Home | Contact Us | Newsletters

The purpose of the Lockhart Committee is to review the Cloning and Embryo Acts of 2002 'in the light of changes in scientific or community understanding or standards since 2002'. "Progressives" will be hoping that the Review will provide an excuse to give the go-ahead to actions that were banned in 2002 - namely cloning. They want the committee to find that ‘not many people’ seemed to be concerned about cloning now, and that public attitudes have ‘moved on’ since the Korean cloning breakthroughs… 

Our role is to show again, as we did overwhelmingly in 2002, that the public does not want cloning, whether for live-birth or for experimentation, and that there has not been any ‘change in community standards’ to justify lifting the ban. That is the line we must hold. 

We need to show clear understanding of cloning, and express strong opposition. The Lockhart Issues Paper (Section 3: Some Key Definitions) confirms that a cloned embryo is a human embryo just like any other, whether conceived naturally or by IVF. It is alive with the possibility of being carried to birth. We need to insist that one 'community standard' is of truthfulness in debate and that we object to the strategy of the cloning lobby to deceive the public by claiming that a cloned embryo is not an embryo because it has been formed by somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) and not by the union of sperm and ovum. The dishonesty of the cloning scientists is apparent because they insist that cloning is only to be used for "therapeutic" and not "reproductive" purposes. If it is not an embryo, how could it be used for reproductive purposes anyway? The truth is that a cloned embryo formed by transferring a human cell into a denucleated human ovum (SCNT) is a human embryo, the identical twin of the person from whom the donor cell was obtained. 

The purpose of creating these embryos, these identical twins, is specifically to destroy them by experimentation. This is totally unacceptable. It is a line that cannot be crossed. Even permitting the use of so-called ‘spare embryos’ from IVF did not cross this line; that practice was only justified in 2002 because the embryos were ‘going to die anyway’, and the Prime Minister and others drew the ethical line in the sand - that no embryo was ever to be created specifically for research and destruction. 

Now we are being asked to cross that ethical line, and let embryos be created – in this case, by cloning (SCNT) – not in order to give parents a child, but to give technicians laboratory material. Write to the Lockhart Committee stating that experimenting on embryos whether obtained by IVF or cloning is immoral, unethical and barbarous. Address for submissions is P.O. Box 4226, Manuka ACT 2603, or Fax (02)62959277 or email: Lockhartreview@secretariat.com.au   

*    *   *   *   *

Another area in which community standards on truth are being challenged is in Victoria's Racial and Religious Tolerance Act. Truth is not a defence to a charge of "religious vilification”, and the RRTA limits freedom of religion and also freedom of speech. How can Christians - or adherents of any other faith for that matter - evangelise if they cannot critically discuss other religions? Victoria’s RRTA seems almost designed to placate intolerant Muslim regimes, as in Saudi Arabia, which do not recognize the right of non-Muslims to practise their religions. Even in Pakistan, a “blasphemy” law is often used vindictively to harrass Christians. When Mr. Howard meets with our local Imams, he should first of all insist that they publicly acknowledge the right of Muslims to convert to another faith if they so choose. Hear expert speakers on the Racial & Religious Tolerance Act at our public meeting.