Irish Government's deceit on right to life of unimplanted human embryo

Pat Buckley (pictured) has an excellent post on the right to life of the human embryo in Ireland. He provides the legal background to a case in the Irish Supreme Court in respect of the right to life of three unimplanted embryos.

Pat Buckley tells us that Mr Donal O’Donnell SC representing the Attorney General and the Irish State, told the court that an embryo is not an “unborn” within the meaning of Article 40.3.3 of the Irish Constitution and that, in his opinion, the destruction of fertilised embryos prior to implantation in a woman’s womb is permitted under law.

Then why, Pat suggests, did the Irish Government ask the Irish people in 2002 to vote in a referendum on an amendment to the Constitution to limit legal protection to the child implanted in the womb?

Why I won't be giving to the second collection for the Catholic Education Service

There's a second collection this weekend in many Catholic parishes in support of the Catholic Education Service (of England and Wales). I will not be making a contribution since I have a conscientious objection to doing so.

As a Catholic parent I am very concerned about the ambiguous policy of the Catholic Education Service which welcomes the presence in Catholic schools of Connexions. Connexions is a government agency which is committed to giving schoolchildren, under the age of 16, access to abortion and abortifacient birth control drugs and devices without parental knowledge or permission. As a result of this policy, it's clear that children in Catholic schools are being given such access, in spite of Connexions' undertaking to respect the Catholic ethos of the schools.

Furthermore, The Telegraph reported in November that the National Children bureau and Sex Education Forum have called for every 11 to 18-year-old in England to be able to receive advice on contraception, pregnancy tests and screening for sexually transmitted diseases between lessons. Such advice can include confidential access to abortion.

The thinking behind the conclusions of the NCB/SEF reports is clearly set out in the Sex and Relationships Education Framework, the “core document” of the Sex Education Forum of which the Catholic Education Service is a member. It is a document to which all Forum members agree in order to meet membership criteria as it makes clear on page 4 of that document.

Surely the Catholic Education Service should dissasociate itself publicly from the NCB/SEF reports and begin actively and publicly to resist, and encourage parents, teachers and boards of governors to resist, the government's anti-life, anti-parent, pressures being brought to bear on schoolchildren?

Doctors must resist crime of euthanasia despite court decision, say bishops

A powerful statement from the Archbishop of Udine on the case of Eluana Englaro (pictured), who is facing death by starvation in the city of Udine, is part of a significant pattern. One Catholic bishop after another is appealing to health professionals to resist pressure to kill Eluana, despite last November's court decision granting her father permission to kill her by removing her feeding tube.

Like other outspoken comments by bishops, the Archbishop Pietro Brollo of Udine could not be more clear about the need for health professionals to resist the decision of the court that she can be starved to death. He says:

“Udine is ready to embrace Eluana Englaro, a daughter of this land. Upon learning of her arrival, I ask first of all that this woman be guaranteed care, hydration, nutrition and every means that someone who is sick, particularly someone who is very incapacitated, is due by those who have the professional duty in conscience to provide a cure.”

Last week I reported that Cardinal Severino Poletto, the archbishop of Turin, was reported to be urging Italian doctors to resort to conscientious objection if they are ordered to let Eluana Englaro—known as the Terri Schiavo of Italy—die of starvation.

And earlier this week, Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan, the president of the Pontifical Council for Health Care, said in a newspaper interview that removing Eluana's feeding tube "is tantamount to an abominable assassination and the Church will always say that out loud."

Last weekend the archbishop of Bologna said in his homily: "In the body of this woman, and in her fate, there is an image of the fate of the West ... ".

These bishops are doing their pastoral duty to care for one vulnerable human being. Pope John Paul II said in Evangelium Vitae: "Every individual, precisely by reason of the mystery of the Word of God who was made flesh (cf. Jn 1:14), is entrusted to the maternal care of the Church". (EV, 3)

Their call for resistance also reflects papal teaching. Again Pope John Paul II wrote:

"Abortion and euthanasia are thus crimes which no human law can claim to legitimize. There is no obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. From the very beginnings of the Church, the apostolic preaching reminded Christians of their duty to obey legitimately constituted public authorities (cf. Rom 13:1-7; 1 Pet 2:13-14), but at the same time it firmly warned that "we must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). In the Old Testament, precisely in regard to threats against life, we find a significant example of resistance to the unjust command of those in authority. After Pharaoh ordered the killing of all newborn males, the Hebrew midwives refused. "They did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but let the male children live" (Ex 1:17). But the ultimate reason for their action should be noted: "the midwives feared God" (ibid.). It is precisely from obedience to God-to whom alone is due that fear which is acknowledgment of his absolute sovereignty-that the strength and the courage to resist unjust human laws are born. It is the strength and the courage of those prepared even to be imprisoned or put to the sword, in the certainty that this is what makes for "the endurance and faith of the saints" (Rev 13:10)." (EV, 73)

Ethical issues concerning the Californian octuplets

All children are equally entitled to be welcomed and loved whatever the circumstances in which they came into this world. This truth, however, does not absolve us of the obligation to reflect on the rights and wrongs relating to the circumstances in which new people are conceived. I was therefore pleased to receive this response on the recent report about octuplets who have been born in California. It was sent by Southern Cross Bioethics Institute, professional advisers on bioethics to SPUC.

The Californian Octuplets

The recent report that octuplets had been born in California is replete with uncertainties. The initial report simply stated that infertility treatment was used, possibly meaning that drugs were taken which increase the number of eggs released. However, a subsequent report in which the grandmother of the octuplets was interviewed, raised the possibility that the children resulted from the transfer of embryos left over from previous infertility treatment. In the same report, it has also become apparent that the existing six children of the woman were also conceived using IVF. The woman is single and it is unclear how the expensive treatments were funded. The family circumstances, in which the mother lives with her parents and her six existing children, appear very modest.

Presuming the reports to be accurate, there are a number of significant ethical issues that arise.

First, the intentional conception of children who will not have a father is unethical regardless of whether infertility treatment is used. There is a considerable consensus among experts that the best developmental circumstances for children exist when they are raised with their natural mother and father. Circumstances may arise following conception in which that is not possible, in which case options exists which are directed to protecting children and providing the best alternate circumstances. But to set out with the intention to deny children a father or mother shows disregard for their well-being.

Second, IVF clinics act irresponsibly by participating in such conceptions. The report that a sperm donor was used raises all of the ethical problems associated with sperm donors, in particular whether the children will ever get to know who their biological father is.

Third, if fertility drugs were used to increase the chance of multiple pregnancies when the health risks to children and mother are so well known and documented, the medical professionals involved have acted unethically by contributing to the initiation of such a high risk pregnancy. If multiple embryos were transferred, the clinics involved have also acted unethically, but with even greater irresponsibility given the apparent direct intention to cause a high risk pregnancy. A high order multiple pregnancy like this present serious risks to the life and health of the mother and the children in both the short term and long term.

Fourth, depending upon which IVF processes were used, numerous embryos may have been discarded as part of the ‘normal’ course of infertility treatment. This is one of the present realities of IVF treatment, regardless of the number of embryos transferred to the woman. Calls for infertility treatment to involve the transfer of just one embryo do minimize the chances of multiple pregnancies; however, even the transfer of a single embryo involves a range of ethical problems (see single embryo transfer document).

