SPUC defended successfully medics' rights to conscientious objection in high court

Monday's high court judgment, in which SPUC played a significant part, was not only important for the defence of women and unborn children but also for the defence of doctors and nurses who object in conscience to participation in abortion. I reproduce below a key extract from the judgment on conscientious objection (with some terms explained in square brackets).

BPAS wants to be allowed to give abortion drugs to women to take away and use elsewhere - so they don't have to take them in a clinic. But the law says that abortion "treatment" must be given at a hospital or clinic, so BPAS argued that administering abortion drugs was not part of the abortion treatment - only prescribing the drugs was 'treatment'. That is a radical argument, and SPUC pointed out to the court that if BPAS was right, and the law should be read in that way, then doctors, nurses and midwives who are sometimes asked to administer abortion drugs, especially in later abortions, would lose the right to opt out - because their conscientious objection (protected in the Abortion Act) is a right not to engage in "treatment" authorised in the Act. If administering drugs (whether oral drugs, pessaries, drips, etc) is not 'treatment' then medical staff have no right to object.

In the judgment, Mr Justice Supperstone, rejected the argument put forward by Ms Lieven the barrister for BPAS (the "Claimant") in these terms:

"Ms Lieven does not accept that the Claimant's interpretation of section 1 [treatment] of the Act is inconsistent with section 4 [conscientious objection] of the Act. Ms Gemma White, for the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, intervening, submits that it is, as there will continue to be many situations in which medical professionals, in particular nurses and midwives, are asked to administer abortifacient drugs; if this claim is successful they will not be entitled to the protection of section 4 ... [BPAS' argument] is no answer, in my view, to Ms White's submission that Parliament clearly did not intend that an action which directly causes the termination of pregnancy should be outside the scope of section 4."

SPUC also provided the court with a crucial quotation from Hansard, as cited by the judge:

"It is to be noted that even in 1967 when terminations were normally by a surgical method, during a debate in Parliament on a clause which became section 4 of the Act, Mr Braine MP, the mover of the Amendment said "It is designed to take account of the fact that the termination of a pregnancy is not always and certainly may not in the future, be a surgical operation" (Hansard, 13 July 1967 at 1314). He added, "I am told that probably in the next decade, a safe chemical method of inducing therapeutic abortion may be developed and may be accepted by the medical profession." (at 1315)"

SPUC's research and legal advocacy work is absolutely vital in holding the line against attacks by the anti-life lobby. That is why we need you to donate, join, and/or leave a legacy to cover the considerable costs of that work. By supporting our work you are supporting the unborn, the disabled, the sick and the elderly and medical staff.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Abortion recovery group welcomes high court ruling against bedroom abortion

SPUC's sister organisation ARCH (Abortion Recovery Care and Helpline) has welcomed yesterday's high court ruling against bedroom abortions. Margaret Cuthill, ARCH's national co-ordinator, told the media this morning:

"As a support group working in the area of abortion recovery and post-abortion trauma education for 20 years, we are encouraged by the high court judgment not to alter the provision of the Abortion Act 1967 to allow early medical abortion to occur in women’s homes.

Abortion is not good medicine for women, and does damage the emotional and psychological lives of those in crisis that make this decision. Every woman is impacted by the pregnancy loss, but this procedure adds another mentally-traumatic dimension to the abortion process.

Women in crisis pregnancy are vulnerable and will react from fear and panic, wanting to be un-pregnant. To be offered a bedroom abortion is an emotional get-out clause many in ignorance will choose. It is really an abuse too far and will add to the trauma of guilt and grief they may experience at some future stage in life.

The British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) say it is concerned for the woman whose symptoms may begin on the journey back from the clinic. There is no substance to this concern or reliable studies to back up this statement. I am appalled that BPAS is not concerned for the woman who is in her home, in pain, bleeding and struggling with the choice she has made. Where is the concern then for not only women’s physical safety but their psychological health and well-being?"

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Pro-life doctor exposes bias of RCOG's latest abortion consultation

“The faster they come, the less they are publicised and the shorter the deadlines – meaning that it is less and less possible to make an intelligent response within the specified time frame. Is this some kind of plot to wave through controversial policy quietly whilst appearing take notice of stakeholders’ opinions? That is certainly the impression created.”

This is how Dr. Peter Saunders (pictured) of the Christian Medical Fellowship has described the latest consultation of the RCOG (Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists) which is revising its controversial document ‘The Care of Women Requesting Induced Abortion’, first published in 2000, revised in 2004, and now undergoing its current revision.

The consultation is open to every person and organisation with an interest in this topic. The closing date for submissions is 18 February. Details here. There is more information about the consultation document(s) on the RCOG website.

Dr. Saunders notes the ubiquitous presence of BPAS and Marie Stopes International, in collaboration with their pro-abortion colleagues within the RCOG and its faculty of sexual and reproductive health.

Dr. Saunders also notes the further inadequacy of the review panel by its failure to include any psychiatrist in its composition. Perhaps the recent change of position by The Royal College of Psychiatrists over the issue of abortion and mental illness, which it now recognises, has something to do with it?

Among the draft document’s recommendations, or rather ideological tenets, are the following:

"Women should be informed that induced abortion is not associated with an increase in breast cancer; Women should be informed that there are no proven associations between induced abortion and subsequent ectopic pregnancy, placenta praevia or infertility; Women should be informed that induced abortion is associated with a small increase in risk of subsequent preterm birth, which increases with the number of abortions; Women should be informed that most women who have abortions do not experience adverse psychological sequelae."

These claims are an egregious attempt to dismiss or ignore the significant body of evidence that contradicts each of the points made by the RCOG. Dr. Saunders provides one pertinent example offered by the American Association of Pro Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists on the link between abortion and pre-term birth.

