Bishops criticise Irish government abortion move

30

The Irish government has announced it will legislate for abortion in circumstances where the mother’s life is at risk.


The move comes seven weeks after the death of Savita Halappanavar.

The four Catholic Archbishops of Ireland, including Cardinal Sean Brady, have criticised the decision.

Abortion is currently illegal in the Republic except where there is a real and substantial risk to a mother’s life, as distinct from her health.

However, up until now the government has not enacted legislation to give certainty to doctors as to when terminations can be carried out and under what circumstances.

The Irish government said the new legislative framework will require a combination of legislation and regulations in cases where the life of a woman is at risk.

The move follows the report of an expert group set up to advise on how to bring legal clarity to the issue.

The new package of measures will comply with the government’s obligations under the European Convention of Human Rights.

In a statement, the Republic of Ireland’s health minister said he was “very conscious of the sensitivities” around the issue.

“I know that most people have personal views on this matter. However, the government is committed to ensuring that the safety of pregnant women in Ireland is maintained and strengthened,” said minister James Reilly.

Written By: Jennifer O’Leary
continue to source article at bbc.co.uk

30 COMMENTS

  1. As usual the RCC shoots itself in the foot yet again ! What twats they are !  Do they imagine that any woman sets out to have an abortion.  No woman wants an abortion in itself, and this man isn’t too keen on them either, but sometimes they are necessary and the best course of action.  Will it be another 100 years before the RCC moves into the 20th century?

    The usual old bully bhoys throwing their ignorant weight around, because God wants this,  or God doesn’t want that, based not even on the story book but on RCC dogma.

  2. Mr DArcy,
    I think that they have made their mind up and decided that they are right.  In the RCC, once that happens, there is nothing NOTHING that can change their minds.  We call this a closed mind.  They call it “faith”.

  3. In a joint statement, the Irish bishops said: “If what is being
    proposed were to become law, the careful balance between the equal right
    to life of a mother and her unborn child in current law and medical
    practice in Ireland would be fundamentally changed.

    “It would pave the way for the direct and intentional killing
    of unborn children. This can never be morally justified in any
    circumstances.”

    It took four archbishops to come up with this astonishing drivel?

  4. Well done my fellow countrymen and it only took someone’s life for us to do the right and obvious thing.  Sigh!  Regardless, the RCC is, hopefully, finally breathing its last breaths in Europe.  

  5. Why should anyone pay attention to a priest or cardinal? They really don’t have anything special to say that others in the public square can’t.

    And the public square is social media.  And there is some interesting analysis going on about just who is in the Irish public square and it seems not only to be Irish priests but, wait for it, American religiously associated anti-abortion pressure groups. 

    Check out the blog of Geoff Lillis (Geoff’s Shorts) and in particular, this post

    http://geoffsshorts.blogspot.n

    Geoff Lillis is an Irish based blogger who analyses Twitter activity to gain insights into the nature of those posting comments and what their interests and affiliations might reasonably seem to be.  The post addresses the ProLife (we’re ProDeath, right?) campaign organisation in Ireland which thinks batty things like

    “THE HUMAN EMBRYO IS ALREADY ONE
    OF US
    Each one of us started life as an embryo. When the father’s sperm
    fuses with the mother’s egg, a new human life begins. Although
    very tiny, this new human being is not just a potential life – it is
    already an actual human life with potential, unquestionably alive,
    unquestionably human. Human embryos outside the mother should
    be entitled to protection for their lives from this first moment.”

    They consider a six day old clump of
    (approximately 100) cells, not yet attached to the uterine wall (i.e.,
    not yet attached to the mother), a human.

    And they’re skewing opinion to make it look like lots of Irish folk are against abortion.

    And they will maintain that their anti-abortion campaign is a human rights issue and not at all religiously motivated; check out the blog and see what their affiliations are.