Fifth, both reports carry with them the implication that it would have been appropriate to abort some of the children once the high number was known. Such ‘selective reduction’ is a particularly horrible process that, if followed, would have meant the surviving children would eventually become aware of their chance survival whilst there brothers and sisters died at the abortionists hand. What psychological damage that would produce is unknown but potentially profound. It is to the mother of the octuplets credit that she refused to have any of the children’s lives terminated.

In conclusion, whilst the natural healthy birth of octuplets understandably raises awe and respect for medical staff who use their skill and expertise to ensure a safe arrival, the use of such skill in IVF treatment which deliberately places children and mother at such high risk cannot be met with the same admiration. Neither can admiration be held for medical professionals who so readily discard embryos as a normal part of infertility treatment. Even less can any admiration be held for some of the same medical personnel who would be ready to ‘selectively reduce’ - that is terminate - the lives of some of those children, whilst they grow alongside their siblings.

UK Government depicts unborn as fully human and alive in anti-smoking campaign

I welcome and congratulate the government on their new campaign aimed at expectant mothers who find it tough to stop smoking. This has got to make sense, as research shows. The Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths point out in their research factfile on reducing the risk of cot death:

"Evidence from a very large number of studies worldwide consistently demonstrates that maternal smoking during pregnancy increases the risk of SIDS."

According to PA News:

"The ad campaign, from NHS Smokefree, will highlight how every smoked cigarette restricts essential oxygen to the baby. A baby's heart has to beat harder every time a pregnant woman smokes, it will show."

The NHS Smokefree website and its pregnancy calendar makes fascinating reading. Whilst it's account of the development of the baby in the womb is not entirely accurate (eg the baby's heart starts to beat between 21 - 25 days from fertilisation and not between week 6 - 7 as the NHS calendar indicates), nevertheless the text is full of references which are clearly intended to bond mothers to babies who are depicted as fully human and fully alive. For example, under week 3 - 4, it states:

"Well done! Quitting smoking is the best decision you can make for you and your growing baby."

And under Week 8 - 12, it states:

"The baby is now called a foetus meaning 'young one'". SPUC could have written that!

Now does anyone mind if I say something blindingly obvious? Exactly the same Government which focuses on the humanity of unborn babies, starting with fertilisation, in order to target mothers who find it tough to stop smoking, is also targeting mothers in order to offer to have their babies killed. Here's the language that's used about unborn babies by organizations funded by the government to do its dirty work:

In describing abortions, Marie Stopes claims that “gentle suction is used to remove the pregnancy from the uterus” when describing surgical abortion, FPA talks about “taking pills to expel the pregnancy” and BPAS, when describing a late term dilation and evacuation, states: “Forceps are used to remove the pregnancy.” You can find more examples here of what I'm saying.

This is government-funded propaganda at its worst. As George Orwell put it: “Political language ... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

I do hope - for the sake of children and their parents - that the government campaign to stop expectant mothers from smoking is successful. I also hope that the public will recognize more and more the government's inconsistency and treachery in promoting the killing of unborn children - even seeking to target every secondary school in the country, including church schools, providing access to abortion clinics for children as young as eleven without parental knowledge or consent - through the use of misleading language by their pro-abortion partners as they seek to cover up their crimes against humanity.

Purdy assisted suicide appeal is misguided

SPUC has been granted status as an intervenor in the case brought by Mrs Debbie Purdy (pictured) against the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), who has declined to publish a prosecuting policy specific to assisted suicide. The case is being heard today by the Court of Appeal.

Paul Tully, SPUC general secretary, said:

"We have great sympathy for Mrs Purdy because of her medical condition, but her legal case is misguided and dangerous. Suicide is a course of action which everyone in society, from individuals to parliament naturally discourages. If we favour suicide for individuals who are suffering, we send a message to all those who are sick or disabled that their lives are not worthwhile."Naturally, those who are sick and disabled often feel they are a burden on others. That is a burden that society must carry willingly and with love, not an excuse for helping them express their sadness by self-destruction.

"We welcome the involvement of the DPP in this case and we commend his legal arguments. His firm resistance to this attack on the law is vital to upholding fundamental rights and freedoms of everyone.

"We are appalled by the continuing attacks on the right to life of those who are elderly or disabled or suffering from progressive degenerative disease. These attacks which would be firmly resisted by public bodies like the BBC if they were directed against young offenders, victims of abuse, or other high suicide-risk groups, are promoted by those who regard disabled people as a burden to be disposed of if the individual loses a sense of their own worth.

"The recent case brought before the GMC against Dr Iain Kerr, the Glasgow doctor to gave lethal drugs to a suicidal patient, indicates the importance of having well-enforced systems to stop doctors becoming the arbiters of life and death over vulnerable patients."

Father's right to kill his daughter will result in countless other killings

Monsignor Ignacio Barreiro, the chief of Human Life International's Rome office, told me this morning that the fate of Eluana Englaro (pictured), granting the right of a father to kill his daughter, would lead directly to the killings of countless other Italian patients.

Early yesterday Eluana was transferred from a clinic near Milan to a hospital in Udine where her feeding tube will be removed resulting in her death by starvation and dehydration.

"Eluana's father is legally responsible for her killing" Monsignor Barreiro said. "He has been fighting for years to have her feeding tube removed and now he has decided to move her to a hospital where this will be done."

Monsignor Barreiro said that he completely agreed with Cardinal Carlo Caffara, the archbishop of Bologna, who said in his homily last weekend: "In the body of this woman, and in her fate, there is an image of the fate of the West ... ".

"Eluana is highly symbolic of the struggle with the culture of death" Monsignor Barreiro told me. It would create a precedent whereby judges, against the law, can decide it's right to kill patients. We are not fighting for Eluana's life because she has limited signs of consciousness but because of her dignity as a human being."

As I pointed out last week in relation to Cardinal Poletto's comments on Eluana's fate, Monsignor Barreiro's position reflects the constant teaching of the Catholic Church re-stated on 1st August 2007 by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in "Responses to Certain Questions of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Concerning Artificial Nutrition and Hydration" and further explained in the CDF's helpful commentary on their responses to the US bishops.

Christian nurse reportedly suspended for offering to pray for a patient's recovery

In a country in which Dame Joan Bakewell, who has made several pro-euthanasia statements, is appointed by the government to represent elderly people ... in a country in which one of the most quoted philosophers on pro-life issues, Baroness Mary Warnock, says that that people with disabling conditions have a duty to die prematurely ... in a continent in which the European Commission requested the EU Network of Independent Experts to publish a legal opinion promoting, without any foundation, the right to abortion and the right to euthanasia ... I get very worried when I read today that a Christian nurse from Weston-super-Mare has reportedly been suspended for offering to pray for a patient's recovery.

Obama’s order to abort world’s poor: Pro-abortion lobbyists target Kenya

Watch out very carefully, particularly if you live in a developing country … The international pro-abortion lobby is going into overdrive to create a completely false image of reaction in the developing world following Obama’s executive order to abort babies in developing countries.

