Tuesday, 23 October 2007

Online Petition

I mentioned a programme on abortion which was to be shown on Channel 4: Dispatches. I didn't get to see it as I was totally shattered, and I don't have a video recorder. Someone put a link to part of the programme in the combox, and I'm embedding it here... It isn't for the squeamish!



Anyway, now there's a petition to Gordon Brown asking for the time-limit on abortion to be brought down from 24 weeks to 16 weeks, in line with other European countries. I've signed, but I'm not entirely convinced that this is the best way to go... my fear is that, in order to gain agreement on the lower limit, political campaigners will agree to lifting the current requirement for a second doctor's signature, effectively ensuring abortion "on demand." I know it is, to all intents and purposes, effectively guaranteed anyway, but I feel it is important that the law is there. Maybe I'm wrong on this one. Comments gratefully received...

The petition can be found HERE.

16 comments:

deb said...

I only got to the part of him describing what is done and for some reason I couldn't watch any more. Just this snippet was emotionally draining to me.

Mark said...

That was horribly chilling, Mac. I'm sorry,; you've reduced me to a jittering mess.

I do wish public opinion would go the way of doctors--it would aid things greatly. My personal opinion is that we require the law to be gradually tightened--law serves a purpose, even when for a time it allows evil in decreasing numbers.

George said...

May the Good Lord have mercy on us all! Like Deb, I only got through a few minutes of this - and like you Mac, I missed the showing of the programme on the TV last week.

Somebody PLEEEEEASE tell me how that so-called 'consultant' can sleep at night doing what he does all day. He was so matter-of-fact telling us that 'pieces of the foetus would be removed bit by bit and the skull would have to be crushed as it is too large to remove in one bit etc....' that it sent chills up my spine. I just couldn't watch any more - and I've been involved with Pro-Life organisations for over 10 years!

A Country that enshrines in law the brutal killing of its most vulnerable citizens - unborn children - can do little else but slowly sink into the mire and slime of degradation and decay. Sadly, that is exactly what we see in the UK all round us. For surely if we hold life to be so cheap then why are we so shocked when 10 and 16 year old boys are gunned down in our cities, when young girls are raped, beaten and murdered, when vicious drug crime is rampant, old age pensioners killed for the few quid in their purses, paedophiles loose on our streets etc...

I would recommend everyone joins Pro-Life groups in their area and does their little bit. Do what you can, wherever you can, for as long as you can - Fr Paul Marx OSB (Founder HLI).

WhiteStoneNameSeeker said...

I've signed and blogged about this.
I couldn't watch the whole thing.
Sometimes I look at people and just wonder HOW and WHY they think the way they do? How can people who were made in the image and likeness of God be so willing to destroy that image in themselves?

The teenage girl shocked me. She had actually been online and SEEN what she was about to go through-and yet there she was. Where were her parents? The father of the child? ANYONE!?

Andy said...

Like you, I used to have doubts as to whether this sort of thing was the right way to go. Now I am convinced that it definitely is not. We've been down this road in the past, and it came to nothing. Worse than that, I think the attempt to stop later abortions has backfired because it gives the message that earlier abortions are ok.

Many (non-Catholic, non-prolife) people I speak with say that abortion shouldn't be allowed if the child can feel pain or is viable. If prolifers promote reductions to take this into account all we are doing is reinforcing other people's false views. In fact, I think people tend to hold these views because this is what prolifers have campaigned on in the past.

Unborn children are not negotiable. It's not acceptable to have abortion for some, but not for others. We should be appealing to the Prime Minister and the parliament for a law that protects all, not for something like a 16 week limit which we don't in fact believe in - and which, in any case, has little chance of being passed.

Philip said...

I thank God for Channel 4 and the fact that it does not shy away from making programmes such as this (unlike just about every other network, especially the BBC).

I watched it, thinking that I knew what to expect. I was wrong! The evil of the process was so graphic, and yet people still defended it, most especially the lady from Marie Stopes. Well-meaning liberalism soon takes upon itself the mantle of fascism and death.