  6. The ignorant mental contortions of assertive “faith-thought”, come out at the least suggestion of movement towards  establishing laws based on scientific research and an understanding of outcomes,  – rather than the view through the blinkers of the brain-dead dogmas of know-it-all scientific illiterates.

  7. On top of all this, when embryos are destroyed in IVF they don’t make a peep.  It is routine to implant 5 embryos to give the round of IVF a 25% chance of working.  It is anticipated and expected that these embryos will die.  But, they are “expendable” because the outcome is a baby…..

  8. The Archbishops say:

    “It would pave the way for the direct and intentional killing of unborn children. This can never be morally justified in any circumstances.”

    Considering that something like 70% of abortions happen naturally, are we to assume that God is the biggest abortionist of the lot !  Killing unborn children “can never be morally justified in any circumstances”  !!!

    NOT EVEN WHEN GOD DOES IT THEN !

    Hell they do keep digging themselves in, don’t they !

  9. The RCC is opposed to IVF because the unused embryos are destroyed.  What becomes of the unused embryos is a hot, controversial topic among Catholic ethicists.  Some say they should be implanted into a willing recipient and adopted out; others say they should be left to expire naturally — using the rationale that to do otherwise would just encourage more people to undergo IVF, (since they would be reasonably assured that fewer embryos would be destroyed).

  10. cornbread_r2,
    Thanks for raising my awareness.  I had no idea that this was a hot topic for the RCC — and, considering that I am surrounded by Catholics…. Well, not surprising that they are inconsistent with actual RCC policy….  Anyway, I am going to look into this a bit.

  11. The BBC article also says “…while at all times taking full account of the equal right to life of the unborn child.” Am I weird in not thinking that mother and unborn child have an equal right to life? Particularly not in situations as these, where the child isn’t viable and a hazard to the mother’s survival, but even in sitations where the child is viable but the mother simply can’t have it; be it for reasons of  health, (physical or mental) or even because she won’t be able to care for it financially. I’m sure such decisions are extremely hard to (have to) make, but ultimately they are up to the mother and no one else. The mother has more right to life than the unborn child.

  12. Sorry I may be being very thick but I’m getting a bit confused by the stance of the bishops.
     
    “In a joint statement, the Irish bishops said: “If what is being proposed were to become law, the careful balance between the equal right to life of a mother and her unborn child in current law and medical practice in Ireland would be fundamentally changed. “
     
    Abortion is being allowed only if the mothers life is in danger right? Even with my limited knowledge of biology the feotus remaining alive is dependent on the mother continuing to be alive as well? So even if Brady uses his particular definition that a bundle of cells is equal ‘life’ – it is still eqaul ‘life’ dependent on the mother – whose life is under threat – being alive? And it will die if the mother does?
     
    So is he proposing two deaths are better than one? Like a tescos offer. Or is he proposing that where a mothers life is in danger he will step in and save her with magic water thus saving them both? Or what? Can someone please clarify.
     
    Of course bishops and priests can avoid the twin sins of contraception and abortion by the simple expedient of ensuring they only have sex with children!

  13. skeelo

     
    In a joint statement, the Irish bishops said: “If what is being proposed were to become law, the careful balance between the equal right to life of a mother and her unborn child in current law and medical practice in Ireland would be fundamentally changed.

    “It would pave the way for the direct and intentional killing of unborn children. This can never be morally justified in any circumstances.

    It took four archbishops to come up with this astonishing drivel?

    I am reminded of a variation on an old joke!

    Q – “How many Irish Bishops does it take to change a light bulb?”

    A  – “4  – One to hold the bulb and 3 to turn the ladder!”

  14. To be honest, I don’t even think women should feel bad about abortion.  It should be viewed as another form of contraception if carried out early.  There’s little rational reason to have a problem with it unless you’re religious.

  15. elderly male virgins? My
    ass! I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these “virgins” had sexually
    abused  some of the children in RC
    schools, taking into account the huge record of child abuse  by RC clerics in Ireland.

Leave a Reply