Text for the day is Jackie Ashley’s Guardian column. Jackie argues that those who object to aspects of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill are acting from intrinsically “reactionary” motives: she warns that this Commons battle is a dry run for the general election. Modern Labour versus Luddite, anti-progressive Conservatives. Dave and his gang, she warns, are dangerous counter-revolutionaries pretending to be modernisers.
The Spectator has expressed deep reservations about this bill, both in its editorial column and John Patten’s recent article: we are especially exercised by the clause which would, in effect, abolish fatherhood from the lives of some children. I see the Government’s proposal as old-fashioned and our objection as authentically modern. Those who still cling to the outmoded, discredited vision of the Sixties are the real reactionaries in this argument: all the most recent research shows that children need fathers, or at least a father figure, if they are to have the best chance in life.
Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in