Education for Choice fails to debunk pro-life campaign against gay marriage

Education For Choice, a pro-abortion propaganda outfit, has today tried (but failed) to debunk SPUC's campaign against so-called gay marriage, a campaign launched in the context of protecting unborn children. EFC deny that there is any particular link between abortion rates and the marital status of women.

Here's a response from Anthony McCarthy, SPUC's education and publications manager:

"If younger women are more likely to have abortions, that is at least partly because they're less likely to have the protective effect of marriage. This effect is not 'magical' but very practical: lack of male support is cited as a reason by so many women wanting abortions. Men who won’t commit publicly to the mothers of their unborn children are likely to be less supportive towards them when they find themselves unexpectedly pregnant. Our society constantly tells women that conceiving a child does not make you morally responsible for that child - and all too many men sadly take that attitude too.

Yes, older married women do have abortions (though still not as often as unmarried women) - sometimes because of marital problems, or worries about foetal disability. Women in this situation need real, life-affirming support - not the 'quick fix' of abortion which does not heal but destroys. At the same time, we need to protect and strengthen marriage in the interests of children and their natural parents - not dilute and distort marriage in the supposed interests of freewheeling adults. When people get the message that it doesn't matter what they choose - providing only that they choose it - everyone suffers, beginning with the vulnerable offspring marriage exists to serve.

Those interested in comparisons between cohabiters and married couples should look at the paper "Unintended pregnancy in the United States: incidence and disparities" by Finer and Zolna (in the journal Contraception, funded by the very anti-life Guttmacher Institute), which clearly shows a big disparity in abortion between cohabiting couples and married ones (almost twice as likely).

The relation between same-sex marriage and the abolition of conjugal marriage (and the need for conjugal marriage to protect children born and unborn) is clear to anyone able to understand simple logic - readers can examine it here: http://www.spuc.org.uk/documents/papers/ssmbackground20120103

EFC's new relationship with Brook is unsurprising, considering that both EFC and Brook (in common with the rest of the pro-abortion lobby) have signally failed to reduce unintended conceptions and sexually-transmitted infections among the young people they falsely claim to serve."

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

SPUC right to campaign against gay marriage, as Pope says threats to the family "threaten the future of humanity"

Pope Benedict XVI, in an address to the world's ambassadors to the Holy See, said:

"In addition to a clear goal, that of leading young people to a full knowledge of reality and thus of truth, education needs settings. Among these, pride of place goes to the family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman. This is not a simple social convention, but rather the fundamental cell of every society. Consequently, policies which undermine the family threaten human dignity and the future of humanity itself. The family unit is fundamental for the educational process and for the development both of individuals and States; hence there is a need for policies which promote the family and aid social cohesion and dialogue. It is in the family that we become open to the world and to life..."

Within this quotation I wish to emphasise the phrases:

• "the family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman"
• "policies which undermine the family threaten...the future of humanity itself."
• "It is in the family that we become open to...life".

This complements what the late Pope John Paul II, the great pro-life champion, taught in his 1995 encyclical Evangelium Vitae:

• [responsibility for abortion, among others] "lies...with those who should have ensured — but did not — effective family and social policies in support of families"
• "The underlying causes of attacks on life have to be eliminated, especially by ensuring proper support for families and motherhood."
• "Within the 'people of life and the people for life', the family has a decisive responsibility ... the role of the family in building a culture of life is decisive and irreplaceable."
• "Only a true love is able to protect life."

Pope Benedict's teaching is also complemented by Cardinal Burke, who gave it a concrete form when he said in September 2009:

"The respect for the integrity of the conjugal act is essential to the context for the advancement of the culture of life". [my emphasis]

And As Dale O'Leary, an expert on the gay agenda, has written:

“Purposefully conceiving a permanently fatherless or motherless child is an act of violence against the child ... Opposition to ‘gay rights’ is rooted in a deep understanding of the truth about the human person, and cannot therefore be cast aside without undermining the very concept of human rights. The promotion of fake ‘rights’ will necessarily undermine support for real human rights.” [my emphasis]

Marriage is a fundamental good of human beings and a natural institution. While different religions honour marriage and some raise it to a sacrament, they do not thereby deny that it is an institution natural to human beings – a basic human good. People of faith and those of no faith can and do agree on this.

The necessity of the family based on marriage, the wrongness of so-called gay marriage and the close link between pro-life and pro-family issues are not only Catholic/Christian/religious beliefs, accessible only to theists and only of concern to them. These beliefs are immutable truths of the natural moral law, accessible by the light of reason to all and of concern to all. As Pope Benedict said in September 2010:

"Marriage is the lasting union of love between a man and a woman, which is always open to the transmission of human life ... the success of marriages depends upon us all and on the personal culture of each individual citizen. In this sense, the Church cannot approve legislative initiatives that involve a re-evaluation of alternative models of marriage and family life. They contribute to a weakening of the principles of natural law, and thus to the relativisation of all legislation and confusion about values in society." [my emphasis]

To defend the nature of marriage is also to re-emphasise the evil of abortion, by grounding our morality in the idea that human persons are essentially bodily beings, whose flourishing has an objective bodily dimension. Sex, procreation, marriage and human life itself are all cheapened by ignoring or downplaying this basic fact. It is for these reasons that it is necessary to speak out on issues surrounding same-sex marriage and civil unions.

SPUC cannot stand by as marriage, which exists precisely because new life stands in need of parental love and nurture, is radically undermined by political bodies which should instead defend this natural institution.

Gay marriage is a pro-family issue and therefore a pro-life issue, squarely within SPUC's constitution and democratically-decided remit. SPUC, for the sake of the future of humanity and the protection of all children, born and unborn, will continue to campaign against gay marriage - see SPUC's position paper and background paper.

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Tablet editor jettisons the truth about pro-abortion MP Jon Cruddas

Catherine Pepinster, editor of The Tablet (the anti-life and anti-family house-journal of British Catholic dissent), has written a column (second page; requires signing-in) in this week's edition about relations between the Labour party and Christianity. She writes, among other things:

"The suspicion [within the Labour party] of Catholic MPs and their agenda has also not been helped by pro-life groups who were vociferous in criticising the placing of an intern within Jon Cruddas' office because the MP in their eyes had failed to speak out on abortion."

