Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-11-29-Speech-4-040"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-11-29"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Human genetics2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20011129.1.4-040"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-11-29-Speech-4-0412
lpv:speaker	lp:Maria Martens2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of South Asia and the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Christen Democratisch Appèl (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I am one of those opposed to cloning, including therapeutic cloning. The distinction between it and reproductive cloning is mainly a semantic one and, in any case, therapeutic cloning opens the door to reproductive cloning. Good intentions, such as the search for solutions to diseases, are not sufficient to prevent what you wish to avoid, such as, and there is unanimity on this point, reproductive cloning and eugenic research. Those who suggest that there is no openness, that a morality is being imposed on the general public and an ethical supremacy is being claimed, are wrong: there has been a year of discussion, all points of view have been extensively aired, the testimony of scientists and experts has been heard, and in today’s vote everyone has an equal voice. In the Netherlands, particularly, it often strikes me that liberals, when others do not agree with them, suddenly start speaking about the imposition of a morality. That fails to do justice to the facts and to the power of independent thought of their fellow MEPs. The suggestion that therapeutic cloning is indispensable for the preservation of human health is misleading: there are alternative research methods that are also promising. I am against cloning and against the use of embryos, also residual embryos, because I believe that one must not use people instrumentally, as in my view the consequences are dangerous. Anyway, it will lead to the making of choices between various kinds of human life and there are alternatives. Research is important, but the job of government is to set frameworks. Those frameworks must not be solely designed, as the liberals would have it, to prevent medical and scientific research from being hampered. Nor must they, in my opinion, be inspired only by the free market and individual interest. We must also look to the general interest: the consequences for people in general, and not just the sick, the consequences for society and for generations to come. It is impossible that we should create life and then destroy it. I should like to convey my congratulations to the rapporteur and am exceptionally pleased with this report."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph