Human beings were created male and female. Reproduction results from mating a male and a female. That seems simple enough – making babies 101. The harder part of teaching reproduction is trying to explain “birds and bees” to a child. But it is getting even more complicated. Homosexuals have been successful to assert their “rights” to be parents even though babies are not naturally produced in a homosexual union. That makes the “birds and bees” story harder to explain. Now it is getting even more complicated. How about reproduction from a threesome: man-man-woman or man-women-women. The biology teacher is going to have a nightmare.
History is in the making. BBC News reported:
MPs have voted in favour of the creation of babies with DNA from two women and one man, in a historic move.
The UK is now set to become the first country to introduce laws to allow the creation of babies from three people.
In a free vote in the Commons, 382 MPs were in favour and 128 against the technique that stops genetic diseases being passed from mother to child.
During the debate, ministers said the technique was “light at the end of a dark tunnel” for families. ….
Prime Minister David Cameron said: “We’re not playing god here, we’re just making sure that two parents who want a healthy baby can have one.”
David Cameron believes that he is not playing god. The fact is that he couldn’t, else he would. What exactly is the rationale for a threesome child? The argument is that those incapable of conceiving could have this privilege of a “manufactured” child through some form of genetic engineering. The thought is seemingly altruistic. It is all about love of life. Understandably, parents who could not conceive may suffer pain and rejection. Nature’s instinct to procreate is powerful enough that infertile couples resort to all kinds of techniques to have a child, preferably one of their own flesh and blood.
The bible tells the story of how Sarah, who was barren, offered her slave girl Hagar to husband so that they may have a child. The aftermath of that decision caused untold misery down generations. The Middle East conflict bears testimony to this unfortunate incident. It is still a family feud. It is common in many cultures for husbands, with the permission of the wife, to take on concubines when the wife is barren. This practice is less palatable today. Fortunately, modern science allows other methods of conception using the parents seeds. But that may not work either. As a last resort, couples may opt for adoption.
It is utterly ironical that UK votes for a threesome family while millions of babies are aborted in UK and the west each year. The presumption that this threesome technology will solve the misery of a few couples is totally misplaced. Having a child of their own is wonderful. But not having one is not a disaster. Every child should be loved, regardless of his genetic makeup. If there is a real love for life, there would not have been so many abortions and wars that kill and maim millions. Trying to outdo God’s creative work will only end in tragedy. There is nothing great in creating a threesome parenthood, other than perhaps, a scientific triumph. Science can contribute much to society, and it can also become a Frankenstein. In this threesome union, it is the latter. It is pointedly mocking the God of creation, less a scientific achievement.
As reported by BBC:
Fiona Bruce, the MP for Congleton, countered: “[This] will be passed down generations, the implications of this simply cannot be predicted.
“But one thing is for sure, once this alteration has taken place, as someone has said, once the gene is out of the bottle, once these procedures that we’re asked to authorise today go ahead, there will be no going back for society.”
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.