Mrs Pepinster is referring to a move by the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales to reverse a decision to provide Dr Cruddas with an intern, as part of its parliamentary internship scheme. The move followed criticism by myself and other pro-lifers of invitations to Dr Cruddas to speak at two Catholic conferences (National Justice & Peace Network and Blackfriars).
 
Mrs Pepinster takes no account of the truth about Dr Cruddas's record on abortion. Dr Cruddas has not merely "failed to speak out on abortion", and not merely "in [the] eyes" of pro-lifers - Dr Cruddas is on record defending legal abortion, thus:

"[Abortion] should be safe, legal and rare"

and

“I'm perfectly happy with the current situation”. [My comment: i.e. a situation which provides legal sanction for the killing of 550 unborn babies daily.]

Futhermore, since 2000, Dr Cruddas voted 18 times with the anti-life lobby, for example voting in favour of the anti-life Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act at second reading (which denotes approval for the bill's principles) - a law designed to kill millions of innocent human beings deliberately created never to be born. He also voted for the pro-euthanasia Mental Capacity Bill (now Act) at second reading and third reading (which denotes approval of the bill as a whole). Also, Dr Cruddas has expressed his pride in his voting record in support of the homosexual agenda.

Mrs Pepinster's evasion and obscuring of the truth is typical of The Tablet's narrative about life and family issues, which attempts to provide cover for its dissenting ideological allies. Tabula delenda est.

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Soho Mass organiser claims gay unions are already being blessed in Catholic churches

Martin Pendergast is a leading figure behind the Soho Masses organised by and for Catholics who dissent from the Church's teaching on homosexuality (see my blog-post of 25 Aug. 2010 for background information about Mr Pendergast; and my posts of 9 Sep. 2010 and 13 Dec. 2010 about the Soho Masses) * **. I've just been sent a video (below) of Mr Pendergast being interviewed outside one of the Masses, posted on YouTube in November, in which he says (at 3 minutes 55 seconds into the recording):

"A lot of us who are in civil unions have had services of blessings in Catholic churches afterwards, and here at these Masses [at Our Lady of the Assumption and St Gregory Catholic church, Soho] on every third Sunday, if we are asked by people, we pray for people who have entered civil partnerships or whose anniversaries happen at that time."

Mr Pendergast doesn't specify in which Catholic churches these services have been conducted, or give further details about the prayers at the Soho church. If, however, Mr Pendergast's claims are true - and they complement the publicly-available evidence of the general nature of the Soho Masses - what is Vincent Nichols, archbishop of Westminster, going to do about it? Bishops are ultimately responsible for the services and public prayers in Catholic churches and/or led by Catholic clergy of their dioceses. Will Archbishop Nichols finally oppose the homosexual agenda infiltrating the Catholic Church? Or will he once again give succour to that agenda - as Mr Pendergast has praised him for only this week:

"[S]ome good news from within communities of faith: ...a Catholic archbishop can publicly recognise the value of civil partnerships in building up the common good"

*SPUC's national council, which is SPUC's policy-making body, elected by its grassroots volunteers, last month passed the following resolution to defend marriage:

"That the Council of SPUC, noting the various proposals currently being made by the present Government and others in regard to the status and standing of marriage and its consequent effect upon family life; and further noting the higher proportionate incidence of abortion in unmarried women compared to married women, resolves to do its utmost to fight for the retention of the traditional understanding of marriage in the history, culture and law of the United Kingdom, namely the exclusive union of one man with one woman for life; and accordingly instructs its officers and executive committee to conduct a major campaign to this end, to co-operate with other persons and societies in so doing and specifically to target the Government's consultation period starting in March, 2012, in regard to (so-called) same sex marriage."

**Why is homosexuality (and sexual ethics generally) important specifically for the pro-life movement? The late Pope John Paul II, the great pro-life champion, taught in no. 97 of his 1995 encyclical Evangelium Vitae that 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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Today's must-read pro-life news-stories, Thu 5 Jan

Lord Falconer

Top stories:

Assisted suicide report from Falconer's stacked commission is worthless says SPUC
The report by Lord Falconer's self-styled commission on assisted suicide, funded by pro-death activists, amounts to a renewed attack on the legal status of disabled and elderly people. The commission has been widely discredited as stacked with supporters of assisted suicide. Paul Tully of SPUC Pro-Life said: "Lord Falconer's cooking-up of a dodgy dossier via a stacked panel shows the lengths to which the assisted suicide lobby will go. They seek to create a two-tier system: people who deserve a right to life, and those who maybe don't." [SPUC, 4 January]

SPUC launches campaign against gay marriage
SPUC has launched a campaign against the Westminster government's proposals for same-sex marriage. SPUC has published a position paper on same-sex marriage following a resolution by SPUC's Council last month. SPUC has also made available a background paper to be read in conjunction with the position paper and which provides some additional references and reflections. Same-sex marriage represents an attempt to redefine marriage, thus undermining marriage. This undermining lessens the protection for unborn children which true marriage provides. [SPUC, 3 January]

UK abortions to reduce multiple births on the rise
Abortions of twins in the UK have risen since 2006, official statistics show. In 2010, 85 women aborted at least one unborn child while going on give birth to another baby, up from 59 in 2006. [Telegraph, 28 December] Anthony Ozimic of SPUC commented: “There are a number of factors which may be responsible for this rise. There may be pressure from doctors on women to abort babies deemed as ‘surplus’, whether conceived through IVF or naturally following fertility treatment. Doctors may also be influencing women to abort with the reason that disability in a child or complications for the mother are more likely in multiple pregnancies than in single pregnancies. Another reason may be the practice of sex-selective abortion among some ethnic groups. Whatever the causes of the rise, it nonetheless reveals the reality of eugenics in modern British medicine, in which some innocent human beings are deemed too inconvenient to be allowed to live.”

