MICHELLE Mulherin is to be congratulated for
her honesty.
One has to conclude that the Mayo TD spoke for
many in the so-called pro-life movement when she declared last week that: “Abortion
as murder — and therefore sin, which is the religious argument — is no more
sinful from a scriptural point of view than all other sins we do not legislate
against, such as greed, hate and fornication; the latter — fornication — being
probably the single most likely cause of unwanted pregnancies in this country.”
Her comment provoked a gamut of reaction, from
outrage to ridicule. Among those who are opposed to any form of abortion,
however, it must have been greeted with dismay. These people like to talk about
values, and the vulnerability of the unborn, and project themselves as acting
in the name of humanity in its purest form. They talk about killing babies. But
they studiously avoid mention of their primary motive. Then along comes a
kindred spirit and lays it out plain and simple — it’s all about religion,
about personal beliefs and interpreting those beliefs in a manner that leaves
no room for humanity, and then foisting those extreme interpretations on the
whole of society.
Last week, one of the women who travelled to
Liverpool to have her unviable pregnancy terminated spoke of her own beliefs:
“I believe in a loving, caring, understanding God and I won’t be damned for
what I did.”
Those who disagree with how she acted have a
different God. Their deity instructs that a 14-year-old who has been raped is
obliged to carry the rapist’s child. He commands that a 17-year-old in state
care can’t terminate her pregnancy although the foetus will be born without a
head. He instructs that a woman suffering painful cancer cannot end her
pregnancy, even if that means she has a better chance of survival. He commands
that a woman with an unviable pregnancy must carry on, irrespective of the
psychological damage and pain being inflicted, until a child is born dead. This
deity might give lip service to compassion, but largely he is focused on
imposing his will on all before him, if necessary destroying people in order to
save them.
The stories publicised last week of the four
women who travelled to Liverpool to terminate their pregnancies couldn’t have
failed to touch anybody with an ounce of humanity. They and their partners had
first been subjected to the devastation that they would not be receiving a
child into their world. Then, they had to face the harsh reality of a state
which turns away from its citizens just at the point when they need to be
comforted and assisted.
Finally, cast out, they had to leave home and
fly to a jurisdiction where their condition is accepted in medical rather than
moral terms. One woman described how she had “to walk around Birmingham for
five hours when you’ve just ended your baby’s life, you’ve had an anaesthetic
and are bleeding and cramping”.
This is precisely what some women are obliged
to endure as a result of the actions of the pro-life lobby.
How offensive is that term? Labelling yourself
pro-life infers that those who disagree with your personal beliefs have less
regard for life than you do. It is ironic then, that among the anti-abortion
lobby, precious few of them — with a few exceptions — give any thought to
advocating for the most vulnerable once they are born into life.
Their other offensive term, “abortion on
demand” speaks volumes. The term evokes the image of a confident or angry woman
striding into an establishment and demanding that her pregnancy, the result
most likely of “fornication”, be terminated. Again, it demonstrates a total
removal from the real world. Anybody who knows a woman who has found herself in
that position knows that decisions weigh heavily, and that far from being
disposed to demand anything, they are often wracked with doubt, and sometimes
guilt.
Fear is the key. Just as their God values fear
over love, so too do these extremists themselves. Last week’s private members
bill by Socialist TD Claire Daly to enact legislation for the X Case was
another reminder of how the political establishment is scared stiff of these
people.
Twenty years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that
abortion was legal in the case where a mother’s life was in danger. Twenty
years later the body politic is still stalling. It is inconceivable that in
almost any other facet of life, such a situation would be allowed to fester
through six different governments.
Last weekend the Labour party voted at its
conference to push for legislation, and then its parliamentarians voted against
Daly’s bill. It would be reasonable to surmise that, like the majority of
people in the country, most in the Oireachtas do not share the extremists’
view, but they know the capacity these people have to instil fear and hatred.
The situation is so demented that even those
who are desperate to create life are being held hostage by these people.
Assisted human reproduction, principally through IVF, is a norm in Western
society. It is a reality that some couples have difficulty in conceiving
naturally. Advances in science mean this does not have to condemn couples to a
childless future. It is possible to assist nature on its way.
To this end, the government of the day was
obliged to have a report prepared on how best to legislate for the area,
particularly to protect those seeking the service. The Commission on Assisted
Reproduction published its report in May 2005. The extremists were unhappy with
conclusions which they felt were not compatible with their personal beliefs. As
a result, no government since has had the basic courage to its duty and
legislate. As a result, assisted human reproduction remains a grey area, which
can at times be brutal, where vulnerable couples are sometimes exploited, and
where science has galloped way ahead of the law. And all because these people
and their capacity to divide opinion.
Times change. The power that these extremists
have wielded in the past may be dissipating. The majority of citizens in the
State would most likely be opposed to abortion being widely available.
Arguably, it would not be a good thing for universal access, certainly in the
short term.
Those who profess allegiance to the majority
religion are instinctively opposed to abortion. But opinion polls in recent
years suggest that many are moving away from the extreme interpretation that
the anti-abortion crowd, and the hierarchy, peddle. Legions of practicing
Catholics in this country ignore the Church’s teachings on artificial
contraception. They turn a blind eye to the stuff about pre-marital sex. They
realise that in the real world, people sometimes divorce.
Some question why their Church appears to be
obsessed with sexual matters in general, and women’s bodies in particular.
Their brand of Catholicism has room for basic humanity.
And so, it must be hoped, that view will be to
the fore in the near future as the issue of abortion in certain circumstances
is finally tackled.
It’s long past the time when basic humanity
should have precedence over the extreme beliefs of a small, but powerfully
vocal, group.
By Michael Clifford