The last word on the RCOG goes to Dr. Saunders:

“Asking this group to comment objectively and honestly about the physical and psychological consequences of abortion for women is like asking Philip Morris or BAT to review the health consequences of smoking or Macdonald’s to outline the adverse effects of fast food consumption. There are simply too many financial and ideological vested interests at stake that threaten a fair assessment.”

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

High court rejection of bedroom abortions is a victory for women

Today's high court judgment on bedroom abortions is a victory for women. SPUC intervened in the case, and evidence we submitted played a prominent part in Mr Justice Supperstone's judgment.

The British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), one of the UK's largest abortion providers and promoters, had asked the court to reinterpret the Abortion Act 1967 to allow women to take misoprostol, used in conjunction with the chemical abortion drug RU486, at home rather than in hospital.

Commenting on the verdict, SPUC's Katherine Hampton, told the media this morning:

“Today's judgment is a victory for women. If BPAS had won this case, it would send out the false signal that there is a ‘safe’ route to abortion. That could lead to more abortions, and more dead babies and more suffering for women. It would also have led to further restrictions on conscientious objection to abortion by doctors and nurses.

"The significance of this case is important internationally too, as chemical abortions are widely promoted in poorer countries, and any move to widen the practice here may adversely affect unborn babies and women around the world.

"We will continue to fight any similar moves to trivialise abortion."

Here is a video of Paul Tully, SPUC's general secretary, interviewed by Sky outside the court:



Also, Anthony Ozimic, SPUC's communications, can be heard here speaking to BBC Radio 5 Live (about 1hr21mins into the programme) and to Premier Christian Radio here.

Some facts about RU486 and misoprostol:
- The woman is directly involved in the abortion by having to take the pills herself.
- The nature of the drug means that the woman must live with her abortion over the course of a number of days. The president of Roussel Uclaf, the original makers of RU486, said “The woman must live with this for a full week. This is an appalling psychological ordeal”. (Edouard Sakiz, chairman, Roussel-Uclaf, August 1990)
- The woman may abort at home and suffer the distress of seeing the expelled embryo/foetus, which she is required to keep and return to the hospital or clinic to help determine if the abortion is complete. If BPAS's challenge had been successful, women taking misoprostol would go into labour at home. This can be very distressing as labour, usually associated with child-birth, now becomes associated with the delivery of a dead child.
- Use of RU486/misoprostol may cause any of the following: haemmorrhage requiring blood transfusion, severe pain requiring strong pain killers, incomplete abortion, rupture of the uterus, vaginal bleeding, abdominal cramping, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, headache, muscle weakness, dizziness, flushing, chills, backache, difficulty in breathing, chest pain, palpitations, rise in temperature and fall in blood pressure. The number and diverse nature of the side effects of RU486/misoprostol point to the fact that these are powerful chemicals.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Catholic Church in South Korea offers powerful defence of human life

The Catholic Church's witness to the sanctity of all human life is the most powerful force in the world for protecting vulnerable human beings. In this connection, I draw great encouragement from the courageous leadership currently being displayed by the Church's leaders in South Korea.

Rebecca Millette, of LifeSiteNews.com, recently reported:

In an effort to promote a culture of life, the South Korean Catholic Bishops’ Conference (CBCK) has announced it will provide shelters and financial support for single mothers and free delivery for unmarried pregnant women in Catholic-run hospitals.

The initiative, called “New Life Project,” was inaugurated by the CBCK on February 7 at a Mass presided over by Bishop Gabriel Chang Bong-hun of Cheongju (pictured), president of the CBCK Committee for Bioethics.

“The Catholic Church teaches that human life begins from fertilization,” said Bishop Gabriel Chang Bong-hun of Cheongju. “Abortions and destruction of human embryos are grave crimes that destroy life.”

As Bishop Gabriel Chang Bong-hun suggests, this sort of action taken by bishops to defend life is the response demanded by the Catholic Church's teaching:

Where life is involved, the service of charity must be profoundly consistent. It cannot tolerate bias and discrimination, for human life is sacred and inviolable at every stage and in every situation; it is an indivisible good. We need then to "show care" for all life and for the life of everyone. Indeed, at an even deeper level, we need to go to the very roots of life and love.

It is this deep love for every man and woman which has given rise down the centuries to an outstanding history of charity, a history which has brought into being in the Church and society many forms of service to life which evoke admiration from all unbiased observers. Every Christian community, with a renewed sense of responsibility, must continue to write this history through various kinds of pastoral and social activity. To this end, appropriate and effective programmes of support for new life must be implemented, with special closeness to mothers who, even without the help of the father, are not afraid to bring their child into the world and to raise it. Similar care must be shown for the life of the marginalized or suffering, especially in its final phases. (Evangelium Vitae, 87)

I look forward to the day when the Catholic bishops of England and Wales will respond to the ongoing crisis in this country, which results in the unspeakable tragedy of hundreds of human lives lost each day. Unfortunately, for this day to arrive we will need to witness a huge transformation in the current policy of the Catholic bishops of England and Wales.

Our bishops are failing to speak out on life issues and to reach out to some of the most vulnerable people in our society - women under pressure to have an abortion - in the way that the bishops of South Korea are doing. Not only this, but our bishops are actually co-operating with anti-life forces.  They do this by making abortion accessible to Catholics and non-Catholics through CEDAR, an initiative of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales, and Connexions, a government agency which is committed to giving schoolchildren, under the age of 16, access to abortion and abortifacients without parental knowledge or permission. Connexions is a body welcomed into Catholic schools by the Catholic Education Service, working on behalf of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales.

I am praying for the day when England and Wales will have Catholic bishops that seek to defend their flock and our nation in the way the bishops of South Korea are doing.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

High court to issue ruling in bedroom abortions case on Monday

The High Court will hand down its judgment in the “bedroom abortions” case on Monday 14 February at 10am.

Mr Justice Supperstone will hand down his judgment, in the case of BPAS vs Secretary of State for Health, in court 12, St Dunstan's House, 133-137 Fetter Lane, London, EC4A 1HD, at 10am. We understand that the text of the judgment will be available to the public shortly afterwards. BPAS sought to be allowed to issue drugs for inducing an abortion for women to use at home. SPUC was an intervenor in the case, and will be available for comment on Monday. Paul Tully, SPUC's general secretary, will be at the court, and his mobile number is (0)7939 178719. SPUC's communications department is available on (0)7939 177683 and (020) 7820 3129.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

No time for Bryant sex ed bill in Commons today

Chris Bryant MP's bill to force schools to teach sex and relationships education (SRE) was not given parliamentary time today for a second reading in the House of Commons. The bill has been re-listed for Commons business in April. SPUC thanks its supporters for lobbying their MPs.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Explicit lessons in school are priming your children for sex, SPUC warns Worksop parents at public meeting

Dozens of worried parents attended a meeting in Worksop yesterday evening.

Antonia Tully of SPUC's Safe at School campaign gave a presentation on the widely-used sex education programme “Living and Growing”, published by Channel Four.

Mrs Tully showed horrified parents extracts from the DVDs in the programme, including an animation of sexual intercourse in two positions; a graphic child birth scene; and a section telling boys of 10-11 years old that masturbation is something everyone does and that it “does you no harm”.

Parents also saw clips which promote homosexuality, with footage of same-sex couples kissing.

Antonia explained to parents how this resource for primary schools effectively primes children for teenage sex.

Trevor Bean, Group Manager for the Education Improvement Service at Nottingham City Council, was present throughout the meeting and said that he would not want his children to see such material.

The Worksop Guardian, a local newspaper, was there and published a report.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Suffering does not alter the value of each life

Janet Thomas of No Less Human, a group within SPUC which represents disabled people, has kindly sent me her review of a recent article from the mother of a disabled child:

"Who can judge the quality of a life?

This is the title of an article published in the current issue of The New Oxford Review, a publication written from a religious perspective so it is not surprising that the author, Angela Manuel Camel, an American mother from Louisiana, answers this question from a faith deeply rooted in the love and goodness of God who knows what is best for those He has created.

If this were all that we were able to find in this article, it would still be worth reading for many who share Angela’s particular belief as well as all those who have some kind of religious faith. Angela reminds us that a life free of pain is not our automatic right, that for those of faith there is value in suffering and that it is not our right to judge the worth of any life, even those of our own disabled babies and that the attitude of those parents with faith should be one of gratitude for being given the chance to love and care for a vulnerable child.

However, even those who have no faith can find much to ponder in this thoughtful article; Angela reminds us that “the quality of life argument”, that would judge a disabled life as worthless because of the suffering, is flawed in that the judgement is not made from the point of view of the disabled child for whom this is the only life she has known and moreover, ignores the fact that the pain she suffers is always accompanied by the ‘encompassing love’ of her family. Angela reminds us all of how important love is in countering suffering. We have a duty to relieve suffering, it is true, but it is in our response to those whose suffering is severe that we show the real depth of our love and compassion. True compassion lies in remembering that suffering does not alter the infinite human value of each life; to advance suffering as a reason for killing disabled unborn babies is a sham love which sees a disabled or suffering life which may be very short as of less worth than a ‘perfect’ one; to judge the lives of suffering people as of little value is to turn our backs on the greatest learning adventure life has to offer. It is only by opening our hearts to suffering, our own and that of others especially our children, that we can enlarge them to accept and appreciate the infinite value, dignity and worth of every human being.

Angela ends with these moving words, “He (God) blessed me and my husband with a child who is as close to perfect as a child could be. Many would remark in confusion, “Perfect? She cannot walk, or talk, or eat on her own, etc.” My response is that she can love and has received love beyond measure. How much more perfect could she be?”"

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

We must work hard to rebut the UN's anti-population ideology

The United Nations Population Division (UNPD), which analyses world demography (and which is separate from the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), which was established to promote population control) is lamenting the fact that the world's population is growing. Hania Zlotnik, UNPD's director, said:

"[H]igh-fertility countries may not reduce their fertility fast enough and countries with intermediate fertility levels may see them stagnate above replacement level. Even countries with intermediate fertility need to reduce it to replacement level or below if they wish to avert continuous population increases to unsustainable levels."

Yet the idea that even high-range estimates of world population growth are "unsustainable" is simply false - as the UNPD itself said in 2001:

"Even though population increased more rapidly during the twentieth century than ever before, economic output grew even faster, owing to the accelerating tempo of technological progress…[W]hile world population increased close to 4 times, world real gross domestic product increased 20 to 40 times, allowing the world to not only sustain a four-fold population increase, but also to do so at vastly higher standards of living ... Over the period 1961-1998, world per capita food available for direct human consumption increased by 24 per cent, and there is enough being produced for everyone on the planet to be adequately nourished ... During recent decades new reserves have been discovered, producing the seeming paradox that even though consumption of many minerals has risen, so has the estimated amount of the resource as yet untapped." (World Population Monitoring, UNPD, 2001)

So we can see that the latest UNPD report represents a victory of ideology over facts. Pro-lifers must therefore work hard to rebut the UN's anti-population ideology. We must use the resources of:

• the Population Research Institute (PRI)
• Dr Nicholas Eberstadt
• the late Dr Jacqueline Kasun
• the late Professor Julian Simon
• Andy Pollard, who will be speaking at the Fourth International Youth Pro-Life Conference, organised by SPUC in Scotland, 18-20 March.

Here is a list of some posts from this blog about population which you may find useful:

• 2011: 18 Jan
• 2009: 15 Jan, 30 May, 1 June, 28 Aug, 20 Nov, 29 Dec

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Contact your MP today re this Friday's sex ed bill

Chris Bryant’s private member’s bill to make sex and relationships education (SRE) compulsory in all schools is due for second reading this Friday, 11 February.