Other stories:

Embryology

• US researchers explore link between stem cells and ageing [Mail, 4 January]
• Stem cell research on donor eggs often not disclosed [Reuters, 3 January]
• Scientists grow sperm in laboratory dish [Telegraph, 2 January]

Euthanasia

• Elderly 'robbed of dignity' by failing social services, say charities [Independent Catholic News, 3 January]
• Catholic archbishop of Cardiff opposes presumed consent for organ donation [Wales Online, 2 January]

Sexual ethics

• Senior UK judge launches pro-marriage campaign [Mail, 4 January]
• European Catholic bishops urge defence of family [CNA, 4 January]
• Boys raised by traditional families 'do better at school' [Telegraph, 3 January]
• US lesbian couple in custody battle following donor child [Mail, 3 January]
• Gay activist praises Westminster archbishop for "recognis[ing] the value of civil partnerships" [Guardian, 3 January]
• Polish MEPs resign from group over its support for gay marriage [Bloggers4UKIP, 3 January]
• UK doctors warn alcohol is fuelling sexual health crisis among teens [Mail, 31 December]

General

• A celebration of motherhood [Pat Buckley, 2 January]

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Assisted suicide report from Falconer's stacked commission is worthless

The report by Lord Falconer's self-styled commission on assisted suicide, funded by pro-death activists and due to be published in full tomorrow, amounts to a renewed attack on the legal status of disabled and elderly people. The report's conclusions were summarised earlier this week by Lord Falconer in the Telegraph newspaper.

The commission has been widely discredited as stacked with supporters of assisted suicide. Over 40 organisations, including the British Medical Association (BMA), refused to give evidence to Lord Falconer's "death-for-the-disabled" group.

Paul Tully, SPUC Pro-Life's general secretary, told the media earlier today:

"Predictably, Lord Falconer's report calls for Parliament to change the law to allow assisted suicide. His group was set up following Parliament's repeated rejections of attempts by Lord Falconer and his ilk to change the law. This is part of a thoroughly nasty strategy to convince the public that many disabled people want to die - and that they are sensible to want to die. Lord Falconer's cooking-up of a dodgy dossier via a stacked panel shows the lengths to which the assisted suicide lobby will go. They seek to create a two-tier system: people who deserve a right to life, and those who maybe don't. In fact, this shabby exercise was bankrolled by Sir Terry Pratchett, a patron of Dignity in Dying, formerly the Voluntary Euthanasia Society.

Disabled people are justifiably frightened when the protection the law gives them against pressure to end their lives is attacked like this. The moves to undermine their right to life are often accentuated by fawning, uncritical media coverage. The assisted suicide lobby represents a mentality of aversion to people who suffer, and it represents celebrities who have more money than sensitivity. We encourage people to show solidarity with disabled people by dismissing out-of-hand Lord Falconer's thinly-disguised propaganda."

SPUC Pro-Life has played a leading role in resisting the assisted suicide movement in the courts.

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

SPUC launches campaign against gay marriage

SPUC has launched a campaign against the Westminster government's proposals for same-sex marriage. We have published today a position paper on same-sex marriage following a resolution by SPUC's Council last month. SPUC has also made available today a background paper to be read in conjunction with the position paper and which provides some additional references and reflections.

We state that:

• Marriage - the permanent, exclusive union of one man and one woman - is the basis of the family, the fundamental group unit of society. Upholding marriage is therefore in everyone’s interests.
• Marriage as an institution protects children, both born and unborn. Statistics show that unborn children are much safer within marriage than outside marriage.
• Same-sex marriage lacks basic elements of true marriage e.g. the complementary sexual difference between spouses necessary for the procreation and healthy upbringing of children.
• Same-sex marriage represents an attempt to redefine marriage, thus undermining marriage. This undermining lessens the protection for unborn children which true marriage provides.

We can't build a true culture of life if we don't defend the truths which connect sexuality to human life. Homosexual unions, whether the existing civil partnerships or the proposed gay marriages, are radically disconnected from those truths. SPUC's Council, elected by SPUC's grassroots volunteers, has therefore resolved to defend human life by defending marriage from the government's proposed redefinition to include homosexual couples.

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

"I begged and danced for the approval of my mother who tried to abort me"

On Wednesday I had the privilege of speaking at a pro-life march in Budapest, the capital of Hungary. Over recent decades, anti-life policies have resulted in the killing by abortion of more than 6 million Hungarians, and thus deeply damaged many millions of families. Pro-lifers in Hungary chose the feast-day of the Holy Innocents to name the children lost and toll bells in their memory.

At least one Hungarian, by the grace of God and by the strong intervention of his father, survived the abortion intended for him. He is my host, Dr Imre Taglasy, the director of Human Life International (Hungary) who took such good care of me when a bone got stuck in my throat on my first day in Budapest. He and I are pictured above in Budapest, after the march.

Here, in his own words, is his deeply moving story:

I begin my story with my family, and especially with my father, who was a major in Hungary till the end of the Second World War. As a professional soldier with his religious conviction (he was born in a Catholic family of eight children) he was declared a class-enemy of the new Communist regime and was sacked at once and removed with his wife and two sons from Budapest to the Great Hungarian Plain (puszta). They were ordered not to leave their dwelling place. He could hardly find the most basic job ... he and his family were starving.

In this sad plight my father's wife realized she was pregnant. My father tried to protect me, but my mother did not want to carry me to term. But it was not so simple to get rid of an unborn baby in the early '50s ... so she asked my grandfather staying in the capital to get a doctor who would be willing to perform the abortion. He found such a doctor in Budapest but class enemies were not allowed to leave the plain (puszta), so while my father was absent she tried to cause an abortion by jumping down from a kitchen table; when that failed she took very hot baths in a tub but they were not successful either. Then she got a lot of quinine pills from her brother. She took them but they were not sufficient to cause a miscarriage so I was born.

I heard the story of my birth accidentally when I was 11 years old and when my father and I were staying in Yugoslavia with relatives. It was late at night and I had gone to bed in the room in which my father and my relatives were talking.

At that time my parents had already divorced and one of my relatives asked my father why. Thinking I was asleep, my father told him the story.

As I lay there in bed, neither a small child nor an adult, I cried, speechlessly, all night long into my pillow. I experienced an emotional earthquake. I felt good myself and I did not know why my mother had tried to kill me at all.

I am still looking for the answer which is perhaps blowing with the wind, since she died some years ago.

There are two different expressions in our Hungarian language concerning "mother". One of them ("edesanya") is connected with "sweetness" meaning that the sweetness of a loving mother has a connection to the milk you get from her bosom. The other word ("anya") simply means that somebody has a mother but this term is very formal and has no special content of sentiment so one uses this term in every official form requiring the name of your parent. In fact my mother tried to kill me, terrorised by the economical pressure of the regime and when it was not successful she didn't give me suck, so I was neither able to enjoy her milk nor her love.

Later when I was two years old I was found by a very nice young lady who lifted me up to her heart from under the kitchen table. She bought me new clothes, shoes, brought me to the opera-house for performances (since she was a ballet-dancer) and to the photographer since she was proud of "her" nice godson ... my relatives told me that I had usually called her with this word: "mother" (edesanya).