I went to bed that night wondering whether that aborted baby (the one who's fully-formed body parts we saw post-termination) had fought for his/her life. We know that twins will react to each other in the womb at an earlier age, so surely, an abortionist's weapon will be fought off. If that's so...

* shudder *

antonia said...

personally I wouldn't sign the petition. I don't want my name saying that I want abortions only till 12 weeks...I don't want abortions at ANY stage.

Mark said...

Hrmmm... I understand both Antonia and Andy's points, but I still question that the petition has no value. I would rather ask to vouchsafe the lives of two, than be not able to ask for the lives of four.

In terms of political machinations, I do believe there is a place for an "economy of scale", though I realise many will consider me reprehensible for saying this. Of course I do not want any abortions, but if we have the chance to limit any of them, then we must seize it!

Cathy said...

I agree with you Antonia. I have thought this for a long time, but it seems everyone says you should try to stop some abortions. You never find any pro-life organisation or anyone that I know of saying you shouldn't sign such petitions or shouldn't restrict some abortions if you can. I think it is an unacceptable compromise to say we'll accept a situation where some abortions can take place so long as others are stopped.

Mac McLernon said...

Cathy -
You never find ... anyone that I know of saying you shouldn't sign such petitions

*ahem*... I thought I did make my reservations clear...!
:-)

Cathy said...

mac - sorry, yes, you did express reservations about signing the petition (even though you did sign it - ahem!). What surprises me is that there is so little questioning of whether the approach to gradually change the law is justified, and it is so rare to hear people like Antonia and also Andy (sorry, Andy, I forgot to mention your excellent points) refusing to do things that the pro-life movement generally proposes as helpful to the cause. Maybe there are a lot of people like Andy, Antonia and me, but you don't tend to hear about them!

Cathy said...

My husband just showed me this weekend's Catholic Herald. The main letter makes some excellent points against supporting attempts to lower the abortion limit. However, on the front page the Cardinal is quoted as saying he supported a "pragmatic" approach. Surely this can't be right, can it?

This seems to be turning into an important question, yet I don't see anyone blogging about it. I wonder what Fathers Finnegan, Boyle, Blake etc. think of such pragmatic compromises?

Fr John Boyle said...

Mac

Thank you for posting this. As I do not have TV I was glad of the opportunity to view it, particularly as I had an exchange of emails on the subject with Jon Snow. I shall now email him again thanking C4 for doing this programme.

It was truly horrific!

Cathy asks what I think about the Cardinals' letter? I fear their excellencies are mistaken. To argue for a reduced time limit is, in my opinion, to allow others to deduce that we consider some life more valuable than others. This is not, of course, what the Cardinals mean, but non-prolifers will perceive an inconsistency.

It is also the case that very few abortions take place at the later stages of the legal limit. And whenever abortion has been debated in Parliament, it has been futher liberalised.

The Church must argue for nothing less than the end of abortion and must accuse society and government of the barbarism that is at the heart of its approach to the unborn. At the same time, it must proclaim love for all whatever their 'quality', and particularly for all who have undergone this horrendous procedure and who have so harmed themselves spiritually, psychologically and physically. And there are many Catholics who need the love and forgiveness only the Church can offer.

We have no reason to lack confidence in the proclamation of the Gospel of Life and Love. The Church is the only institution that can pick up the pieces of this terrible holocaust.

Fr John Boyle said...

BTW: no I won't be signing the petition, Mac, although I understand why you have done so and the caveat you made.

Cathy said...

I didn't think you would actually reply to my comment Father. I'm flattered, as well as very pleased by your response. I had thought my view was right anyway, but for you to say so too is quite an endorsement :-)

I just saw Damian Thompson is blogging on this question too - though I think he has come down on the wrong side! (What a shame)

Ottaviani said...

We must have no compromise with the pro-death lobby. Any half-wake bargain is indirectly giving tacit support for abortion to continue in the early stages. We are fighting for life from conception not from 16 weeks.

The pro-death lobby do not settle for a few slices of the bread, when they want the full loaf. Neither should we.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...