There is growing concern among parents about the practice of SRE – especially in primary schools - and the evidence of the damage is mounting. Research has shown the ineffectiveness of the typical UK approach to SRE, even when delivered to a very high standard by specially-trained presenters.

SPUC has produced a detailed briefing on the Bryant bill

Although the bill is unlikely to make further progress due to procedural reasons, if you know that your member of parliament (MP) is sympathetic to pro-life concerns, please contact him or her and ask them to be available to speak and vote against the bill. You can contact your MP via the SPUC website at http://www.spuc.org.uk/mps

Please remember to forward any replies you receive from MPs to SPUC HQ political@spuc.org.uk

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Please support pro-life vigil in Maidstone on 16 February

"A great prayer for life is urgently needed … prayer and fasting are the first and most effective weapons against the forces of evil." Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae.

The Helpers of God's Precious Infants is an international pro-life group founded by Monsignor Philip Reilly under the direction of Bishop Thomas Daily of New York. Its main work is prayer vigils at abortion facilities. To date, 5 cardinals and over 100 bishops worldwide participate, including Bishop Thomas McMahon of Brentwood, Bishop John Hine of Southwark and Bishop Arthur Roche of Leeds. The spirituality is one of solidarity with Jesus in the person of the forgotten poor: “Whatever you do for the least of these my brethren, you do for me.” (Matt.25:40).

The Helpers will be holding a vigil, with full police co-operation, on Wednesday 16 February at the Marie Stopes abortion facility, Brewer Street, Maidstone, Kent ME14 1RV. The proceedings will start at 10.00am with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass at St Francis’ Church, Week Street, ME14 1RH celebrated by Father Neil Vincent.
10.30am: prayerful and peaceful procession to Marie Stopes abortion facility, processing with image of Our Lady of Guadalupe, Holy Rosary.
12.00pm: return procession for blessing and refreshments in the parish centre.

Directions: Connex South East runs a direct line from Victoria to Maidstone East Station, which is directly opposite St. Francis Church.
By road: The M20 – come off at Junction 6. Follow signs to town centre then to Maidstone East station. There is a car park at the station and also two car parks in Brewer Street and one in Wheeler Street, both of which are accessed by Lower Boxley Well road. The shaded areas on the map are pedestrian areas only.

The Helpers ask those unable to join the procession to join them spiritually.

For further information contact:
The Helpers Of God’s Precious Infants, P.O. Box 26601, LONDON, N14 7WH
Telephone: 020 8252 3109 E-mail: info@hgpi.co.uk Web: www.hgpi.co.uk
Local co-ordinator: Carole Smith, mobile 07502 109397

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Archbishop Nichols is failing repeatedly to protect unborn children and Catholic families

Last week Vincent Nichols (pictured, right) archbishop of Westminster, issued a statement in response to parent-led protests about the way Westminister archdiocese is treating the Cardinal Vaughan Memorial School. Firstly, I should say that it is outside SPUC's remit to comment on the key issue in the dispute between the parents and the archdiocese, namely, the school's admissions policy. However, I note with great interest the Vaughan Parents' Action Group (VPAG)'s response to Archbishop Nichols:

"The VPAG notes that, in his 85 word statement, the Archbishop does not even mention the word “parents” ... The Church teaches that parents are “the primary and principal educators” (Gravissimum Educationis, 3) of their children, not the Diocese, and not the Bishop. It is their role to support parents in that task..."

I note that Paul Barber, Westminster archdiocese's director of education who has just been appointed by Archbishop Nichols to the Vaughan governors' board, in March sent a shameful message to clergy whitewashing the Labour government's attempt to force all state-funded schools to teach anti-life/anti-family sex education.

Elsewhere, Archbishop Nichols has been giving lip-service to Catholic teaching on the family. In a recent speech to Caritas Social Action, he cited a statement issued by the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales reflecting on Pope Benedict's visit to Britain:

"Catholic social teaching reminds us that the key to social development lies in placing the good of the human person centre-stage. In that perspective marriage, family life, and the dignity of work are vitally important. The future of society crucially depends on the nature and quality of family life."

Archbishop Nichols also said:

"In the social doctrine of the Church, particularly as expressed in [Pope Benedict's encyclical] Caritas in Veritate, we have a source of practical guidance and profound wisdom relevant to all who desire to recover a stronger sense of a more humane civil society."

Yet, just there as there was no mention of parents in his statement on the Vaughan school, neither was there any mention of unborn children in his speech to Caritas Social Action - even though Pope Benedict spoke clearly of the need to protect unborn children in both Caritas in Veritate (paragraphs 15 and 28) and directly to the bishops themselves during the papal visit.

Time and again Archbishop Nichols (and the bishops' conference of which he is president) not only fails to protect unborn children and Catholic families, but is actively complicit in undermining them. The parents' group at the Vaughan school is but the newest of a growing number of elements in the Catholic Church in England and Wales who rightly demand better of an archbishop of Westminster.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Don't let China's president get away with denial of its forced abortion policy

President Hu with US president Obama

Last month Hu Jintao, the Chinese president, made a state visit to the United States. LifeSiteNews.com reports that during the visit, a congresswoman urged China to end its forced abortion policy. Mr Hu responded by saying that such a policy does not exist. Steven Mosher, president of the pro-life organisation the Population Research Institute (PRI), described Mr Hu's denial as a "bald-faced lie". Also, in a recent PRI briefing, Mr Mosher said that abortion centres which he visited in China last year were very similar to the nightmarish abortion centres run by Dr Kermit Gosnell, the arrest Pennsylvania abortionist.