My biological mother could not love me although I was begging or dancing for her approval and acceptance. I studied well, become a well-known writer by publishing several books, carried out scientific research and won academic honours but everything seemed to be in vain since I was not able to win her love. In my twenties I published a book of poems and one of these works reflects on my life story using the ancient Greek myth of Penelope. In this poem you can analyse the confused bonding of an abortion-survivor with his parent or with the abuser of her child.

PENELOPE, MY MOTHER

you sit on the stigma of silence

with averted eyes

you would draw my face

onto your withered lap

spin it over weave it through

with sea-blue veins

with scarlet reed

spin me over weave me through

with snake

with strand of hair

unravel me by night

give birth to me by day

only kill me by night

you would piece together my bones

a stripped-down image

for the walls of your palace

bind my skin and gut

as strings onto your harp

is it an axe that I am

propped up in a corner

is it a prince

sewn inside a frog's skin

(Translated by Eva Kovacs-Hicks, Toronto)

It took 50 years of pain and sorrow to overcome the situation of a deeply damaged (unborn) child and that of a post-abortive mother ... I always tried to love my mother ... meanwhile I realized that I hated those foods (cheese, beer, etc) which she liked whilst, on the contrary, I liked the kind of women who have black hair and eyes, slight face which reminded me of my god-mother. So many times I asked myself: where is my mother, how can I love her?

Before her death the Lord gave me the answer by His merciful forgiveness. After so many years of struggling, begging and dancing for her love I finally was able to reconcile with her before her death. It happened by not accepting but rather understanding some of the elements of the kind of "internal" terrorism which pushed and pressured her to kill me. And finally I am going to die too and I badly need this forgiveness of the Lord for my own sins as well.

There is a picture in my bedroom above my bed. This photo was taken by the sculpture of the Pieta carved by Michelangelo in the middle of 16th century. The picture illustrates the Blessed Virgin who is a Patron Saint of Hungary and now she is perhaps my mother and hope and trust as well.

Against the civilisation of death I am now working for the culture of life full time. From the special grace offered me by Almighty God, the Creator, I have a large family ... The smiles of my children and wife are my strongest weapon in doing my duty to protect life! Thanks to the Lord!

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Please attend SPUC's conference on women's rights

Each year an estimated 350,000 mothers die from pregnancy related causes. This is a tragedy that must come to an end. The 2015 deadline for achieving millennium development goal 5 (maternal health) is fast approaching, yet mothers are still dying. What is happening, and how can you and I help bring it to an end?

Join us on 20th March 2012 for an international day conference in London that will address the UK's policy on maternal health and mortality in the developing world. The scandal of the UK exporting abortion around the world will be challenged at a day conference entitled "Abortion or Maternal Health: What should we be funding in developing countries?" This will take place on Tuesday 20 March 2012, at the Regent Hall, 275 Oxford Street, London W1C 2DJ, from 9.30am to 5pm.

Please encourage your friends and contacts, especially medics, students, clergy, lawyers, developing world charity promoters, teachers and advocates of women's rights to attend the conference.

The coalition government continues to promote abortion intensively in poorer countries of the world – on the false pretext of reducing maternal deaths. We cannot ignore how our country is working to export the culture of death around the world.

A detailed briefing and presentation are available to prepare participants for the conference and future educational and lobbying efforts. The briefing includes suggestions for straightforward action to challenge the government.

Internationally renowned experts speaking on the day include lawyer Roger Kiska of the Alliance Defence Fund, consultant obstetrician Dr. Obielumani Ideh from Nigeria, and maternal health campaigner Fiorella Nash. 

Our headline speaker is Professor Robert Walley. Dr. Walley is the founder and executive director of MaterCare International (MCI), and Fellow of the Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists of England. He has visited Africa regularly since 1981, and for seven years he directed a maternal health project in Nigeria. MCI has worked in Ghana, Kenya, Haiti, East Timor, Rwanda, and Sierra Leone.

Entrance to this important conference can be purchased online via our website shop or by filling in and returning a booking form. Tickets cost £55 or £35. Lunch can be added for £10.

Official flyer for the conference

Downloadable booking form

You can also use the conference's Facebook page to invite others to attend.

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

A bone stuck in my throat in Budapest leads me to witness a sign of hope

Yesterday I arrived in Budapest to particiapte in and to speak at the "Peace in the Womb" march for the abolition of legalised genocide in Hungary, which takes place today.

I spent much of my time yesterday at St John's hospital in Budapest (pictured) where, with great kindness and professionalism, the medical staff succeeded in removing a duck bone stuck in my throat.

Dr Imre Téglásy, my host in Hungary, was also very kind. Imre, an abortion survivor and the father of ten children, is president of Alpha Alliance, Human Life International, Hungary. He is organising today's march, which finishes at the palace of the Hungarian state president. In spite of the great pressures on Imre on the eve of such a big event, he stayed with me throughout my mercifully short but painful ordeal, joking "a prophet cannot ignore someone in need of help because he's so busy prohesying".

So my adventure in Hungary has begun with an impressive experience of the kindness of Hungarians - a kindness also in evidence at the old people's retirement home where I am staying and where the residents are clearly being treated by the staff with great love and respect. That kindness is a sign of hope for Hungary and for Europe. That kindness is the legacy of a largely Catholic culture which clearly still survives in spite of the numerous disastrous historical events, which have afflicted Hungary in the twentieth century and into the twenty-first century...including the killing by abortion of (at least) six million unborn children since abortion was legalised here in June 1956.

As long as the milk of human kindness continues to flow there's  hope that abortion can be defeated and a civilisation of life and love established.

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Pro-life movement continues to flourish in Belarus

At the start of 2011 LifeSiteNews.com described the Open Hearts Foundation, an education focused pro-life group in Belarus, as a ray of hope in Eastern Europe. Hilary White reported:

In 1994, four years after Belarus declared independence from the Soviet Union, the abortion rate in the country had reached an unimaginable high of 65.8 percent of all pregnancies. Since then it has fallen steadily to 28.2 per cent in 2008, according to figures issued by the Ministry of Statistics and Analysis and the Ministry of Health.

Some of this success may be attributable to a growing pro-life movement, which is doing everything it can to make sure that those numbers continue to drop. According to the pro-life education group, The Open Hearts Foundation, the Belarus pro-life movement had a very busy year last year.