Under the headline “American abortion debate reaches into Nairobi slums” the Associated Press have put out a story saying: “Aid workers and experts say President Barack Obama's decision to allow aid money to flow again to international groups that offer abortion counseling will help restart programs desperately needed in Africa, the continent hardest hit by a so-called ‘gag rule’.” Read on – and you will find one pro-abortion professional after another being quoted, working for groups like Marie Stopes International, Population Action International, Family Health Options Kenya (which was legally registered in Kenya and affiliated to the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), in 1962); all of them purporting to speak for the poor in Kenya, in support of legalized abortion. They’re virtually an international professional army of pro-abortion lobbyists – and the weapons they use (principally the weapon of misrepresentation) are aimed at the unborn and their mothers.

Unfortunately for this army of international pro-abortion professionals, today’s Sunday Nation reports that the vast majority of ordinary Kenyans, belonging to one of the world’s poorest nations, are opposed to proposed legislation (most of them totally opposed) which would promote and allow easy access to abortion on demand, with virtually no safeguards to protect unborn children. The Sunday Nation story says:

“Fifty six per cent of Kenyans totally oppose such a law, with a majority of them living in rural areas, according to research by the Steadman Group conducted last month.

“However, it is not that the remaining 44 per cent support abortion. Of these, 30 per cent sit on the fence, saying abortion should be legalised only if the life of the mother is in danger.”

And, unfortunately for this international professional army of pro-abortion lobbyists, there are good men in Kenya prepared to speak the truth – like Cardinal Njue, who called on Kenyan Catholics to "Stand firm against this evil of abortion" in a powerfully worded message; and Dr Stephen Karanja, the head of the Kenyan Catholic Doctors Association, who said about the result of the US election: “They have no business electing a person who is going to destroy our countries. And that is what they have done. This is something that a lot of people don’t realise, that what these Americans do affects innocent people thousands and thousands of miles away.”

If you want to do something practical to oppose Obama’s appalling decision, one of his first actions as US President, to abort the world’s poor: take the time to write now to President Mwai Kibaki, the Kenyan President, and to Vice-President Stephene Kalonzo Musyoka of Kenya, calling on them to resist US and other financial and political pressures, and, in particular, to oppose the Reproductive Health Bill drafted for Kenya by the pro-abortion lobby. Take time, if you can, to read here a clear analysis of this eugenic and coercive bill. You can write to them by post at: Office of the President, P.O. Box 30510, Nairobi, Kenya and Office of the Vice President; Jogoo House Wing A, Taifa Road, PO Box 30478, NAIROBI, Kenya, 00100 (As far as I can see, email addresses for the Kenyan President and vice-President are not publicly available, unless someone can enlighten me at johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk

Mexico's experience proves once more: strong religious leadership defeats abortion

There's excellent news from Mexico. Not only has the Mexican state of Colima rejected an initiative by Mexican socialists to legalize abortion by an overwhelming majority (19 votes to 1!), the Catholic Church has been given the credit for this pro-life victory.

Reportedly, Adolfo Nunez Gonzales of the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD), who introduced the measure, has attributed his defeat to the influence of the Catholic Church, saying:

"It's not a secret for anyone that the Catholic Church is a sector with a lot of power and weight, and that, of course, what is said in a church one Sunday or whatever day the mass is done, influences the people to analyze it all week".

Excellent! That's exactly what Pope John Paul II called for, in 1995, in Evangelium Vitae when he wrote: "What is urgently called for is a general mobilitzation of consciences and a united ethical effort to activate a great campaign in support of life ... " (EV, 95)

Four years earlier, on 19 May 1991, Pope John Paul wrote a personal letter to "each of my brother bishops" saying: "All of us, as pastors of the Lord's flock, have a grave responsibility to promote respect for human life in our dioceses. In addition to making public declarations at every opportunity, we must exercise particular vigilance with regard to the teaching being given in our seminaries and in Catholic schools and universities."

Equally excellent are the outspoken comments of Archbishop Raymond Burke, called to Rome recently to head the Church's top canonical court, who has observed that the US bishops' statement Faithful Citizenship had contributed to Obama's victory in the recent US presidential election. LifeSite news reports as follows:

"Archbishop Burke, citing an article by a priest and ethics expert of St. Louis archdiocese, Msgr. Kevin McMahon, who analysed how the bishops’ document actually contributed to the election of Obama, called its proposal 'a kind of false thinking, that says, there’s the evil of taking an innocent and defenceless human life but there are other evils and they’re worthy of equal consideration.

“But they’re not. The economic situation, or opposition to the war in Iraq, or whatever it may be, those things don’t rise to the same level as something that is always and everywhere evil, namely the killing of innocent and defenceless human life.”

What's happened in Mexico shows that with strong religious leadership, from all faiths and none, throughout the world - the pro-life movement not only can prevail, the pro-life movement will prevail. We've seen this also in Northern Ireland - where politicians of different faiths who are totally unafraid of declaring their religious faith - have resisted pro-abortion efforts to impose Britain's Abortion Act on Northern Ireland for over four decades.

Let's continue to hear it for the unborn from bold bishops and from other religious leaders. Abortion is the top political issue of today. 4,000 babies are killed in Britain every week. If it were 4,000 policemen, teachers, Catholics, Muslims, being killed each week - who would doubt that this was the top political issue on which to judge politicians? If a difference is being made for the unborn, then they're not being treated as fully human.

It breaks my heart. I still find it shocking that we live in a country which allows us to murder our children: Fr Guy de Gaynesford

The parish priest of St. Mary's and St. Petroc's, Bodmin, Fr Guy De Gaynesford, delivered a moving homily in support of the White Flower Appeal for the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children. Listen to it here.

Latin American reaction to Obama's funding of overseas abortions

Mr Barack Obama's presidency began ignominiously with an order to allow US funding for abortion overseas. The Archbishop of Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, said the move, which would cost lives, contrasted with the decision to leave Iraq. Cardinal Nicolás de Jesús López Rodríguez said the president was mistaken and the measure would further bring down America's morality. Senator Liliana Negre de Alonso, vice president of the Argentinian senate, said using taxpayers' money for abortion eroded the principal human right – the right to life. Congresswoman Martha Lorena de Casco of Honduras said the move threatened her country's legislation. Mrs Christine Vollmer of the Latin American Alliance for the Family said: "Instead of a positive message of wanting to work to better conditions for every Latin American, President Obama has announced his willingness to fund the enemies of the people of Latin America whose laws generally are very respectful of the right to life before birth." Yes to Life of El Salvador said Mr Obama shouldn't press their nation to imitate America's "tragic, anti-life experience".

Fearless Bishop O’Donoghue makes plea to fellow bishops on catechetics

In a forthright talk at Oxford University this evening, Bishop Patrick O’Donoghue has fearlessly explained how many Catholics in Britain have rejected “much that is essential to Catholic faith and practice, relentlessly criticising the Church’s past, placing their own judgement above the authority of the Church, these ‘Catholics’ advocate, and import into the Church, what the secular world holds up as ‘good’ as being in keeping with the ‘tolerance’ and ‘compassion’ of Jesus – divorce, contraception, abortion, IVF, homosexual acts/unions, embryonic stem cell research.”

Bishop O’Donoghue was speaking at the Newman Society, Oxford University's oldest student Catholic society, on Why I wrote Fit for Mission: Church, the bishop's document, published last year, which has won a number of plaudits from the Vatican. (Cardinal John Henry Newman pictured above)

Bishop O'Donoghue's talk provided a frank analysis of how secularism is influencing the Catholic Church, continuing a theme he developed in last weekend’s Catholic Herald. He spoke about “obstacles” put in the way of “the authentic implementation” of the Second Vatican Council by Catholics “particularly in positions of leadership in schools, seminaries, parishes, and dioceses”.

“ … Looking around at the pathetic situation of catechetics in this country”, Bishop O’Donoghue said, “and the extent of ignorance and apostasy among generations of Catholics since the Council, we have to ask ourselves, ‘Why has Pope John’s vision for the Council not been realised in this country?’…”

In a plea to his brother bishops, he asked: “Why are some Catholic education authorities, even bishops in this country, so fearful of Fit for Mission Schools?” – an earlier document in which he called on parents, schools and colleges to reject anti-life sex education.

“After all”, the bishop said, “it only re-iterates the teaching of the Church and it is has been widely and publicly welcomed by the Vatican and many bishops, clergy and laity around the world?”

Bishop O’Donoghue continued:

“In Fit for Mission? Schools and Fit for Mission? Church I have sought to identify the obstacles that have blocked the true vision and grace of the Council. Let me briefly list what has got in the way and continues to do so …

“… Catholics in this country have interpreted the Council as signalling a wholesale rejection of aspects of the Church’s identity, out of a desire to be open to modernity … A wide-spread caricature of the Council’s Decree on Religious Freedom has resulted in many Catholics holding that if – in conscience – they disagree with any teaching of the Church then they have the freedom – even the duty – to reject that teaching.

“For many, the authority of the autonomous conscience has overthrown the authority of Christ given to Peter and the Apostles. Catholics have forgotten that a conscience ill-informed about the divine law and natural law has a predisposition to make errors of judgement, due to being easily swayed by passion and self-interest, and weakened by habitual sin. As a consequence for some Catholics the objective authority of the Church’s doctrine, morality and discipline has been replaced by a subjective, personal judgement of the so called ‘pick and mix’ generation of Catholics … ”

Doctors, nurses and pharmacists must resist anti-life laws, says Turin archbishop

Cardinal Severino Poletto (pictured), the archbishop of Turin, is reported to be urging Italian doctors to resort to conscientious objection if they are ordered to let Eluana Englaro—known as the Terri Schiavo of Italy—die of starvation.

Cardinal Poletto's statement immediately follows strong comments from the Vatican condemning US President Obama's arrogance over abortion. Obama's promise to sign the Freedom of Choice Act which seeks to compel medical professionals to provide abortions, with no opt-outs for conscientious objection, reflects political trends elsewhere in the world. This includes Britain - on euthanasia by neglect - and in Europe, where unelected international bodies are seeking to advance a new doctrine of human rights, including the right to abortion, as human rights expert Jakob Cornides has pointed out.

Cardinal Poletto's intervention and leadership in the case of Eluana Englaro are exactly what's needed in the world today. He says: “No human law can go against conscience, obliging it to commit acts that are against our own convictions ... This is valid for a doctor who is being asked to practice an abortion, as well as for the one who is forced to remove Eluana’s feeding tube, or for the pharmacist who refuses to sell a certain pill”.

SPUC has been reporting on this story since July last year. Eluana was injured in a vehicle accident in 1992 since when she has been in a semi-coma "showing some signs of extremely limited consciousness", according to Monsignor Barreiro, director of the Rome office of Human Life International. He added: "However, we are not fighting for Eluana's life because she has limited signs of consciousness but because of her dignity as a human being".

Cardinal Poletto's comments reflect the constant teaching of the Catholic Church, re-stated on 1st August 2007 by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in "Responses to Certain Questions of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Concerning Artificial Nutrition and Hydration".

The CDF document, which is in question and answer form, begins:

"First question: Is the administration of food and water (whether by natural or artificial means) to a patient in a “vegetative state” morally obligatory except when they cannot be assimilated by the patient’s body or cannot be administered to the patient without causing significant physical discomfort?

"Response: Yes. The administration of food and water even by artificial means is, in principle, an ordinary and proportionate means of preserving life. It is therefore obligatory to the extent to which, and for as long as, it is shown to accomplish its proper finality, which is the hydration and nourishment of the patient. In this way suffering and death by starvation and dehydration are prevented ... "

In a most helpful commentary on their responses to the US bishops, the CDF shows how the Church's position on "the nutrition and hydration of patients in the condition commonly called a 'vegetative state'" has been its consistent teaching on this matter, making a careful distinction between this medical situation and the "use and interruption of techniques of resuscitation". The Commentary states:

" ... The Address of Pope Pius XII to a Congress on Anesthesiology, given on November 24, 1957, is often invoked in favor of the possibility of abandoning the nutrition and hydration of such patients. In this address, the Pope restated two general ethical principles. On the one hand, natural reason and Christian morality teach that, in the case of a grave illness, the patient and those caring for him or her have the right and the duty to provide the care necessary to preserve health and life. On the other hand, this duty in general includes only the use of those means which, considering all the circumstances, are ordinary, that is to say, which do not impose an extraordinary burden on the patient or on others. A more severe obligation would be too burdensome for the majority of persons and would make it too difficult to attain more important goods. Life, health and all temporal activities are subordinate to spiritual ends. Naturally, one is not forbidden to do more than is strictly obligatory to preserve life and health, on condition that one does not neglect more important duties.

"One should note, first of all, that the answers given by Pius XII referred to the use and interruption of techniques of resuscitation. However, the case in question has nothing to do with such techniques. Patients in a “vegetative state” breathe spontaneously, digest food naturally, carry on other metabolic functions, and are in a stable situation. But they are not able to feed themselves. If they are not provided artificially with food and liquids, they will die, and the cause of their death will be neither an illness nor the “vegetative state” itself, but solely starvation and dehydration. At the same time, the artificial administration of water and food generally does not impose a heavy burden either on the patient or on his or her relatives. It does not involve excessive expense; it is within the capacity of an average health-care system, does not of itself require hospitalization, and is proportionate to accomplishing its purpose, which is to keep the patient from dying of starvation and dehydration. It is not, nor is it meant to be, a treatment that cures the patient, but is rather ordinary care aimed at the preservation of life.

"What may become a notable burden is when the “vegetative state” of a family member is prolonged over time. It is a burden like that of caring for a quadriplegic, someone with serious mental illness, with advanced Alzheimer’s disease, and so on. Such persons need continuous assistance for months or even for years. But the principle formulated by Pius XII cannot, for obvious reasons, be interpreted as meaning that in such cases those patients, whose ordinary care imposes a real burden on their families, may licitly be left to take care of themselves and thus abandoned to die. This is not the sense in which Pius XII spoke of extraordinary means ... "

Vatican condemnation of Obama's "arrogance" is well-judged

It's the morning after the night before as the world wakes up to the terrible reality of Barack Obama's presidency of the US.

In a well-judged response, the Vatican has been swift to pronounce a severe judgement on one of Obama's first presidential decisions: to sign an order to "aggressively promote" abortion as a tool of population control in developing countries - as I explained in my blog "The party's over ... " last week.

The BBC reports that: "Senior Vatican official Monsignor Rino Fisichella (pictured), President of the Pontifical Academy for Life, urged Mr Obama to listen to all voices in America without 'the arrogance of those who, being in power, believe they can decide of life and death' ... If this is one of President Obama's first acts, I have to say, in all due respect, that we're heading quickly toward disappointment".