Mr Hu's denial is easily exploded by even just a few references (see SPUC's 2004 parliamentary submission):

• In 1979 Chinese Vice-Premier Chen Muhua described the one-child policy as: "A policy of encouragement and punishment for maternity, with encouragement as the main feature, will be implemented. Parents having one child will be encouraged, and strict measures will be enforced to control the birth of two or more babies."
• The 1992 Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Women's Rights and the Interests of Women says: "When a wife terminates gestation as required by the family planning programme, her husband may not apply for a divorce within six months after the operation" (article 42)
• the 2001 forced abortion drive in Huaiji county, Guangdong
• the 2002 Law on Population and Birth Planning says: "Citizens . . . are also duty-bound undergo family planning as provided for in the law." (article 17) in order to "uphold a single-child policy for married couples" (article 18)
• the 2009 forced abortion drive in Guangzhou. Reuters quotes Zhang Minan, a law professor at Guangzhou's Sun Yat-sen University and an expert on the issue, saying:"'They (the authorities) do have the right (to force abortions) ... "
• the testimony of the victims: e.g. Mao Hengfeng, Zhang Linla

Both the UK and US governments bankroll China's population control programme tens of millions of pounds worth of annual funding for pro-abortion organisations working closely with the Communist regime: the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and Marie Stopes International (MSI).

Readers should write to the Chinese embassy to call for an end to China's population control programme, citing the evidence of forced abortion as a regular part of the programme:
Ambassador Liu Xiaoming
Embassy of the People's Republic of China
49 Portland Place , London W1B 1JL
political@chinese-embassy.org.uk

High court reserves judgment in 'bedroom abortion' case

The High Court in London today reserved its judgment on a push to allow so-called 'bedroom abortions'. SPUC was represented before the court.

The British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), one of the UK's largest abortion providers and promoters, asked the court to rule that under the Abortion Act women may take drugs designed to cause an abortion at home, rather than in hospital. At present the drugs, which must be prescribed by a doctor, have to be administered in a hospital or a registered clinic.

Mr Justice Supperstone reserved the judgment until a later date.

Paul Tully, SPUC's general secretary, submitted evidence on behalf of SPUC and was at the High Court in London. Commenting after the hearing, he said:

"One of the main concerns with the practice of ‘bedroom abortion’ is about safety. It is well established that drug-induced abortion has a high rate of incomplete abortion and other immediate complications like haemorrhage. These are serious safety concerns.

“Equally worrying to us are the impact the case could have on nurses. We asked the court to note that if BPAS’s wish is granted, it could seriously undermine the right of nurses not to take part in abortions. BPAS argued that administering abortion drugs is not ‘treatment’ for an abortion (so it can be done anywhere). If the court accepted that argument, those nurses who object to abortion could lose the statutory right to refuse to give abortion drugs.

“BPAS argued that taking abortion drugs at home is safe, and should therefore be permitted. However, it displayed a disturbing lack of knowledge about the way abortion drugs work. For example, it asserted that the second drug used in the typical two-stage chemical abortion process, will not cause an abortion when used on its own. This is incorrect. Either of the drugs can cause an abortion. They are used together to try to reduce the number of incomplete abortions and severe side effects.”

Commenting on the case, Katherine Hampton of SPUC added:

“Every abortion destroys a baby and hurts a mother: if BPAS wins this case, women may think there is a ‘safe’ route to abortion. That could lead to more abortions, and more dead babies and more suffering for women. The significance of this case is important internationally too, as chemical abortions are widely promoted in poorer countries, and any move to widen the practice here may adversely affect unborn babies and women around the world."

Some facts about RU486 and misoprostol:

• The woman is directly involved in the abortion by having to take the pills herself.
• The nature of the drug means that the woman must live with her abortion over the course of a number of days. The president of Roussel Uclaf, the original makers of RU486, said “The woman must live with this for a full week. This is an appalling psychological ordeal”. (Edouard Sakiz, chairman, Roussel-Uclaf, August 1990)
• The woman may abort at home and suffer the distress of seeing the expelled embryo/foetus, which she is required to keep and return to the hospital or clinic to help determine if the abortion is complete. If BPAS's challenge is successful, women taking misoprostol would go into labour at home. This can be very distressing as labour, usually associated with child-birth, now becomes associated with the delivery of a dead child.
• Use of RU486/misoprostol may cause any of the following: haemorrhage requiring blood transfusion, severe pain requiring strong pain killers, incomplete abortion, rupture of the uterus, vaginal bleeding, abdominal cramping, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, headache, muscle weakness, dizziness, flushing, chills, backache, difficulty in breathing, chest pain, palpitations, rise in temperature and fall in blood pressure. The number and diverse nature of the side effects of RU486/misoprostol point to the fact that these are powerful chemicals.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Bedroom abortions case to continue tomorrow at High Court in London

The High Court hearing into bedroom abortions, which began last Friday (28 January), will continue tomorrow, Friday 4 February, at 10:30a.m. SPUC is being represented by legal counsel at the hearing. It is expected that oral submissions will be completed in the afternoon, after which the judge will consider his ruling. The High Court challenge has been launched by the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), one of Britain’s main abortion providers. BPAS is seeking to widen the scope for using the drug misoprostol, used in conjunction with another drug, RU486, to cause abortions. BPAS uses the drugs to poison the uterine environment and kill unborn children. Allowing misoprostol to be taken at home will increase the numbers of women delivering their dead child at home.

Paul Tully, SPUC's general secretary, will be at the High Court and available for comment. He can be contacted by mobile on (0)7939 178719. SPUC's communications department can be contacted on (0)7939 177683 or (020) 7820 3129.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Parents to hear about sex ed in primary schools at public meeting

Extracts from a controversial sex education programme will be screened at a public meeting being held in Worksop, Notts., to alert parents to the dangers of explicit sex education.

The programme under scrutiny is “Living and Growing”, produced by Channel 4. Used by Worksop primary schools as a resource to teach sex and relationships education (SRE), “Living and Growing” includes a cartoon of sexual intercourse, showing girls how to locate their clitoris and telling them that it feels nice when you touch it. This material is for children of seven to nine years of age.