Their recent newsletter indicates that pro-life work is continuing to flourish in Belarus. Their recent newsletter reports plans to open crisis several crisis pregnancy centres, pro-life motor-rallies (pictured) in three cities (Vitebsk, Mogilev and Brest), participation at the World Demographical Summit in Moscow (at which SPUC were represented by Dr Tom Ward) and the hosting of pro-life seminars for families.

The editorial of the newsletter concludes by saying:

our mission on this earth is to create the civilization of love and life round us

We at SPUC wish the Open Hearts Foundation and all their pro-life colleagues in Belarus every success in doing just that.

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Abortion survivor produces award winning documentary in defence of life

I was very pleased to read on Patrick Buckley's blog that Melissa Ohden has released a new hour long documentary, called  A Voice for Life. Melissa's mother underwent a saline abortion when she was six months pregnant with Melissa. Here is a brief description of a saline abortion, taken from SPUC's 2002 document A Way of Life

The use of prostaglandins is the most common form of late abortion in Britain. Prostaglandins are hormone-like substances which are administered to the pregnant woman either by a drip into a vein or directly into the womb. After a period of between 12 and 24 hours, prostaglandins cause the womb to contract, causing the baby to be delivered prematurely. In order to prevent the baby from being born alive, abortionists may inject urea or saline into the amniotic sac or potassium chloride into the baby.

Melissa, like Gianna Jessen who survived the same procedure, is now a powerful defender of the unborn. You can watch a summary of her story in the youtube video below.

It seems that Melissa's new documentary is set to be a great tool for the pro-life movement to help defend the lives of unborn children and their mothers. Patrick says

A Voice for Life continues to garner awards on an international level, including the Transforming Stories International Film Festival in South Africa, and the Redemptive Film Festival in Virginia Beach, where it received the highest honor. More importantly, to the creative team of A Voice for Life, Steve Feazel, Gunther Meisse, and Melissa Ohden, the pro-life film is making an impact in the world, touching hearts changing minds, and bringing hope and healing to individuals who have been devastated by abortion.
...
In addition to the 58 minute documentary, a short, 9 minute film, featuring Melissa as narrator, has also been released for pregnancy centers and other organizations that minister to abortion vulnerable women to utilize as a resource in their life-saving, life-transforming work. Melissa's powerful message to women in this video as both a survivor and a mother, herself, is beyond description. To view the trailer of the short resource video, visit www.avoiceforlife.com/trailer.html.

Any readers in the UK suffering after an abortion should contact ARCH (Abortion Recovery Care and Helpline) runs a helpline: 0845 603 8501 and which can be telephoned from within the UK (calls charged at local rates). There is also an ARCH website.

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Catholic Voices rush to defend episcopal obfuscation on homosexual unions

In recent days and weeks "Catholic Voices" have been rushing to defend comments by Vincent Nichols, Catholic archbishop of Westminster, on homosexual unions.* ** Yesterday the Catholic Voices blog claimed that:

"Archbishop Nichols's position on civil partnerships is consistent with church teaching"

and:

"As the law continues to treat homosexual behaviour as a private phenomenon, it is entirely consistent with church teaching for Archbishop Nichols to support the civil partnership scheme as an existing and legitimate mechanism to help give stability to committed couples of the same sex, while strenously resisting any attempt by the state to redefine marriage."

Part of Catholic Voices's defence of Archbishop Nichols' position is that the civil partnership legislation:

"does not undermine the unique position of marriage in British law as it does not presuppose that a civil partnership is a homosexual relationship."

Yet as Jacqueline Humphreys, an Anglican barrister, has said:

"[T]here can be no ambiguity that [UK civil partnerships] are intended to be sexual ... [T]he fact that some people do not engage in genital sexual activity within their marriage does not prevent marriage from being the legal regulation of an essentially sexual relationship. The same applies to civil partnerships ... [C]ivil partnerships are in all important respects the same as marriage in terms of practical legal effect. Civil partnerships also share the overwhelming majority of the conceptual understandings of marriage that exist within English law".

In fact, Ms Humphreys, who supports homosexual unions, argues that UK civil partnerships can't undermine marriage - because (she argues) they are marriages! (However, I can't emphasise strongly enough how important it is to campaign against the government's proposals for same-sex marriage, as such explicit and total legal equality with true, i.e. heterosexual, marriage would further enshrine homosexual unions in UK law as well as undermine marriage by redefining it.)

Ms Humphreys has explained in detail how the Civil Partnerships Act has numerous aspects which mirror UK marriage law. There are so many of these aspects, so I won't list them all here, but here are some of the main ones [my emphases in bold]:

• "Like marriage, a civil partnership ends only on death, dissolution or annulment"
• "[C]ivil partners are to be treated by law in the same way as married couples in respect to property disputes" etc.
• "Civil partnerships are also designed to be monogamous ...  This mutual exclusivity of marriage and civil partnership has the effect of putting civil partnerships firmly in a position equivalent to marriage."
• "[T]he range of persons within prohibited degrees of relationship with whom it is not possible to enter a civil partnership...is the equivalent to that for marriage ... If civil partnerships are not assumed to be sexual, there can be no reason to restrict close family members from entering them. But because they are presumed to be sexual, it would not be appropriate for the law to legitimise 'incestuous' relationships."
• "[T]he term 'in-law' where it appears in legislation also includes relationship by reason of civil partnership in addition to relationship by marriage and that `step-parent' and 'step­child' relationships are also recognised for civil partners as they would be for spouses."
• "A civil partnership is voidable on the ground that at the time of its formation the respondent was pregnant by some person other than the applicant."
• "[M]any of the details of the 2004 Act anticipate that children will be a feature of the family life of some civil partnerships"
• [T]he Act recognises same-sex marriages in other countries as civil partnerships.

Ms Humphreys explains that it is for technical legal reasons that adultery is absent as a ground for dissolution, and not because civil partnerships are not intended to be sexual. She concludes that the only significant difference between UK civil partnerships and UK marriages is the obvious - the former are same-sex only, the latter opposite-sex only.

Even Archbishop Nichols's spokesman admitted [my emphasis in bold] that:

"the archbishop acknowledged the existence of 'civil partnership' between persons of the same sex that already offer the same legal framework of marriage". 