His predecessor, Monsignor Eli Sgreccia, put it even more strongly, likening Obama's policy to that of King Herod and his slaughter of the innocents.

These strength of the Vatican's response to Barack Obama's action is well-judged, in view of the gravity of the situation. In addition, the new President has promised to sign the Freedom of Choice Act which seeks to compel medical professionals to provide abortions, with no opt-outs for conscientious objection. Such presidential action will only serve to strengthen moves elsewhere in the world - the Philippines, Kenya, the European Institutions, and Britain - where attacks on conscientious objection are either proposed (as in the Philippines and in Kenya); are government policy or enshrined in legislation (as in Britain) or are being powerfully promoted (as in the European institutions).

As I've mentioned before, peaceful resistance is the way forward for the pro-life movement worldwide - as well as continuing our existing educational, political, and compassionate caring work. SPUC's campaign of peaceful resistance is focused on resisting euthanasia at the bedside and the Society's Safe at School campaign. Please contact me at johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk for further details.

In addition, later this week SPUC is launching its campaign to make the right to life a top priority issue at the next general election. Abortion, euthanasia, IVF and embryo research cannot be dismissed as a "single issue" of no more significance than any other social justice issue. As Bishop Sgreccia says: we're fighting against the "slaughter of the innocents" and it's time for the campaign strategy of the pro-life movement, which includes our supporters in the faith communities, fully to reflect that reality.

Stem cell scientist prays that Obama has "crisis of conscience" on federally-funded execution of human embryos

SPUC's news summary service (for which you can sign up here) reported Friday's news that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the US has approved a test of the treatment of spinal injuries in around 10 people with paraplegia using human embryo cells.

The company concerned, the Geron Corporation, wants to do a similar test with diabetics. President Obama is expected to lift President Bush's ban on federal funding for research on new human embryo lines.

James L. Sherley, M.D., Ph.D.(pictured), a leading stem cell scientist, senior scientist at Boston Biomedical Research Institute, who has travelled the world pointing out the inefficacy of embryonic stem cell research to his scientific colleagues, has written to me with the following comment:

“Executives of the Geron Corporation in the U.S. must be quite pleased with the news media tizzy inspired by their Obama-timed announcement of a first clinical trial with human embryonic stem cells. Such clamour excites, builds anticipation, and favors optimism over realism, even when the caveats are well known to the approving U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and reporters.

“In fact, the price of Geron's stock has been climing consistently during the month of December, had a sudden pick up in rate during this week, and surged today on the heels of news reports of the approval of their clinical trial. The problem with some Americans is that they will often abandon even our most fundamental principles, if they see an opportunity for personal gain.

“In the case of Geron's approval, reporters are clumsily obscuring the important principle that is being dismissed by Geron and the FDA. Reporters are mechanically penning reassurances from Geron that they are working appropriately with the FDA to evaluate whether Geron's cells will injure patients. Geron's approved phase I trial will evaluate whether spinal injury patients, who volunteer for the trial, experience undue harm after injection of human embryonic stem cells.

“Of course, the whole trial is a complete ruse, since a greater harm already occurred with the deaths caused by making the embryonic stem cells. President Obama's delay in keeping his promise that he would immediately order federally-funded execution of nascent human beings for research could mean that he now experiences a crisis of conscience. I certainly pray that he will.

“After all, how can one lead on a promise of unity and respect for the American principle of the inalienable right to life, but at the same time promote the death of people just because they are younger? Geron's trial may be legal because of a current exception in U.S. law that permits elective killing of persons who are younger than the stage of birth, but it is certainly not right in any sense of the word.”

You may like to join Dr Sherley in prayer by joining the daily prayer campaign for Barack Obama, and Tony and Cherie Blair, that they will have a change of heart - and that they will use their influence in the world to save lives and become powerful ambassadors in the world for the unborn and for the value and inviolability of human life.

Second Vatican Council tells couples to obey Catholic teaching on birth control says Bishop O’Donoghue

After President Obama’s attack on human life worldwide yesterday, it’s wonderful to wake up to the powerful leadership and prophetic voice of Bishop Patrick O’Donoghue, writing in the Catholic Herald this weekend.

Describing the body of documents produced by the Second Vatican Council of the Catholic Church as “a Magna Carta of the Holy Spirit for the modern Church” Bishop O’Donoghue says:

“ … there is the danger that those involved in the historical search for the Council will create a picture of the ‘Council’ that reflects their own likes and dislikes. If Catholics really knew the documents of the Council there would not be so much confusion about what they actually say:

“1) Catholics could not continue to live lives focused on their own prosperity if they truly knew that Gaudium et Spes 69 teaches, among other things, that we must “feed the man dying of hunger, because if you have not fed him, you have killed him”.

“2) Catholics could not say that Paul VI’s prophetic encyclical, Humanae Vitae, went against Vatican II if they knew that Gaudium et Spes 51 teaches that couples “may not undertake methods of birth control which are found blameworthy by the teaching authority of the Church in its unfolding of the divine law ... ”

Recently, the Vatican has strongly endorsed Bishop O’Donoghue’s outspoken defence of Humanae Vitae. In his “Fit For Mission? Church, Being Catholic Today”, he spoke about the mistaken reasoning of those who say the Catholic Church should drop its opposition to contraception.

When I wrote about this document last August I explained why, to my mind, it’s quite clear* that countless human lives have been destroyed as a result of the rejection of Humanae Vitae and its teaching on the wrongfulness of the separation of the unitive significance and procreative significance of the conjugal act, not least through birth control and IVF practices, including amongst Catholics (*albeit on the question of the separation of the unitive significance and the procreative significance of the marital act SPUC itself has no policy. The Society is made up of people of all faiths and none and SPUC’s remit is solely concerned with defending the right to life from conception till natural death.)

The party's over: Obama signs order to abort the world's poor

President Obama, America's abortion President, has wasted little time in using his powers to kill the unborn and, in my view, pro-life people worldwide are facing an historic challenge which can be summed up in two words: peaceful resistance.

This afternoon he signed an order "that will put hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars into the hands of organizations that aggressively promote abortion as a population-control tool in the developing world" according to the US National Right to Life Committee (NRLC).

NRLC explains: "Obama's order overturns the 'Mexico City Policy', under which funds in the US 'population assistance' programme go only to overseas organizations that pledge not to 'perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning'.

My picture, above, shows children in Kenya where Dr Stephen Karanja, the head of the Kenyan Catholic Doctors Association, said about the result of the US election: “They have no business electing a person who is going to destroy our countries. And that is what they have done. This is something that a lot of people don’t realise, that what these Americans do affects innocent people thousands and thousands of miles away.”

Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the NRLC, explains, "One effect of Obama's order will be to divert many millions of dollars away from groups that do not promote abortion, and into the hands of those organizations that are the most aggressive in promoting abortion in developing countries. President Obama not long ago told the American people that he would support policies to reduce abortions, but today he is effectively guaranteeing more abortions by funding groups that promote abortion as a method of population control.”

NRLC goes on to explain that contrary to some misunderstandings, enforcement of the Mexico City Policy did not reduce the amount of money spent on the programme, nor will Obama's order increase the amount (which is $461 million in the current fiscal year). Rather, the policy affects what type of groups qualify for grants under the programme. Obama's order will result in a redirection of funds to groups such as the International Planned Parenthood Federation, which are ideologically committed to the doctrine that abortion on demand must be universally available as a birth control method."