Antonia Tully, the organiser of SPUC's Safe at School campaign, will advise parents that primary schools are under no legal obligation to deliver SRE, nor are they compelled to take advice from local authorities in their choice of programme for SRE. Antonia will speak at a public meeting organised by SPUC in Worksop on Wednesday 9 February, 7.30 pm, at The Crossing Church and Centre, Newcastle Street, Worksop.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Watch this stunning pro-life speech by the late US president Ronald Reagan

This Sunday marks the 100th birthday of Ronald Reagan, the late US president, and 20 January was the 30th anniversary of his inauguration as president. Mr Reagan is the only US president to have a written a pro-life book, entitled "Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation". SPUC's colleagues at the Population Research Institute (PRI) in Virginia have described it as "[o]ne of the best books ever written on abortion". Jack Willke, the great American pro-life leader, has told me that as president Mr Reagan did whatever the pro-life movement asked of him.

I am therefore delighted that the Personhood USA campaign has created a video featuring a stunning speech by Mr Reagan. Do watch the video below or on YouTube, and share it with your contacts.



Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Legalising assisted suicide would make the elderly even more exposed to abuse

In the last 48 hours there have been two reports of the shocking level of abuse of vulnerable people in Britain today:

1. Researchers from the University of Manchester's centre for social ethics and policy found that at least 400, and maybe up to 1,200, more people died than would have been expected at Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust, according to investigations in 2009 and 2010. The research highlighted the fact that patients were abandoned without food, drink or medication.
2. The Daily Mail found that between 2005 and 2009 in England and Wales, 667 care home residents died of dehydration and 157 died of malnutrition.

I am sure that an anti-life mentality has contributed to the death-toll. The British government, parliament, courts and medical establishment have all undermined protection for the sick, elderly and disabled through:

• the 1992 Bland judgment
• professional guidance from the British Medical Association (BMA) and the General Medical Council (GMC)
• the Mental Capacity Act 2005
• the Liverpool Care Pathway
• the Director of Public Prosecutions' guidelines on assisted suicide

These changes, combined with the influence of pro-euthanasia advocates in academia and the media, has contributed to a mentality which acquiesces in neglecting certain categories of people to death. With this mentality so prevalent in law, policy and opinion, it would be highly dangerous for parliament to legislate in favour of assisted suicide. Such legislation, however seemingly water-tight any safeguards might appear, will create an even wider scope for abuse to go undetected. Human nature being what it is, abusers will exploit any lowering of protection by testing and breaking the limits of that protection. This generation owes it to its parents and grandparents to hold the line against the culture of death.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

South Africa's Catholic bishops are wrong to laud Nelson Mandela

The South African Catholic Bishops' Conference last week issued a statement of support for Nelson Mandela, the former South African president, following reports that he had been hospitalised. The statement said:

"Former President Mandela means different things to different people. To his family he is a veritable Patriarch who stands for and is an example of the virtues of a truly great and loving Father, who cares for all near and dear to him.

To the Nation, he is a great and inspiring leader, a true icon of the...reconciliation which we still need urgently.

To the international community, he is a unique African and global statesman who rose above personal, tribal, race and party interests in order to lead the South African nation through a difficult transition from apartheid to Demomcracy."

I am disturbed by this glowing tribute to Mr Mandela, in the light of his record on pro-life/pro-family issues (see below). It is absolutely vital that Catholic leaders do not allow themselves to become respecters of persons, swept away by personality cults. Catholic leaders have a duty to stand up to public figures with  anti-life and anti-family records, however praiseworthy their record may be on other issues. The sanctity of human life and the dignity of the family are the foundation and guarantee of all other human rights.

Nelson Mandela and abortion

Mr Mandela has been quoted as saying on abortion: "Women have the right to decide what they want to do with their bodies." In 1996, Mandela signed into law the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Bill, which permits abortion on demand. SPUC's pro-life colleagues in South Africa tells us that the bill was introduced into the South African parliament by Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, Mr Mandela's health minister. In addition, the wording of the new South African constitution, signed by Mr Mandela in 1996, had made the legalisation of abortion on demand a mere formality. Mr Mandela's African National Congress (ANC) has a strong ideological committment to abortion, with the ANC Women's League strongly behind the legalisation of abortion on demand. The ANC has for decades been in a close political and electoral alliance with the South African Communist Party (SACP) (Mr Mandela pictured with SACP leader Joe Slovo) which also has a strong ideological committment to abortion.

Nelson Mandela and homosexuality*

The 1996 Constitution signed by Mr Mandela made South Africa the first country to forbid so-called discrimination on the grounds of "sexual orientation”. Homosexualist activists have honoured Mr Mandela for this provision.

Nelson Mandela and condoms

Mr Mandela is well-known for his activism regarding HIV/AIDS, through which he has many times promoted the use of condoms.

Nelson Mandela and "The Elders"
Mr Mandela is one of "The Elders", a group of retired international public figures dominated by leading international advocates of abortion, homosexuality and population control.


* The late Pope John Paul II, the great pro-life champion, taught (Evangelium Vitae, 1995, para.97) it is an illusion to think that we can build a true culture of human life if we do not offer adolescents and young adults an authentic education in sexuality, and in love, and the whole of life according to their true meaning and in their close interconnection.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

New study shows that artificial birth control doesn't reduce abortions, pregnancies or infections among minors

David Paton, professor of industrial economics at Nottingham University Business School, has co-authored a new study into the free provision of morning-after pills via pharmacies. Dr Paton told today's Telegraph:

“We find that offering the morning-after pill free of charge didn’t have the intended effect of cutting teenage pregnancies but did have the unfortunate side of effect of increasing sexually transmitted infections. By focusing on sexually transmitted infections, it allows us to test whether there is an impact on sexual risk-taking, and that seems to be the implication.”

