Yes I'm back....
Maybe I'll refer to the past few weeks as I go on ; but in the meantime last week was a devastating blow upon the nation and humanity as a whole.
The HFE act had nothing Human about it, it had little to do with fertility and when it came to embryology it defied all evidence and reason and opened the floodgates for the furtherance in the systemic genocide....
It merely confirmed a few things we'd always known - the liberal intelligentsia have now decreed a father is surplus to requirement [my children's school has already banned the use of 'mum and dad' when teachers speak to pupils] , that multiple siblings can be produced in a lab and only the one most suitable to provide spare body parts for their sick brother or sister will be implanted ; the rest are sluiced away; and that it is perfectly 'un-frankenstein-like' to create thousands of diseased human embryos within irradiated animal eggs in order to analyse, dissect and destroy in the name of a research system which has not provided any beneficial results whatsoever.
It also re-assured us that our suspicions were not paranoic when we presumed that the pro-choicers were intent on universal abortion on demand up to birth and beyond with virtually no concern to the sensibilities of the foetus [did you see Dawn Primarolo screaming on TV that pro-lifers were evil and promoting vile untrue propaganda] - It confirmed that the argument for viability was the mendacious sham we always knew it to be ; that David Steel was always a duplicitous bastard who always denied he was seeking abortion on demand but forty years after the event after millions have perished it just doesn't seem enough to him; no, already thousands use abortion as a form of late 'contraception' oblivious to the consequences ; as if they were going for a legwax.
I'm sick of hearing about the choice being a tough decision - a crisis of conscience where different demands are tugging different ways ; and the mother's psyche is left fraught ; and society is aiming to reduce the amount of abortions by making life more financially and socially secure for women - it's a lie !
Yes there are many women who deeply regret killing their children and suffer terribly in the aftermath; these women in silence [ignored by everyone ] regret being pressurized or cornered or bullied or being ignored by professionals when expressing reticence in going through with the termination.
But society is turning abortion into such an 'irrelevance' that many thousands of women are not affected in any way ; one 'renowned' agony aunt is notorious for referring to abortion's health and beauty benefits for the young woman - problems with combination skin and acne ? get pregnant for a few weeks!!!
We catholics have a tendency to overuse the adjective 'satanic' - but how else can we categorise this ?
We're going to soon face up to the facts - the majority of people are oblivious to what happens when women enter an abortion clinic and that's the way society wants it .
Mandatory counselling - which is technically a legal requisite of the 1967 and 1990 acts; but has been ignored by every politician and medical practitioner - was proposed by a pro-choice MP last week - it was trounced !
And as for post-abortion counselling for those who require it ?
Well the feminista ideology decrees that these women who suffer depression or deep anxiety at any loss post-abortion are 'letting down the sisterhood' ! So most political commentators deny its existence and claim it's merely pro-Life propaganda.
Already we have pro-Life medical practitioners having to inform their patients and display posters in their clinics ; together with pharmacists they face disciplinary procedures if they refuse to refer patients demanding abortifacients or abortions....
Imagine how the politicians would twist it into some alleged 'misogynistic bullying' if they offered abortion counselling ? Evan Harris [Dr Death] wants every 'Life' and spuc or Winning clinic to be legally forced to give advice and information as to where and how to procure an abortion. A bit like making it compulsory for alcoholic anonymous to have a two-drink minimum bar before every meeting .
So it's left to pro-Life groups to pick up the pieces for these women's shattered lives wih counselling and support - for as long as they are legally able - Harris will get his way sooner than later...
Now I'm really quite angry at the way the pro-Life groups campaigned during all this ; but this is neither the time nor place to criticize them and their compromises or naiive trust in their own capabilities or the efficacy of their mini-campaigns. One cannot say they did not work hard ; but the price is too high for these small pressure groups to remain as such - we desperately require a national universal movement for Life run by professionals with political and media acumen.
As for the Bishop's conference ? his Eminence ? Eccleston square ? The tablet ? The national Justice and Peace groups ?
A few nice speeches, the odd pastoral letter...the rest was silence !
I think chocolate teapot would be an offensive allusion ; shameful irresponsible negligent reprobates would be an understatement.
...and when Cardinal Cormac gave his speech and said how 'disappointed' he was - please forgive me but I wanted to kick his backside all the way to beachy head [but not back]
the only MP who made any concrete reference to both her personal beliefs and her faith regarding the issues wasn't a catholic but rather a member of the DUP !!!!
In the meantime one thing is absolutely ludicrous - Claire Curtis Thomas MP is deputy chair of the All Party Parliamentary Pro-Life group ; yet she is quoted by the BBC in believing in a mother's right to choose !!!!! It's a bit like having Herod or Medea run a creche !
What planet are we on ?
Three times every two seconds ; Christ is re-crucified in the womb .
46 million lives a year -LOST - not including all those millions chemically aborted or prevented from implanting by pills, patches and iuds.
Catholics of centuries past would have taken to the streets ! Mobs would have adopted civic disobedience and a refusal to conform or participate in a government which conspired in this genocide.
These days we are so much more civilised ; we have coffee mornings and little talks from enthusiastic amateurs and car window stickers and after a few prayers we decide to write stern letters to our MPs
then we can compartmentalise it to a little night prayer and indignant outrage when a pro-choicer is on the radio or TV.
We're all so quick to promote the corporal works of mercy ;
but I sometimes wonder if we're not really 'sincere' self- deluded goats who think if we pretend and say we're sheep long enough it will be true if we hide from the truth in the shadows of ignorance.... [Mtt 25]
Mercifully we have some Bishops willing to make their voices heard [albeit AFTER the event - but would that Cardinal Cormac had said something remotely akin to the words of Bishop O'Donoghue yesterday :
A Statement from Patrick O’Donoghue, Catholic Bishop of Lancaster, on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill
Listening to the second reading and debate on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill in the House of Commons, I was saddened beyond measure. It has been said that the House of Commons is at its best when debating issues of conscience, but do I detect here a growing intolerance to listening to religious or ethical considerations? Again and again the justification given to experimenting on embryonic human beings or killing the unborn was an appeal to ‘science’ or ‘scientific research’ as if it were the only source of objective, rational knowledge. It seems that millennia of ethical and religious thought are lightly dismissed as subjective and discredited.
In contrast to the language of utilitarianism in the parliamentary debate that sought to justify the exploitation of the unborn for our economic and medical gain there arises in my heart the words of Scripture that speak prophetically of the dignity of the unborn child:
‘You created my inmost self,
Knit me together in my mother’s womb.
For so many marvels I thank you;
A wonder am I, and all your works are wonders.
...Your eyes could see my embryo.’ (Psalm 139:13-14, 16).
Every embryonic human person is a wonder of creation, who possesses the inherent right to realise his or her potential for creativity, love, self-sacrifice, and joy. However, our society has so cheapened and violated human life that it does not hear or understand the language of wonder about the unborn.
A dangerous myth appears to be growing that the only knowledge that can inform policy- making is scientific research. Discourse and reason are impoverished when science is used to exclude other branches of knowledge, such as reasoning based on natural law.
Not only this, but we witnessed a flawed, selective approach to science, with the House choosing to ignore the hard scientific evidence provided by adult and umbilical cord stem cell research, that proves that unethical research on embryonic human persons is unnecessary.
What we saw last week in the House of Commons was the misuse of science to justify the continued exploitation and disposal of society’s most vulnerable members – embryonic and foetal human persons.
As I understand it, there is not a shred of scientific evidence to support those who promote the benefits of creating human-animal hybrids. What we witnessed in the vote allowing the creation of human-animal hybrids was a partisan act of faith that experimentation on embryos will at some distant time result in cures for Alzheimer’s, MS and other diseases.
We all hope and pray that medical science will find cures for these diseases that cause such dreadful suffering, but not at the cost of de-personalising the unborn and treating them as things to be manipulated and dissected. Compassion cannot result in the exploitation and destruction of unborn human persons. It is also a misuse of science to employ medical judgements concerning the ‘viability’ of the unborn child’s development as the only consideration that grants the most fundamental of human rights – the right to life.
It’s farcical to think that the definition of a human person depends on being able to exist on one’s own. Human life is a series of inter-related dependencies at all stages of our existence. The State has no moral right to exclude the most vulnerable stage of dependency from the legal protection granted to human life. Any State that accepts the arbitrary use of power over others is immoral. As I see it, last week’s vote in the House of Commons perpetuated the immoral use of power over the unborn.
How can it be reasonable that a 12 week old foetus is treated as an unborn child or disposed of as a thing depending on the choice of the mother? Being a person is not something granted by the choice of another, but is an inherent right dependent on the fact of existence. From the moment of conception, the unborn human being is genetically unique from his or her mother and father. The unborn child is a completely new and different living being.
The Catholic Church truly cares for the well-being of women, particularly those agonising over the decision whether to continue with a pregnancy or to have an abortion. I can only imagine that the trauma of rape or the anxiety of a mother unable to cope can feel unbearable. However, I have been told that the grief and distress that many women suffer following an abortion is also unbearable. Confronted with this suffering, we must all do more to support the work of Pro-Life groups that offer counselling and practical support to women who are considering abortion or are struggling to cope after an abortion.
In its strong stand against abortion or experimentation on embryonic human persons, the Church is not saying all who have an abortion or all those who voted for this legislation are evil. But it is the Church’s duty to constantly remind society that the act of intentionally killing the unborn embryo or child is always of itself evil.
I would like to personally thank all those Members of Parliament who tabled amendments and voted in defence of unborn human life. I call on all people of faith – Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, and Christian – who believe in the sanctity of unborn human life to join with the Catholic Church in redoubling their efforts in the continuing campaign for a change in these laws.
During the 19th century, slavers said black people weren’t human. They were wrong. During the 20th century, the Nazis said Jews weren’t human. They were wrong. Since 1967, the House of Commons has said the unborn are not human. They, too, are wrong.
+Patrick O’Donoghue, Bishop of Lancaster Sunday, 25 May, 2008