Douglas Johnson of NRLC warns: "This is the first in an anticipated series of attacks on longstanding pro-life policies, as the new administration pushes Obama's sweeping abortion agenda. That agenda includes repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which would result in tax-funded abortion as a birth control method in the U.S., and imposition of sweeping pro-abortion mandates on private employers through health-care reform legislation."

The Obama phenomenon will affect political decision-making worldwide. All our lives will be affected. Pro-life people must organize and encourage powerful, peaceful resistance at every level in society. The right to life must be made the top priority issue at general elections in every country by all right-minded citizens. The great US election party is over. The first killings have been ordered by America's new abortion President - and we've all got a lot of work to get on with.

Irish bill to protect human embryos fails to achieve its objective

The Stem-Cell Research (Protection of Human Embryos) Bill 2008, debated in the Dáil (the Irish Parliament) last November, may now have run its course and may progress no further.

Nevertheless, this well-intentioned bill, introduced by Senator Rónán Mullen, deserves the careful analysis (provided by Southern Cross Bioethics Institute) to which Pat Buckley draws attention today. It's important that legislative measures, seeking to uphold the sanctity of human life, can withstand ethical scrutiny and don't, on reflection, make the situation they seek to resolve worse.

In the words of the analysis which deserves to be read in full, published on Pat Buckley's blog:

" ... How is it possible that a Bill containing in its title the “Protection of Human Embryos” fails to do so?

"The Bill achieves this by bracketing out artificial reproductive technology (ART) from the definition of “embryo-destructive research”. That is, the Bill excludes from the definition of “embryo-destructive research”: (i) in vitro fertilisation and accompanying embryo transfer to a woman’s body, or (ii) any diagnostic procedure carried out for the benefit of the human embryo which is subject to such test.

"Therefore, this Bill provides explicit approval for ART.In every context in which ART takes place, and specifically in vitro fertilisation (IVF), embryo transfer (ET) and related diagnostic testing, human embryos are placed at extreme risk with by far the majority being either discarded, subjected to procedures and processes involving their destruction, or allowed to succumb when unwanted ... "

BBC licence fees used to fund anti-life propaganda again

Alison Davis, who heads SPUC's disability division, contacted me to tell me about what looks like another very one-sided BBC drama focusing on assisted suicide.

I have frequently commented on BBC bias on life issues. Licence-fees are effectively being used to fund anti-life propaganda, worldwide.

Even before the showing of the feature length drama "A short stay in Switzerland" (BBC1 9pm Sunday 25 January), its leading actress Julie Walters, is quoted as being "set to win awards" for it.

In the drama Ms. Walters plays Anne Turner, a doctor and mother of three adult children who developed Progressive Supranuclear Palsy (PSP), just shortly after her husband died of a similar condition. While he died naturally, Dr. Turner, with the "support" of her children, decided to go to the well-known "Dignitas" centre in Zurich, founded by Dr. Ludwig Minelli in order to die by "assisted suicide." She reportedly wanted to go to the clinic while she was still well enough to travel, because "assisted suicide" is illegal in Britain. She particularly wanted to make a stand in favour of the Mental Capacity bill which would legalise death by dehydration and starvation for some vulnerable patients (now the Mental Capacity Act 2005).

PSP involves degeneration of nerve endings, affecting balance, mobility, vision and inability to swallow. Some people with the condition often become unable to walk, feed themselves or communicate easily with others. However, while these symptoms may well be very distressing, not all those with PSP suffer them all, and hospice treatment whether as an in- or out-patient can help both those with the condition and their familes to live well until they die naturally. Average life expectancy from diagnosis is about seven years.

While Ms Walters maintains that she simply wanted the issues aired, her bias is made clear by her comments. She says "Anne was an intelligent, informed and articulate woman. It was a courageous act."

While every individual's response to a disabling condition will be different, Ms. Walters' dubbing of Dr. Turner's response as "courageous" ignores the wonderfully positive response of the actor, comedian and classical pianist Dudley Moore (pictured) who lived with PSP for eight years, during which he raised $100,000 for research into PSP. He was diagnosed in 1999, and died naturally of pneumonia, a common complication of PSP on 27th March 2002. His truly courageous stance receives no mention in the trailers for this film. It looks set to be the viewer's loss to be given only a one-sided look at what possible responses are available for those who experience disabling conditions and their families.

You may like to watch the programme. If you conclude that it's another example of BBC anti-life propaganda, write to your MP and ask him or her to take up your concerns with Mark Thompson, the BBC director-general.

Is the BBC demonising the pro-life movement?

A British television police drama shows pro-life people kidnapping children. SPUC supporters have expressed concern about BBC1's Hunter (starring Hugh Bonneville, right) currently still showing on the internet. Betty Gibson of SPUC Northern Ireland who watched the programme tells me she was horrified: "These supposed pro-lifers were shown inscribing 'sacred' on one of their captives and also killing a hostage. The BBC wouldn't dare portray other groups in this way."

It's all very puzzling, to say the least. Might it be an attempt to demonise the pro-life movement? Could BBC producers have been emboldened by the inauguration of Mr Barack Obama as a pro-abortion president? Of course, this is just a fictional situation, but pro-life people are the last to threaten children. Indeed, we defend them.

The pro-life movement lobbies for change to the law, it provides research and information on bioethical issues, and it gives practical and emotional help to women facing difficulties in pregnancy. Some of the nicest, kindest people I've met have been pro-life activists.

Then there is the grim irony that one of the extremists in the programme has spina bifida and seems to want revenge for the deaths of people with a similar disability through abortion. (The overwheming majority of unborn babies discovered to have spina bifida in Britain are aborted).

I guess playwrights and producers can do all sorts of things in the name of good drama, but is there another agenda here? We mustn't be distracted by a TV show from our defence of vulnerable human beings, but maybe it's worth remarking on such an eccentric portrayal of pro-life people just when the most pro-abortion president in US history has been inaugurated.

Obama's inauguration offers no hope for women at home or abroad

Here are my comments on some extracts from President Obama's inauguration speech:

"I stand here today ... mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors." [JS: Like the sacrifices of your mother, Mr Obama, who did not seek to have you aborted.]

"America has carried on ... because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding documents." [JS: Such as the Declaration of Independence : "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life..." under which killing children before birth should be unthinkable.]

"The time has come ... to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness. [JS: except for the millions that will be aborted under President Obama's laws and policies.]

"We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost." [JS: not by abusing and killing embryonic children!]

"America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity" [JS: except for millions of unborn children in America and elsewhere, who will be denied any sort of future by President Obama's pro-abortion policies.]

" ... those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents [JS: What else is abortion than slaughtering innocents?]

"To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish..." [JS: But in China, farms are destroyed for violations of the one-child policy, a policy in which President Obama has pledged to be complicit, through re-funding UNFPA and IPPF.]

"It is ... a parent's willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate. [JS: How does promoting abortion encourage this willingness? What about the majority of Chinese women who are willing to have another child, but will be denied one by an Obama-funded population control programme?]

It is chilling to note that the following information appeared on the White House website within minutes of Mr Obama's inauguration:

"Reproductive Choice

Supports a Woman's Right to Choose: President Obama understands that abortion is a divisive issue, and respects those who disagree with him. However, he has been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women's rights under Roe v. Wade a priority in his Adminstration. He opposes any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in that case.

Preventing Unintended Pregnancy: President Obama was an original co-sponsor of legislation to expand access to contraception, health information, and preventive services to help reduce unintended pregnancies. Introduced in January 2007, the Prevention First Act will increase funding for family planning and comprehensive sex education that teaches both abstinence and safe sex methods. The Act will also end insurance discrimination against contraception, improve awareness about emergency contraception, and provide compassionate assistance to rape victims.

"Health Care

Supporting Stem Cell Research: President Obama and Vice President Biden believe that we owe it to the American public to explore the potential of stem cells to treat the millions of people suffering from debilitating and life-threatening diseases. Obama is a co-sponsor of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007, which will allow research of human embryonic stem cells derived from embryos donated (with consent) from in vitro fertilization clinics. These embryos must be deemed in excess and created based solely for the purpose of fertility treatment."

On the right-hand side of my blog I will be recording the life- and family-related actions of Mr Obama as US president. Please use this to keep up-to-date with the challenges that the pro-life movement will face in the coming years.

Joined up thinking about the unborn is needed at University College Dublin

Pat Buckley has spotted an important article on the unborn in the Irish Times.

"Emotional well-being begins before birth ... " writes Marie Murray, a director of psychology and the director of the Student Counselling Services in University College Dublin (UCD).

"Life begins not at birth but before it" she continues. "One piece of evidence for this is the way babies respond to voices, patterns of sounds, melodies and stories that they have heard prenatally when they are provided with those same sound sequences and experiences after birth".

In a good article in the Irish Times, she concludes: "Inevitably, some of the research on womb life has been exploited in educational programmes by those who promote prenatal education for intellectual advancement and advantage over others.

"But that is not the primary purpose of research on interuterine conditions. Rather than exploiting knowledge about life in the womb for competitive gain, this is information to be used to provide the most conducive environment for the development of human potential, happiness, security and love in order to lay down the psychological foundation that will support the child through all the developmental stages that lie ahead ... "

In the light of her obvious concern for the unborn (whose "life begins not at birth but before it ... " as she puts it) I do hope that Marie Murray does something about the deeply misleading information posted on the UCD Student Counselling Services about so-called "contraception".

In the UCD Student Counselling Service webpage on "Contraception Choices" the action of the intrauterine contraceptive device (IUCD) the coil is described as follows: "A small plastic and copper device is put into the womb. It works in several different ways – by stopping sperm from meeting the egg, by delaying the egg getting to the womb or by preventing the egg from settling in the womb." This description uses the word "egg" three times - in the first place to denote the unfertilised ovum and, in the second and third places, to denote a newly-conceived human being.

Children have no chance of developing their "human potential, happiness, security and love" if their very existence is obscured, so that students at UCD, perhaps unwittingly, experience an early, unrecognised abortion by using the IUCD.

A fuller description of the way IUCD works would be that it can: interfere with the ability of sperm to pass through the uterine cavity; or, interfere with fertilisation in the fallopian tube; or cause local inflammation in the uterine lining, inhibiting implantation if conception has occurred and thus can induce an early abortion.

Similarly, with other kinds of "contraceptive" drugs and devices, their abortifacient nature is not mentioned at all - for example, the implant, combined oral contraception, and injectable contraception. Fuller details of how such products work can be found here.

Joined up thinking about the unborn is needed at University College Dublin - and, undoubtedly, elsewhere in the academic world. Students are entitled to the full truth about the unborn, about when human life begins, and about the abortifacient nature of so-called contraceptive drugs and devices.

Signs of growth in youth support for pro-life movement in Britain

Almost every day I hear about young people initiating significant pro-life events and activities around the UK. There are signs of a growth in youth support for the pro-life movement. Watch this space for further developments - but here are two forthcoming events on which you may wish to spread the word.

Lucy McCully (pictured above to the right of Cathy McBean, manager of British Victims of Abortion) has written to me to say:

"Due to the phenomenal success of our first international conference, SPUC Scotland will be hosting the 2nd International Student Pro-Life Conference in 2009. This conference is an excellent opportunity for those aged between 17 and 35 years to network and socialise with fellow pro-lifers from around the world. This year our theme is ‘I Am Here’ and we will be putting a face to the common pro-abortion arguments by hearing from those behind the ‘hard cases’. Our keynote speaker will be international pro-life speaker, Rebecca Kiessling (below, right), who was conceived after her mother was raped. Rebecca will share her personal story and explain to us why she believes, 'Your value is not based on the circumstances of your conception.'

"Delegates will be given the opportunity to network with established pro-life organisations such as SPUC, Youth Defence (Ireland), Stand True (USA) amongst others. In addition we will also hear from professionals in the fields of International Law, Bioethics and Post Abortion Counselling.

"This weekend will be a unique, inspiring experience filled with educational opportunities, activities, socialising and most importantly lots of fun! If young people would like to attend this conference, please book in advance to avoid disappointment. You can register by contacting me at SPUC Scotland, 75 Bothwell Street, Glasgow, G2 6TS Telephone: 0141 221 2094 or email me: lucy@spucscotland.org"

Next month the Oxford University ProLife Society, the Oxford University Newman Society, and the Catholic Society at the University of Oxford, are joining forces for a Fertility and Faith Conference on Saturday 21st February at 10.00am. The Oxford University Newman Society website states:

"Hosted by the Linacre Centre for Healthcare Ethics in association with the Newman Society, the Catholic Society and the Pro-Life Society at the University Catholic Chaplaincy, Fr Tim Finigan, Anthony McCarthy and Ira Winter will give presentations, and there will be a panel discussion and Q&A session after lunch. If you are interested in finding out about the Church's teaching on fertility, infertility, marriage and love, please do come along. To book your free place, or for further information, please contact Stephen Barrie, Education Officer for the Linacre Centre on 01865 610 212, 020 72667410 or at stephen@linacre.org."

Voting list on European Parliament pro-abortion resolution: Spread the word

Further to my previous blog, check here for how MEPs voted, listed by country, on the pro-abortion resolution (the Catania report) passed on Wednesday by the European Parliament.

If you have pro-life contacts in any EU country, make them aware of this appalling resolution which calls for the recognition of a so-called right to abortion (despite the fact that not one international treaty or human rights court recognises any such right). Tell them to check and to spread the word on how their country's MEPs voted.

Please email immediately the MEPs for your region, either to congratulate them or to express your disappointment, on how they voted on the Catania pro-abortion resolution on Wednesday. You can find who the MEPs are for your region and their email addresses by following the links here , specifically by clicking on your region on the coloured map on the left of the page.

The Alliance Defence Fund, an organisation of pro-life lawyers, has published a most useful commentary on the resolution which you can find in full here.

Population explosion myth blamed for conflict in Gaza

Fiorella Nash's Monstrous Regiment of Women highlights an article in the Wall Street Journal earlier this week that suggests (as Fiorella describes it) "the current conflict is the fault of western aid agencies for allowing Palestinians to breed".

I worry that this kind of thinking in the brave new world of Barack Obama, the most pro-abortion president in US history, will be translated into more of the kind of major international policy developments which took place in the US in 1970.

Steven Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute, writes:

"As the populations of developing countries began to grow after World War II, alarm bells sounded in the heads of many in the national security establishment ... Demographic projections, showing population spiking in the developing world, combined with falling birthrates in Europe, were viewed with foreboding. Hushed discussions in the corridors of power followed.

"When the US birthrate, robust until the early 1960s, headed south [down] a few years later, these discussions quickly took on an increasing urgency. One of the first official expressions of concern was a classified National Security Council Memorandum [NSSM 200] dated 10 August 1970. This memorandum, signed by President Richard Nixon's national security advisor, Henry Kissinger, stated that 'The US should recommend that the UN Fund for Population Activities undertake a study of world population problems and measures required to deal with them, as a top priority item in the Second Development Decade' ... The preoccupation of the US security establishment with population growth - seen as US security and economic interests - stands here revealed. At the same time, NSSM 200 is a blueprint for preserving the global economic, political, and military dominance of the United States. Believing that people mean power, and worried about the demographic decline of the West, these practitioners of realpolitik unapologetically sought to engineer a fertility decline among more prolific peoples. And they were fully prepared to deceive other countries into doing so with spurious arguments".

I recommend that you obtain a copy of Steven Mosher's seminal book Population Control - Real Costs, Illusory Benefits

A favourite Cherie Blair charity promotes abortion in Poland and Mexico

It seems that the letter I wrote last week to Cherie Blair (pictured) was timely. One of her favourite charities, Human Rights Watch, which has a radical pro-abortion agenda, has been busy promoting legal access to abortion in Poland and in Mexico. My letter asks Cherie Blair to drop her support of Human Rights Watch – and all the other leading pro-abortion organizations she backs.

The folly of the Angelicum, a leading Catholic university in Rome, in inviting Cherie Blair to speak on women and human rights, is becoming more obvious as the weeks pass. I do hope and pray that Mrs Blair has a change of heart. Once again, I invite those interested to join me in the prayer campaign for Cherie Blair and her husband, Tony Blair, and for Barack Obama, who is set to become the most pro-abortion president in US history.

Churches and pro-lifers must act following pro-abortion European Parliament vote

It's time for church leaders and pro-life groups throughout Europe to make the right to life the top political priority in their countries. MEPs voted today to approve a resolution calling on the European Union (EU) to promote abortion and same-sex unions throughout the EU. The resolution, authored by Giusto Catania of Italy's Communist Refoundation Party (logo pictured), is built on the Charter of Fundamental Rights, part of the Lisbon treaty, despite the fact that neither the charter nor the Lisbon treaty have been passed into law.

Anthony Ozimic, our political secretary at SPUC, says: "The resolution passed today is soft-law pressure for abortion to be made a right in every EU member-state. The resolution violates national laws on conscientious objection to abortion and on public funding for abortion. The resolution calls for the recognition of a so-called right to abortion - yet not one international treaty or human rights court has recognises any such right. Abortion is the most contentious issue at United Nations conferences and any attempt even to imply a right to abortion creates heated controversy between national delegations.

"Religious leaders and pro-life groups throughout Europe must shake off their complacency about the EU and mobilise religious believers for pro-life action. The message everyone must hear is that the right to life is the most important political issue, because the right to life is the indispensable foundation of all other rights. Failure to act will mean that countless millions of unborn children will die because of the EU's promotion of abortion both inside and outside Europe."

It is interesting to note Giusto Catania, the resolution's author, is a communist. Communism was one of the first modern movements to promote abortion. Soon after taking power in Russia, Lenin legalised abortion on demand in 1920.

If you're interested in helping SPUC's new political drive to make the right to life a top political priority, please contact me at johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk

The hypocrisy of anti-life politicians who present themselves as Catholic

The leader of the majority Democrat party in the US House of Representatives has spoken of her continued support for government funding for human embryo research, and says she would support a law to enforce it. Ms Nancy Pelosi (right) claims she is an ardent practising Catholic.

Pope Benedict told the General Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life on 27th February 2006: "God’s love does not differentiate between the newly conceived infant still in his or her mother’s womb and the child or young person, or the adult and the elderly person. God does not distinguish between them because he sees an impression of his own image and likeness (Genesis 1:26) in each one… Therefore, the Magisterium of the Church has constantly proclaimed the sacred and inviolable character of every human life from its conception until its natural end."

How, then, does Ms Pelosi, justify her actions? The same question must be put to certain Catholic politicians listed in the Catholic Directory of England & Wales. The following MPs supported the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act at both second and third reading:

• Andy Burnham
• David Cairns
• Rosie Cooper
• Jim Cunningham
• Hugh Irranca-Davies
• Tommy McAvoy
• Paul Murphy.
  

This act allows the licensing of yet more procedures that will harm or kill embryos created in the laboratory. It extends the ways in which embryos can be artificially created and manipulated, and it makes it easier to change the law to extend objectionable procedures like cloning.

Some British Catholic politicians, and Ms Nancy Pelosi, seem to think they know more about the love of God than Pope Benedict. MPs who hypocritically call themselves Catholic have voted contrary to church teaching. After all, Pope John Paul began his 1995 encyclical on human life with: "The Gospel of life is at the heart of Jesus' message."

Act today to stop anti-life, anti-family EU resolution this Wednesday

This Wednesday the European Parliament will vote on a resolution which seeks to promote abortion and same-sex unions throughout the European Union. The resolution, authored by Giusto Catania, an Italian Communist MEP, calls upon EU member-states to guarantee access to "sexual and reproductive health and rights", a term which is often interpreted to include abortion on demand. The resolution also calls on EU member-states to recognise same-sex unions equally with (heterosexual) marriage. The full report can be read here.

The resolution should be rejected, because it threatens unborn children. The resolution repeats the usual calls by the pro-abortion lobby for more contraception, more sex education and more confidential advisory services. Providing these things, however, does nothing to decrease the numbers of abortions, sexually transmitted infections and teenage pregnancies, and may in fact serve to increase them. (For more information about this, see my blog citing the work of Professor David Paton.)

The resolution should also be rejected because it promotes an unauthentic model of the family, by seeking to impose upon EU member-states the recognition of same-sex unions. Although SPUC is not a religious organisation, we feel that both religious and non-religious pro-lifers can understand and appreciate the following words of the late Pope John Paul II:

"It is an illusion to think that we can build a true culture of human life if we do not help the young to accept and experience sexuality and love and the whole of life according to their true meaning and in their close interconnection ... Only a true love is able to protect life." (Evangelium Vitae, 97)

Please email immediately the MEPs for your region, urging them to vote against the Catania resolution on Wednesday. You can find who the MEPS are for your region and their email addresses by following the links here , specifically by clicking on your region on the coloured map on the left of the page.

Time for a change of mind at Mencap

Mencap, which describes itself as the voice of learning disability, says that Britain's state health service is failing people with mental impairments. They write: "People with a learning disability get unequal healthcare. This is leading to people dying when their lives could have been saved." Now we learn that a hospital in southern England has apologised after Mr Martin Ryan (aged 43, pictured) who had Down's syndrome was left to starve to death.

Mencap is right to be concerned and I hope that the tragic occurrences which its report describes will cause it to reconsider its support for the Mental Capacity Act. This law enshrines lethal discrimination against the disabled and vulnerable. Things can only get better once we have that act repealed or significantly amended. Mencap needs to understand that the Mental Capacity Act is the problem under which food and fluids can be withdrawn with the intention of ending the patient’s life.