And as Dr Paton says in the study itself:

"Empirical studies to date suggest that schemes to increase access to [morning-after pills] have failed to result in observable decreases in unwanted pregnancy or abortion rates ... [O]n average, the presence of a pharmacy [morning-after pill] scheme in a local authority is associated with an increase in the rate of STI diagnoses amongst teenagers of about 5%. The equivalent figure for U16s is even larger at 12%."

Time and again we see how the culture of death does young people a grave disservice, telling them that:

• losing their virginity before marriage is inevitable
• sex using artificial birth control is consequence-free; and
• abortion is always there as a back-up.

As a result the UK has stubbornly highest rates of teenage pregnancy, teenage sexually-transmitted infection and teenage abortion.

Dr Paton has provided a reliable basis upon which David Cameron's government can safely throw the Labour government's Teenage Pregnancy Strategy - which emphasised increased morning-after pills access (personally endorsed by Tony Blair*) - into the dustbin of history marked "Failed".

*foreword, Teenage Pregnancy Report, Social Exclusion Unit, 1999.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Surrogacy objectifies women and commodifies children

Melinda Tankard-Reist (pictured), an Australian pro-life bioethicist, has written an excellent article analysing the wrongness of surrogacy. I've posted some choice quotes from Melinda's article below.

From "Gestational carrier is an ugly term" by Melinda Tankard-Reist, The Australian, 19 January:

• "The objectification of women's bodies and commodification of childbirth came together yesterday in a single antiseptic phrase contained in the announcement of a second child for actress Nicole Kidman and her musician husband Keith Urban:

'Our family is truly blessed . . . to have been given the gift of baby Faith Margaret. No words can adequately convey the incredible gratitude that we feel for everyone who was so supportive throughout this process, in particular our gestational carrier.'

• "In those last two words, the woman whose body nurtured this child for nine months is stripped of humanity. The phrase is reminiscent of other terms popular in the global baby-production industry, such as suitcase, baby capsule, oven and incubator. The detached language views women as disposable uteruses. This dismantling of motherhood denies the psychological and physiological bonds at the heart of pregnancy."
• "Of course the birth of any baby is worthy of celebration. But that doesn't mean we should avoid hard questions about the fragmentation of motherhood, about a child who may wonder about their birth mother and why she is not raising them."
• "In the US commodification of a child knows few limits. Journalist Bill Wyndham, pretending to be a single, HIV-positive gay man, was told by a surrogacy company he'd make a perfect dad. He was, however, not allowed to adopt a puppy from the dog pound."
• "The process of pregnancy, labour and delivery followed by summoning extraordinary reserves of strength to surrender that baby, cannot be reduced to the science fiction that the woman who does all this is merely a 'gestational carrier'."

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Bedroom abortions court hearing to go in second day

The High Court hearing into bedroom abortions (see 13 January SPUC release), being held this afternoon, will not conclude today but will continue next Friday (4 February). This is due to delays in the court's schedule today. SPUC is being represented by legal counsel at the hearing.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Pro-life youth should book now for this year's International Youth Pro-Life Conference

The fourth International Youth Pro-Life Conference, organised by SPUC, will be held between Friday 18 and Sunday 20 March this year at the Loch Lomond Youth Hostel, north-west of Glasgow, Scotland. This conference is an excellent opportunity for young people from across the globe to network, socialise, make friends and empower one another to spread the pro-life message. This year's conference will be building on the last 3 years’ conferences that have seen hundreds of young people from all over the world come together to learn about pro-life issues, get ideas of how to actively defend and promote life and meet with fellow pro-lifers.

This year’s conference has the theme No Less Human. The focus will be on the value and need to defend all human life, regardless of the physical or mental characteristics of that life or particular stage of life development.

Speakers will include:

• Fr John Fleming, SPUC's bioethical consultant and world-renowned bioethicist
• Andy Pollard, well-known within the pro-life movement as an energetic and dynamic speaker on population issues
• John Deighan, parliamentary officer for the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Scotland
• Lynn Murray, a pro-life activist and disability rights campaigner
• Anthony Ozimic, SPUC's communications manager

If you are aged between 16-35 years of age and would like to attend this amazing weekend, please visit the conference website http://spucconference.org.uk or contact Joe Lee in the SPUC Scotland office on (0141) 221 2094 or email at joe@spucscotland.org

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Abortion is the euthanasia lobby’s road-map

Monday's Independent newspaper featured an interview with Dr Ann McPherson, who is a spokesman and activist for the Voluntary Euthanasia Society (VES) (now all-too-conveniently repackaged as "Dignity in Dying") and its offshoot, Healthcare Professionals for Assisted Dying - which should more accurately be named "Killing Not Care". The end of the inteview reads:

"McPherson acknowledges that people may be depressed, or feel a burden, or come under pressure from relatives. But these issues are not peculiar to dying – they apply in other areas such as abortion.

Like the Abortion Act, an Assisted Dying Act would be about giving people – in this case the terminally ill – the right to choose. And as with abortion 'you would probably need two doctors to approve it.'"

This is not the first time that the pro-death lobby has argued for assisted suicide using a comparison with the Abortion Act. Debbie Purdy, the disabled woman whose VES-backed court case led to the undermining of protection for the disabled, said:

"Since the 1961 Suicide Act was introduced we have legalised homosexuality and abortion without making them compulsory. We need to look at the law on assisted suicide again and think about how that could be legalised too with proper safeguards in place."

Indeed, Sarah Wootton, the VES's head, used to work for the pro-abortion Family Planning Association (FPA) and was a founding trustee of Abortion Rights.

So it's unsurprising that Dr McPherson doesn't sound particularly bothered about assisted suicides requested under duress. After all, most legal abortions are unwanted or coerced. McPherson's and Wooton's support for assisted suicide is, like their support for abortion, based more on ideology than patient welfare. Should assisted suicide be enshrined in law, the VES will soon be working to undermine the very safeguards they claim to support - just as the pro-abortion organisations which Sarah Wootton used to work for are now lobbying to remove the two-doctors requirement.