So it is absurd for Catholic Voices to claim that the Civil Partnerships Act 2004:

"denies homosexual unions a parliamentary imprimatur and does not enshrine them as institutions within the legal structure of the United Kingdom."

Catholic Voices did state correctly that:

"Civil partnerships...come into effect through the signing of a civil partnership document rather than via publicly-made promises in a civil ceremony, as...with marriage."

Yet everyone knows that civil partnerships are in practice celebrated like civil marriages:

• conducted at registry offices, witnessed and registered by the same government officials who witness and register marriages
• celebrated with much of the traditional panoply of weddings (rings, kisses, formal attire, receptions etc)
• referred to in common parlance as "weddings" and the partners referred to as "husbands" or "wives".

Here are Elton John and David Furnish in wedding attire as they celebrate their civil partnership at Windsor Guildhall, famous for the civil marriage of HRH the Prince of Wales, on the first day that the civil partnership legislation came into effect:

Also on the first day of civil partnership legislation, here are two lesbians in (modern) wedding attire at their civil partnership ceremony at Brighton Town Hall:

And again on the same day, two homosexual actors proudly display their exchange of rings - the most traditional, public and permanent of material symbols of marital fidelity - at their civil partnership ceremony at Islington Town Hall:

Catholic Voices' scramble to defend Archbishop Nichols is the latest evidence confirming that Catholic Voices has been established to defend the Catholic bishops of England & Wales against accusations of dissent from Catholic pro-life/pro-family teaching. For example:

• its selection criteria explicitly bars anyone who is "angry or upset with...the bishops of England and Wales"
• it not only "has the blessing of the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales", but it is "accountable to the bishops"
• it perpetuated the myth that the Soho Masses for homosexuals, established and protected by the bishops, are perfectly proper within the context of Catholic teaching and discipline, when in fact there is solid and mounting evidence that the Masses are organised by and for homosexuals who explicitly dissent from the Church's teaching
• it opposed parents trying to protect the Catholic (i.e. pro-life, pro-family) ethos of their schools from bullying by bishops and their dissenting bureaucrats (book, p.150-151).

What we need are real voices of Catholics as distinct from the highly-compromised establishment mouthpieces called "Catholic Voices".

*SPUC's national council, which is SPUC's policy-making body, elected by its grassroots volunteers, last month passed the following resolution to defend marriage:

"That the Council of SPUC, noting the various proposals currently being made by the present Government and others in regard to the status and standing of marriage and its consequent effect upon family life; and further noting the higher proportionate incidence of abortion in unmarried women compared to married women, resolves to do its utmost to fight for the retention of the traditional understanding of marriage in the history, culture and law of the United Kingdom, namely the exclusive union of one man with one woman for life; and accordingly instructs its officers and executive committee to conduct a major campaign to this end, to co-operate with other persons and societies in so doing and specifically to target the Government's consultation period starting in March, 2012, in regard to (so-called) same sex marriage."

**Why is marriage (and sexual ethics generally) important specifically for the pro-life movement? The late Pope John Paul II, the great pro-life champion, taught in no. 97 of his 1995 encyclical Evangelium Vitae that 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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

This Christmas, help free Chen Guangcheng, persecuted opponent of China's one-child policy

As we in the UK start our Christmas celebrations, we are safe in the knowledge that our family lives will not be interrupted by arbitrary imprisonment or torture. We can (at least for now) speak out freely against pressure upon women to end the lives of their children through abortion. Chen Guangcheng has no such safety or freedom. Since speaking out against forced abortions and sterilisations in Linyi in 2005, the Chinese Communist authorities have subjected him to years of imprisonment, torture, neglect and harrassment. He is currently under house arrest. Christian Bale, the Hollywood actor, tried recently to visit him but was roughed up by officials instead.

Chen, who is blind, has become a icon for freedom, instantly recognisable in his dark glasses. Chen's supporters have started a Dark Glasses campaign to pressure the Communist government to release him. Anyone can join this campaign - simply take a photo of yourself wearing dark glasses, with a message of support for Chen, and email it to Women's Rights Without Frontiers - full details are available on their website. Here is the photo I'll be sending:

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Today's must-read pro-life news-stories, Tue 20 Dec

Garik Hayrapetyan, UNFPA Armenia

Top stories:

Selective abortion of girls increases in Armenia, says UN Population Fund
The Armenian representative of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) has warned of a rise in unborn girls being aborted in Armenia. Garik Hayrapetyan (pictured) told a news conference that: "In ten to 20 years, we will face a deficit of women -- that means, of potential mothers". [AFP via Yahoo!, 19 December] Anthony Ozimic of SPUC  commented: "UNFPA's words of concern about sex-selective abortion are empty, considering that UNFPA has for decades been complicit in China's forced abortion programme, which is largely responsible for China's massive gender imbalance."

Other stories:

Embryology

• IVF industry booming in Ireland [Irish Independent, 19 December]
• British Heart Foundation funds destructive embryo research [John Smeaton, 19 December]

Sexual ethics

• Mother conceives 6 times in 5 years despite contraception [Mail, 20 December]
• Sociologist slams UK deputy PM's dismissal of marriage [Mail, 19 December]
• Group sex is latest trend for teen girls, suggests US report [Mail, 19 December]
• A book to help parents fulfil their role as the primary educators of their children in sexual matters [John Smeaton, 19 December]

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

British Heart Foundation funds destructive embryo research

SPUC has re-launched its information on charities as an online index, with new entries and updated information added as and when new information is received. Today's charity is the British Heart Foundation (BHF).

In a letter SPUC dated 22 October 2010, Betty McBride, BHF's director of policy and communications, said that the BHF:

• currently funds more than £12 million of stem cell research using both embryonic and adult stem cells. SPUC comment: Human embryos are human beings from the moment of their conception (fertilisation or an analogous form of creation such as cloning). Removing stem cells from them abuses and usually kills them.
• does not have a policy on pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) but added that the more "...we learn about the genetic causes of cardiovascular disease, it may become possible for PGD to be used."
• does not fund research into prenatal diagnosis of disability or provide advice on where such tests can be obtained
• funds training for ultrasonographers who undertake foetal scans in early pregnancy to identify congenital heart disease. SPUC comment: One possible purpose of discovering heart disease in the unborn is to enable parents to choose to abort their affected child.

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

A book to help parents fulfil their role as the primary educators of their children in sexual matters

Edmund Adamus, the director of pastoral affairs in the Catholic archdiocese of Westminster, has written an inspiring article on sex education which has just been published in L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper. Edmund's article promotes a new book entitled "As I Have Loved You" by Dr Gerard O'Shea of the John Paul II Institute for Marriage and Family in Melbourne, Australia. The book provides a programme and materials which help parents fulfil their role as the primary educators of their children in sexual matters. It would be wrong, however, to think that the book pits parents against schools: in fact, the work was produced after a long period of "careful consultation with teachers, parents and experts in the field". Edmund writes:

"Conscientious Catholic teachers and educators [all too often unduly burdened with the increasingly aggressive civil demands for explicit sex education, even at primary age-levels] know just how the more intimate aspects of the topic are best handled through a personalised one-to-one dialogue.

They also know [as they are often parents themselves] that those best placed to deliver this kind of one-to-one formation, are in fact parents. For countless decades, Catholic parents have appropriated the habit of delegating their unrenounceable and irreplaceable educative role in this arena to the Catholic school, and then largely forgetting about it. Now they need to be formed as moral educators of their children."

An aim of SPUC's Safe at School campaign is also to remove a source of conflict between schools and parents, by stopping the intrusion of pornographic sex education programmes into schools.

"As I Have Loved You" is published by Gracewing Publishing in Great Britain and Connor Court in Australia.

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Today's must-read pro-life news-stories, Mon 19 Dec

Christian Bale: tried to visit Chen Guangcheng

Top stories:

UK prime minister says UK should return to Christian moral values
David Cameron, the British prime minister, has called for British society to return to traditional Christian moral values. In a speech to mark the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible, Mr Cameron said: "moral neutrality is not going to cut it any more". [Telegraph, 17 December] John Smeaton, SPUC director said: "It is hypocritical for Mr Cameron to promote traditional morality when his government is bank-rolling abortion, contraception and homosexuality at home and abroad."

Dutch pro-lifers say: campaign for abortion abolition, not stricter rules
The annual Dutch March for Life took place on Saturday 10 December. It is estimated that 1,400 people took part in the march, which is almost double last year's attendance. Dr Bert P. Dorenbos, President of Cry for Life and the chief organiser of the march, said: "We're not going for stricter rules, but we are called to advocate the abolition of abortion." John Smeaton, SPUC director, commented: "Dr Dorenbos’s comment is particularly applicable to the UK and misguided parliamentary moves, e.g. trying to lower the 24-week upper time-limit on most social abortions." [John Smeaton, 15 December]

Other stories:

Abortion

• One in five sexually-active women aged 16 to 24 has taken morning-after pills in past year [Mail, 17 December]
• MEPs issue death penalty for unborn babies with HIV [John Smeaton, 16 December]
• Morning-after pill use in Spain soars 83% after sales allowed in pharmacies [ANSA, 14 December] 
• SPUC supporters use Christmas celebrations to reach out to those hurt by abortion [John Smeaton, 14 December]

Euthanasia

• UK hospital accused of leaving patients to starve [Telegraph, 17 December]
• UK General Medical Council drawing up guidelines on assisted suicide [Mail, 16 December] 

Population

• Hollywood star (pictured) assaulted in bid to visit Chinese forced abortion opponent [Reuters, 16 December]

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

MEPs issue death penalty for unborn babies with HIV

SPUC supporters and regular readers of this blog will remember that we recently urged our supporters to contact their MEPs and ask them to vote against the motion in the European Parliament on abortion and HIV/AIDS. The motion was riddled with anti-life and anti-family content.

Daniel Blackman, who researches international affairs for SPUC, has written a report on the outcome of the vote on the motion.

EU passes motion promoting abortion under the banner of HIV/AIDS prevention, by Daniel Blackman

On 1 December 2011 MEPs debated and voted on the controversial motion entitled “on the EU response to HIV/AIDS in the EU and neighbouring countries.” The motion was put forward by Françoise Grossetête on behalf of the PPE Group; Nessa Childers on behalf of the S&D Group; Antonyia Parvanova on behalf of the ALDE Group; Satu Hassi on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group; Marina Yannakoudakis on behalf of the ECR Group; Marisa Matias on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group; and Oreste Rossi on behalf of the EFD Group. The date selected for the final vote was strategic, 1 December being world AIDS day.

The original motion was itself harmful for people already living with HIV/AIDS, and for those whose lifestyles put them in the high risk group for contracting HIV. Amongst other things, the motion strongly favoured the “condom first” approach of the UN, EU, and WHO. Some of the worst sections included:

AA. whereas it is crucial to advocate strengthening and expanding policy and programming in the area of links between sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) and HIV so that HIV/AIDS prevention programmes are integrated into SRHR programmes and HIV/AIDS prevention becomes an integral part of sexual and reproductive health care.

14. Calls upon the Member States to ensure that all National AIDS programs and strategies develop strong linkages between sexual and reproductive health and HIV services.
15. Notes that prevention measures should explicitly include adequate information and sex education, access to protection means, such as male and female condoms, and strengthening the rights and autonomy of women in sexual relationships.

22. Calls on the Commission and Council to ensure access to quality comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services, information, and supplies. This should consist of, among others, confidential and voluntary counselling, testing and treatment for HIV and all sexually transmitted infections; prevention of unintended pregnancies; equitable and affordable access to contraceptives, including access to emergency contraception; safe and legal abortion, including post-abortion care; care and treatment to prevent vertical transmission of HIV, including of partners and children.

It is clear that the scientific evidence, the epidemiological studies and the voices of experts like Dr. Edward C. Green and Professor David Paton on the ineffectiveness of current condom-first anti-life approaches, really don’t matter in the face of political expediency and aggressive anti-life ideology. The motion became much worse following the submission and acceptance of amendments to the motion. These motions were put forward by many of the original proposers of the motion listed above, and other MEPs like Sophia in't Veld, Michael Cashman, and Corinne Lepage, well-known for their aggressive promotion of contraception, abortion, and destructive behaviours and lifestyles.

Prolife MEPs and NGOs worked together, calling for split and separate votes on some of the most controversial sections, hoping that they would be exposed and voted out of the motion. However, even without the most anti-life amendments, the document as a whole would have remained unacceptable. SPUC encouraged constituents to contact their MEPs about the most dangerous sections and the harmful content likely to remain, which meant that a clear vote against the motion as a whole was required. People living with HIV/AIDS do need particular medical and pastoral support, but this motion fails these people and acts as a Trojan horse for the agendas of pro-abortion MEPs and lobby groups.

On the day, all of the anti-life pro-abortion sections received overwhelming support from MEPs, including the vast majority of the PPE (Christian Democrat) MEPs. Every vote on anti-life sections was lost by a wide margin. Section 22, which includes an explicit promotion of abortion, received 6 separate roll-call votes. Every single one was sadly lost. The fifth roll-call vote dealt specifically with the reference to abortion. Only 206 MEPs voted against abortion i.e. they used their vote to defend unborn babies. They were:

ALDE: Aylward, Gallagher, Harkin, Takkula
ECR: Bielan, Cymański, Czarnecki, Deva, Helmer, Kamiński, Karim, Kirkhope, Kowal, Kurski, Legutko, McClarkin, Migalski, Piotrowski, Poręba, Szymański, Tannock, Wojciechowski, Włosowicz, Ziobro
EFD: Belder, Borghezio, Fontana, Morganti, Rossi, Scottà, Speroni, Terho, Tzavela, Vanhecke
NI: Claeys, Dodds, Gollnisch, Hartong, Kovács, Le Pen Marine, Madlener, Mölzer, Obermayr, Stassen, Stoyanov Dimitar, Zijlstra
PPE: Abad, Allam, Andrikienė, Angelilli, Antonescu, Antoniozzi, Arias Echeverría, Ayuso, Baldassarre, Balz, Bartolozzi, Bastos, Bauer, Becker, Belet, Berlato, Bodu, Bonsignore, Borys, Brok, Busuttil, Böge, Băsescu, Březina, Cancian, Carvalho, Casa, Casini, Caspary, Coelho, Comi, Daul, De Mita, Delvaux, Deutsch, Deß, Dorfmann, Díaz de Mera García Consuegra, Estaràs Ferragut, Feio, Ferber, Fernandes, Fidanza, Fraga Estévez, Gahler, García-Margallo y Marfil, Gardini, Gauzès, Glattfelder, Grzyb, Gyürk, Gál, Gáll-Pelcz, Handzlik, Hankiss, Herranz García, Hibner, Higgins, Hohlmeier, Iacolino, Jahr, Jazłowiecka, Jeggle, Jędrzejewska, Kalinowski, Karas, Kasoulides, Kastler, Kelam, Kelly, Klaß, Koch, Kozłowski, Kuhn, Köstinger, La Via, Landsbergis, Langen, Lehne, Liese, Lisek, Lope Fontagné, Mann, Matera, Mato Adrover, Matula, Mauro, Mayer, Mayor Oreja, McGuinness, Melo, Mikolášik, Millán Mon, Mitchell, Morkūnaitė-Mikulėnienė, Mészáros, Neynsky, Niculescu, Niebler, Olbrycht, Oomen-Ruijten, Pack, Pallone, Papastamkos, Patrão Neves, Pieper, Pirker, Posselt, Protasiewicz, Proust, Pöttering, Quisthoudt-Rowohl, Rangel, Reul, Rivellini, Roithová, Rübig, Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra, Saryusz-Wolski, Saudargas, Schnellhardt, Schnieber-Jastram, Schwab, Scurria, Seeber, Siekierski, Silvestris, Sommer, Sonik, Stolojan, Stoyanov Emil, Surján, Szájer, Sógor, Teixeira, Thun und Hohenstein, Thyssen, Tőkés, Ulmer, Ungureanu, Vaidere, Verheyen, Vidal-Quadras, Weber Manfred, Weisgerber, Wieland, Winkler Hermann, Wortmann-Kool, Zalewski, Zanicchi, Zeller, Zwiefka, de Grandes Pascual, de Lange, del Castillo Vera, van de Camp, Áder, Őry, Šťastný
S&D: Prodi

Section 22 makes the link between pregnant mothers with HIV/AIDS, their babies, and the “solution” to mother-child HIV transmission by killing the child before he or she is born. The majority of MEPs are clearly not content with killing the disabled; they are now seeking out sick babies.

In the final vote, 454 MEPs voted in favour of this barbaric resolution, a small but stalwart 86 voted against it, and 44 abstained. The MEPs who voted against were:

ALDE: Aylward, Gallagher
ECR: Bielan, Cymański, Czarnecki, Deva, Helmer, Kamiński, Kowal, Kurski, Legutko, Migalski, Piotrowski, Poręba, Szymański, Tomaševski, Wojciechowski, Ziobro
EFD: Agnew, Andreasen, Belder, Bufton, Clark, Fontana, Speroni
GUE/NGL: Angourakis, Toussas
NI: Claeys, Gollnisch, Hartong, Kovács, Madlener, Mölzer, Obermayr, Zijlstra
PPE: Allam, Antoniozzi, Arias Echeverría, Ayuso, Bartolozzi, Borys, Brok, Busuttil, Březina, Cancian, Casa, Casini, Deß, Díaz de Mera García Consuegra, Ferber, Fidanza, Fraga Estévez, Gardini, Grzyb, Handzlik, Hibner, Kalinowski, Kastler, Kelam, Kelly, Klaß, Koch, Kozłowski, Mato Adrover, Mauro, Mayor Oreja, Millán Mon, Olbrycht, Pieper, Posselt, Protasiewicz, Pöttering, Roithová, Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra, Saryusz-Wolski, Saudargas, Sommer, Sonik, Surján, Vidal-Quadras, Zalewski, Zeller, Zwiefka, de Grandes Pascual, del Castillo Vera, Šťastný

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy

Dutch pro-lifers say: campaign for abortion abolition, not stricter rules

The annual Dutch March for Life took place on Saturday 10 December to commemorate the passing of the Pregnancy Termination Law, passed on 18 December 1980, which allows for abortion on demand in Holland up to the 24th week of pregnancy.

It is estimated that 1,400 people took part in the march, which is almost double last year's attendance.

The event was organised by the pro-life group Cry for Life. Dr Bert P. Dorenbos, President of Cry for Life and the chief organiser of the march, said:

"We're not going for stricter rules, but we are called to advocate the abolition of abortion."

Dr Dorenbos’s comment is particularly applicable to the UK and misguided parliamentary moves, e.g. trying to lower the 24-week upper time-limit on most social abortions.

It is greatly encouraging to see the development of a vibrant and active movement for life in the Netherlands.

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
Like SPUC's Facebook Page
Please support SPUC. Please donate, join, and/or leave a legacy