A right old religious rumpus

So Gordon Brown finally decides to let Labour MP's have a free vote on three aspects of the Human Embryo bill,the proviso being that once the details of the bill are agreed,Labour MP's must follow the party whip.

Rather strange that he has got himself into such a mess given what James Kirkup says at Three Line whip

Gordon Brown's current difficulties with the Catholic Church are in some ways curious. After all, the PM is famously the son of the manse whose faith and moral compass are, we are often reminded, at the root of his politics.

The three areas are those concerning IVF,the creation of the hybrid embryos(admixed) and the part concerning the creation of saviour sibling's that is using cells or organs of parents which are a match for a sick brother or sister in order to cure them.

Why it has taken so long to get to this point is unclear.Brown has once again shown the dithering aspect of his premiership,has given ammunition to former enemies such as Steven Byers and has upset the church.

The clamour for a free votehas reached a peak in the last few days,Tony Benn writing in this morning's Mail asking

Would the public still feel the same obligation to obey laws that had not been discussed and decided by MPs accountable to us? I suspect not.

Polly Toynbee taking a rather secular approach writes in the Guardian that

Whatever the religious claims, the human fertilisation and embryology bill is not in some special moral category of its own. It allows scientists to use the outer empty shell of animal eggs, for lack of spare human eggs, in which to implant purely human DNA for 14 days, to derive stem cell lines which model a particular disease to be studied in the lab. The UK pioneers stem-cell research into Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, motor neurone disease and muscular dystrophy, as well as cancer, diabetes, strokes and infertility. Contrary to the cardinals' wilfully ignorant campaign of misinformation, no animal hybrid, no monstrous Island of Doctor Moreau chimeras loom. Forget spurious "thin end of the wedge" arguments: no further step can be taken without another act of parliament. After wide public consultation, three years of parliamentary scrutiny and passage through the Lords, this has strong support from by the Medical Research Foundation, the Royal Society and the Academy of Medical Sciences, as well as Cancer Research UK and the British Heart Foundation.