So the VES has very helpfully set out their road-map for assisted suicide and euthanasia, based on abortion law. If that road-map is followed, we will thefore see:

• permission in so-called 'hard cases' lead to killing on demand and killing under duress
• so-called safeguards ignored, falsely interpreted and undermined
• medics and others with a conscientious objection persecuted
• taxpayers' money diverted

and many of the other evils attendant upon the practices of the culture of death.

In 1925 a certain Austrian politician set out his own road-map for changing societal norms, including a rejection of the sanctity of life. Many people dismissed the road-map, and labelled the people warning about it as scaremongers. 20 years later over 50 million people lay dead, including millions killed through the author's openness to suicide, euthanasia and abortion. It's high time for a road-block, so I'm greatly relieved by last night's vote by the French Senate to reject assisted suicide and euthanasia.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

French Senate's rejection of assisted suicide and euthanasia is welcome

Overnight the French Senate rejected proposals to legalise assisted suicide and euthanasia, by 170 votes to 142. Francois Fillon, the French prime minister, had spoken out strongly against the proposals.

As I told the media earlier today, I hope that this victory for life will help people in the UK understand the strong opposition elsewhere to assisted suicide and euthanasia. The UK will do irreparable damage to its international reputation if it continues down the path of killing patients. The French vote is a wake-up call to UK politicians to start overturning laws, policies and court judgments which enshrine euthanasia by dehydration and which tolerate assisted suicide. I express our congratulations and admiration for the French pro-life movement in securing this victory for the sick, the disabled and the elderly.

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

We need pro-life bishops who are not respecters of persons

Today Catholics celebrate the Conversion of St Paul. In his Epistle to the Romans, St Paul says (2:11):

"For there is no respect of persons with God"

Respecting persons is rejected in numerous other places in Sacred Scripture. It means that God's law applies equally to all persons, rich or poor, strong or weak, famous or obscure. God is not impressed with flowery words, studied artifice or manufactured sentiments, but with loving obedience to His commandments, not least "Thou shalt not kill".

That's why I am very grateful to Bishop Thomas Tobin of Rhode Island, America, who has punctured the balloon of President Barack Obama's rhetoric. In his local Catholic newspaper, Bishop Tobin wrote about Mr Obama's words in response to the recent shooting in Tucson, Arizona:

"[T]here was something that left me cold, unimpressed and unmoved ... President Obama’s persistent and willful promotion of abortion renders his compassionate gestures and soaring rhetoric completely disingenuous ... As he stood on the stage in Tucson, he was a prophet without credentials; his speech, a song without a soul."

Bishop Tobin's cutting criticism of Mr Obama is in stark contrast to the silence of the Catholic bishops of England and Wales in response to British pro-abortion leaders. For example, none of the bishops are on record as pointing out the hypocrisy of Tony Blair, Gordon Brown or David Cameron. I believe this is because the policy of the Catholic bishops' conference of England and Wales is to respect persons in government and officialdom. This is evidenced by:

• the reception of Tony Blair into the Catholic Church by Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, despite Mr Blair's failure to repudiate (before or since) his anti-life/anti-family political record;
• the co-operation between Archbishop Peter Smith and Lord Falconer, then Lord Chancellor, in the passage of the pro-euthanasia Mental Capacity Act (Lord Falconer has since gone on to be a prominent advocate of assisted suicide)
• the whitewashing by Archbishop Smith of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)'s policy on assisted suicide

Rather, we need more bishops like Thomas Tobin who, like St Thomas More, are "the King's good servant, but God's first".

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Let's pray for Dr Gosnell's conversion to life

The worldwide pro-life movement is reflecting and commenting on the reports regarding Dr Kermit Gosnell, the Philadelphia abortionist accused of running the most bloody and sordid abortion business perhaps ever recorded. Dr Gosnell and his staff are accused, among many other things, of:

• numerous infanticides
• deaths of, and injury to, women patients
• running a filthy clinic
• storing the bodies of babies in refrigerators, including next to orange juice
• keeping a collection of severed baby feet in jars

Anthony Ozimic, SPUC's communications manager, wrote in 2005 a dissertation on the subject of abortion centre staff. Anthony has sent me his reaction to Dr Gosnell's case:

"Firstly, it is important that, in commenting on Dr Gosnell's case, pro-lifers are careful to uphold the principle that a man is innocent until proven guilty, however overwhelming the evidence in this case. Dr Gosnell must receive a fair trial, for the sake of truth, justice and mercy. My comments on his case are dependent upon Dr Gosnell actually being proved guilty in a court of law.

Secondly, Dr Gosnell's alleged crimes constitute but one case among many - though perhaps the worst recorded one - of gross moral degradation among abortionists. The details of Dr Gosnell's alleged degradation are indications that abortion is wrong, as those details mirror very closely the details of other cases of mass killing. For example, Dr Gosnell's alleged collection of baby feet is similar to the eyeballs collected by Josef Mengele at Auschwitz. (It should be noted that after the second world war Mengele was an abortionist and was at one point detained by the authorities following the death of one of his women patients.)

Lastly, many abortionists will, like Mengele, remain morally asleep until death, but there is a growing number of abortion centre staff whose consciences reawaken. The prosecutor in Dr Gosnell's case has been reported as saying that he may ask the courts to impose the death penalty on Dr Gosnell. It is therefore vitally important that religious believers pray for Dr Gosnell, that his current ignominy will became the occasion of his conversion. I will be praying in union with Human Life International's prayer campaign for the conversion of abortionists."

Comments on this blog? Email them to johnsmeaton@spuc.org.uk
Sign up for alerts to new blog-posts and/or for SPUC's other email services
Follow SPUC on Twitter
Join SPUC's Facebook group
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy