Aryans and to show their descent from a mythic race of super-men from Atlantis. Yes, really.) had declared that the people of Tibet, Nepal, and Kashmir (that I know of; their may be more) were Aryan people! He basically said that they were equal to the Germans in their racial purity (and I know that all notions of purity are bollocks but there you go). You'd at least hope that they'd go to the trouble of finding out just what the man actually said before committing acts of violence is his name, but it would appear not. Perhaps if the words of Adolf Hitler could be put into Topsy and Tim style books they might get it...
Anyway, what influence have these 2 organisations had on Britain's recent overflow of racial tension? Well to put it in a nutshell, if the BNP are the bullet in the head of racial harmony in the aforementioned 3 towns then the ANL have acted as the gunpowder. It is my belief that the riots (especially those that occurred in Bradford) would have been much less severe, perhaps even avoided altogether were it not for the ANL. Now this is not to say that the ANL turned up at all 3 towns with the intent of causing violence (although it would be naive to say that none of them did; the ANL has always been a loose coalition and so can include all sorts of elements other than peace loving anti fascists), but where they appeared, the violence followed. In Bradford the initial trouble centred on the impromptu ANL demonstration. The BNP thugs gathered to abuse them and a large gang of Asian youths (who were ostensibly there in support of the ANL) surged forward to attack them. Battle duly commenced.
Okay then; aren't the ANL simply fulfilling their purpose? They will stand up to the BNP come what may because of the words of Niemoeller, isn't that a good thing? Well, yes and no. Rather than looking at what happened with the ANL there, lets have a hypothetical look at what *should* have happened if they weren't...
Well, there are all of the BNP thugs all gathered together and...oh, look at that. The police have formed a cordon around them and are pummeling merry shite out of anyone who tries to get out or in (a sort of even-handed beating you might say). The people who want to get on with their day are doing so without interruption and the people who simply want a fight with the BNP are getting pepper sprayed and arrested. The BNP can go no-where and those who try to get out...are getting pepper sprayed and arrested! At the end of the day the BNP are peacefully dispersed and a police presence remains all night.
Now then; that was an ideal world scenario. Due to the various different police forces not setting their houses in order, I'm not sure that the Asian community has sufficient trust in them to be as even handed as I'd described. Some may find the above description semi-fascist in itself. I would answer by saying that extreme times (and extreme organisations) call for extreme measures. Though I dislike it as much as the next man, a powerful police presence can sometimes be the best solution to a problem like this.
But thanks in part to the partly justified mistrust of the police from minority communities, the police do not have the mandate to do this. Instead, the ANL continue to provide a focal point for the violence, either knowingly or otherwise. I find myself applauding their intentions but (as by now you may have gathered) resenting the fact that they are still necessary. Is there really still such little trust and so much hate because of skin colour? Is this actually the 21st century or was there some kind of error when Julius Caesar re-did the calendar and this is in fact the 11th century? Either way, I repeat my earlier exhortation to sort the whole shitty mess out and get on with the important business of evolving as members of the human race.
Thursday 5 July 2001
Sorting the Sperm from the Chaff
A rare foray into the world of scientific news.
Having scanned through today's news items, I find myself taken with the urge to talk about a matter rooted in a science which I know next to nothing about. No change there you may think, but in truth vast area's of the scientific world have "Here be Dragons" scrawled on them as far as I am concerned. This is not how I would like things of course, but mention this as a sort of disclaimer to those of a more scientific bent (i.e. to plead ignorance when you pick my arguments apart by the second line).
Today a story has broken concerning what some regard as the dark side of Genetic Engineering (GE for short as I can't be arsed to write that out again and again...). It is a topic that is always at the forefront of any of the arguments against tinkering with DNA, and it may be that today's story will serve to bring over a lot of previously neutral people to the anti GE camp. Whilst there are many subtleties and nuances to the anti GE argument, I don't believe that I would be doing them any injustice by summing them up in two words; designer babies.
This immediately conjures up all sorts of images to me. They range from the hip media 30somethings looking through a catalogue to decide what physiological and emotion template they would like for their child ("And will that be blue eyes to go with the blonde hair madam? A very wise choice...." Of course, that may not be entirely a dreadful thing; early projections show that we could once and for eradicate the heartwrenching disaster of giving birth to a ginger haired baby once and for all...), to the sinister Nazi-overtoned drive to ensure that all children are born to a perceived ideal.
But let us steer clear of images and dally with the facts for a short while. Basically, a clinic in America is using something called a sperm-sorting machine to enable couples to choose whether they have a boy or a girl. This sperm-sorting machine (stop sniggering) detects whether the sperm has an X chromosome for a girl, or a Y for a boy. Presumably the sperm is then used to fertilise the egg via artificial insemination as the idea of using this machine during, *ahem*, natural conception brings to mind some of the more unsavoury pornography available in Amsterdam. The success rate is not 100% (it's actually 92% and 72% respectively for identifying the correct sperm type) but for the first time it is offering parents the chance to choose a physical characteristic of their unborn (and unconceived) child.
Up until today I hadn't thought that this was legally possible. After all, there is a raft of legislation to prevent this sort of thing and it was only a few months ago that A Dundee couple were refused permission to have IVF treatment that would guarantee having a girl. However, the sorting technique gets around this as the current rules of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) apply to embryos and sperm donation, they do not apply to sperm sorting. So could this be the first step on the slippery slope to designer babies?
I find that I am in two minds as to whether it is or not. The mere fact that it is happening at all inclines me to worry that it is. I am all in favour of GE when it is used for things like eradicating hereditary diseases or to detect severely handicapped children before they are born. But to have this incredibly powerful tool and to use it to select the sex or height of one's child is rather like using a Cray supercomputer as a calculator. And yet when something is invented, we cannot uninvent it. Whether we like it or not, some people do think that the right to define their child's characteristics is a good thing; no more than an extension of the pro-choice arguments that state it is a woman's right to decide. I am emphatically pro-choice, so why do I feel such unease?
Probably because whenever this argument is raised, it tends to be done so in a manner that leads us to believe that there will be neither control nor regulation of GE in any way, shape or form. This is what is referred to in the common parlance as "misleading bollocks". There are criteria in place to use the sorting process so it's not as if people will be allowed to use it willy-nilly (sorry; cheap joke...). They require any person(s) who wish to use the process to already have at least one child of the opposite sex that they are trying to conceive, so we are not on the face of it heading for a hi-tech China where female children are next to worthless and will even be left to die so that a male child can be born and raised in that household. So despite the non-involvement (and indeed, opposition) of the HFEA, the clinic involved would appear to be behaving responsibly and to an extent, that puts paid to the bulk of worries about the use and abuse of sperm sorting.
Nonetheless, despite this and despite my inherent distrust of the anti GE camp (far too many of them seem to be glazed eyed religious types who believe that anything to do with sex and reproduction is vaguely sinful; strange how they never get many converts to their cause but there never seems to be a shortage of the bastards. I think the reason that they're so opposed to GE is because they've actually been growing clones of themselves in vast warehouses and they don't like the idea of anybody else being able to do the same...) I find that I am still uneasy at the prospect of the road ahead. The way has surely been cleared for a more open and thorough debate of just what the implications of GE are for us and more specifically for our children. I would hate to see the issues behind that debate obscured by rabble-rousers on either side. GE may well be important, so let's treat it with the respect it deserves
Having scanned through today's news items, I find myself taken with the urge to talk about a matter rooted in a science which I know next to nothing about. No change there you may think, but in truth vast area's of the scientific world have "Here be Dragons" scrawled on them as far as I am concerned. This is not how I would like things of course, but mention this as a sort of disclaimer to those of a more scientific bent (i.e. to plead ignorance when you pick my arguments apart by the second line).
Today a story has broken concerning what some regard as the dark side of Genetic Engineering (GE for short as I can't be arsed to write that out again and again...). It is a topic that is always at the forefront of any of the arguments against tinkering with DNA, and it may be that today's story will serve to bring over a lot of previously neutral people to the anti GE camp. Whilst there are many subtleties and nuances to the anti GE argument, I don't believe that I would be doing them any injustice by summing them up in two words; designer babies.
This immediately conjures up all sorts of images to me. They range from the hip media 30somethings looking through a catalogue to decide what physiological and emotion template they would like for their child ("And will that be blue eyes to go with the blonde hair madam? A very wise choice...." Of course, that may not be entirely a dreadful thing; early projections show that we could once and for eradicate the heartwrenching disaster of giving birth to a ginger haired baby once and for all...), to the sinister Nazi-overtoned drive to ensure that all children are born to a perceived ideal.
But let us steer clear of images and dally with the facts for a short while. Basically, a clinic in America is using something called a sperm-sorting machine to enable couples to choose whether they have a boy or a girl. This sperm-sorting machine (stop sniggering) detects whether the sperm has an X chromosome for a girl, or a Y for a boy. Presumably the sperm is then used to fertilise the egg via artificial insemination as the idea of using this machine during, *ahem*, natural conception brings to mind some of the more unsavoury pornography available in Amsterdam. The success rate is not 100% (it's actually 92% and 72% respectively for identifying the correct sperm type) but for the first time it is offering parents the chance to choose a physical characteristic of their unborn (and unconceived) child.
Up until today I hadn't thought that this was legally possible. After all, there is a raft of legislation to prevent this sort of thing and it was only a few months ago that A Dundee couple were refused permission to have IVF treatment that would guarantee having a girl. However, the sorting technique gets around this as the current rules of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) apply to embryos and sperm donation, they do not apply to sperm sorting. So could this be the first step on the slippery slope to designer babies?
I find that I am in two minds as to whether it is or not. The mere fact that it is happening at all inclines me to worry that it is. I am all in favour of GE when it is used for things like eradicating hereditary diseases or to detect severely handicapped children before they are born. But to have this incredibly powerful tool and to use it to select the sex or height of one's child is rather like using a Cray supercomputer as a calculator. And yet when something is invented, we cannot uninvent it. Whether we like it or not, some people do think that the right to define their child's characteristics is a good thing; no more than an extension of the pro-choice arguments that state it is a woman's right to decide. I am emphatically pro-choice, so why do I feel such unease?
Probably because whenever this argument is raised, it tends to be done so in a manner that leads us to believe that there will be neither control nor regulation of GE in any way, shape or form. This is what is referred to in the common parlance as "misleading bollocks". There are criteria in place to use the sorting process so it's not as if people will be allowed to use it willy-nilly (sorry; cheap joke...). They require any person(s) who wish to use the process to already have at least one child of the opposite sex that they are trying to conceive, so we are not on the face of it heading for a hi-tech China where female children are next to worthless and will even be left to die so that a male child can be born and raised in that household. So despite the non-involvement (and indeed, opposition) of the HFEA, the clinic involved would appear to be behaving responsibly and to an extent, that puts paid to the bulk of worries about the use and abuse of sperm sorting.
Nonetheless, despite this and despite my inherent distrust of the anti GE camp (far too many of them seem to be glazed eyed religious types who believe that anything to do with sex and reproduction is vaguely sinful; strange how they never get many converts to their cause but there never seems to be a shortage of the bastards. I think the reason that they're so opposed to GE is because they've actually been growing clones of themselves in vast warehouses and they don't like the idea of anybody else being able to do the same...) I find that I am still uneasy at the prospect of the road ahead. The way has surely been cleared for a more open and thorough debate of just what the implications of GE are for us and more specifically for our children. I would hate to see the issues behind that debate obscured by rabble-rousers on either side. GE may well be important, so let's treat it with the respect it deserves
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)