file: /pub/resources/text/ProLife.News/1992: pln-0204.txt --------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Life Communications - Volume 2, No. 4 February, 1992 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This newsletter is intended to provide articles and news information to those interested in Pro-Life Issues. Questions to readers and articles for submissions are strongly encouraged. All submissions should be sent to the editor, Steve (frezza@ee.pitt.edu). ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) 14-YEAR-OLD IRISH GIRL STOPPED FROM HAVING AN ABORTION: In the [Irish] High Court on Monday [17 Feb] Justice Declan Costello ruled that the parents of the rape victim could not take their daughter to England for an abortion. The girl was ordered not to leave the country for nine months. A 16-page judgement was released, from this it was learned that the girl had only informed her parents of the rape three weeks ago. [Mid January?] She claimed that she had been raped by her best friend's father in December, and had been sexually abused by the same man for two years. The girl and her parents were described as being "highly respectable" and live in the greater Dublin area. Justice Costello found the case "complicated and difficult" but concluded that the facts forced him to apply the law as laid down by the eighth amendment to the Constitution. [Evidently, she told her parents she'd been raped, and the family made the arrangements to travel to England. Before they went, the father contacted the police to inquire whether a foetal tissue sample could be used for DNA matching in a subsequent rape trial (this is apparently established legal procedure in England). The local police didn't know the answer and contacted their headquarters, who contacted the Attorney General to find out whether it was acceptable, and then he decided to take the prosecution. In fact the family had already travelled to England when they were officially informed that if the abortion went ahead they would all be in contempt of court and liable to imprisonment on their return, so they returned without the abortion having gone ahead.] Reaction at home and abroad was vociferous. About 250 people protested outside the office of the Attorney General and then marched to Leinster House. All the opposition parties said that they would raise the matter in the Dail. The Taoiseach called a meeting of the Cabinet to discuss the case. The national newspapers were unanimous in their criticism of all the events leading to the situation. For the most part the pro-life lobby was muted. A spokeswoman spoke of her compassion for the girl but reminded us that there were two lives involved. The churches said nothing, except for a priest who wrote to the Irish Times. He argued that "a moral obligation cannot be based on an act of violence". When the Dail met on Tuesday the Taoiseach expressed his concern at the ruling and said he would invite party leaders to review the situation. He was critical of those who blamed the Attorney General saying that it would, in the long term, be disastrous if he was to turn a blind eye to the law when he thought it appropriate. Outside of politicians there were many prepared to accept that, at every level, the law in this country is frequently adept at turning a blind eye. As the week went by more and more people expressed the view that the constitution would need to be amended. Those who were against the 1983 amendment again advocated the total removal of the ban on abortion. It seemed that the only way to avoid a referendum was for the family to appeal the case to the Supreme Court and for Justice Costello's ruling to be reversed. Late in the week the family decided to do this and the State will cover the associated costs. The main thrust of the appeal will be that the EC rule which permits free movement of citizens of member states takes precedence over Irish law. Gardai [Irish Police] are still building a file on the alleged rape and it could be some time before anyone is charged. In fact the Supreme Court hearing opens [24 Feb] and a decision is expected by Friday.[28 Feb, 1992] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (2) MOTHERHOOD IS FOR LOSERS Karen DeCrow, former president of NOW, is miffed that when TV character Murphy Brown became pregnant, she didn't have an abortion. The show's producers must be pandering to conservative viewers who are crying out "for a backlash against women" -- symbolized, apparently, by continuing a pregnancy. But Murphy doesn't need to have a baby, because she's made it in her profession, and "keen social commen- tators ... believe that getting pregnant, and having a baby, is what women do when they are convinced they are not slated for success." (Not just stay-at-home moms, but anyone who has a baby.) Gee, exalting the power suit/expense-account life, while sneering at stupid moms--doesn't it sound a bit familiar? Whose values have we adopted here? And how can it be that the radical edge of so-called feminism can sound so much like an old-fashioned male chauvinist pig? Reading: Miami Herald, 11/17/91 -submitted by Steve Chaney ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (3) WHAT WORKS - AVOID DOUBLESTANDARDS The charge of "hypocrisy" leveled by "pro-choicers" against pro-lifers seems to be a common rhetorical ploy used to promote abortion. This is the first of a series examining the 'double-standards' raised by many abortion defenders. [If you have any you care to contribute, please send them to the Editor.] "Pro-life men are `hypocrites' because they can't get pregnant." Refutation: Women are slightly more pro-life than men. Doublestandard #1: `Pro-choice' men can't get pregnant either. However, both can be held liable for child support. Pro-life men are putting principle before economic consideration. `Pro-choice' men are hardly acting disinterested. Doublestandard #2: Since women are more pro-life than men, why isn't it suggested that `pro-choicers' are `hypocrites' because men can't be abandoned, pregnant, by jerks who realize that "now she'll just have to get that safe and legal abortion!" [See QOM] `Pro-choice' message: Acting principly is deemed hypocrisy, while acting selfishly is deemed `sensitive'; The way for men to love, respect, care for, and show sensitivity to women is by finding them, feeling them, impregnating them, aborting them, and then forgetting them. But `pro-choicers' are kind and thoughtful enough to let women be men by insisting that the one tiny bit of difference be scraped away. Feminity is transformed into Masculinity. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "Pro-lifers are `hypocrites' because are forcing their religion on everyone else." Refutation: Anti-abortion laws do not force *any* supernatural metaphysical belief on anyone. Doublestandard: You don't see members of `pro-choice' religions accused of trying to "force" their church's "pro-choice" morality on society. `Pro-choice' message: Pro-life convictions are "obviously" the result of indoctrination. "Pro-choice" convictions are "obviously" the result of careful thought. Pro-lifers are "dangerous"; pro-choicers are "tolerant". -by David Rasmussen ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (4) READER RESPONSES (And there's been lots!) In respose to Cruz-Uribe's objection (v2n3) to the "Letter from the Future."(v2n2) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I agree with David that the letter is extreme, and that it probably has a negative effect in terms of winning people over to our cause. On the other hand, the situation it portrays is not as far-fetched as David (or the pro-abortion people who would sneer at it) seem to believe. In pagan Rome, the father of a household had absolute power of life and death over all persons in that household ... his descendants and his slaves. This power was called patria potens, literally the power of the father. He could order his wife to have an abortion (or forbid it), since the unborn child was under his power. Even his grown children, though they be magistrates in the Republic, were subject to his whim. In the very early days, he could even order his wife put to death, but for obvious reasons, this was changed, so that *her* father (or father's father) retained patria potens over her, not her husband. It is important to realize that Romans never claimed that slaves and children were not human. They just didn't have the right to life ... that was introduced to Rome by Christianity. Even though the pro-abortion people who are living today would never agree to the scene depicted in "Letter from the Future," there is really no reason to believe that their moral descendants would not. Certainly Margaret Sanger would have approved: "The kindest thing a poor family can do for its youngest member is to kill it." What difference is there between the abortion of today in the West, and the infanticide-at-birth practiced in China, masquerading as abortion? Not much. What difference is there between infanticide of the disabled practiced today in the West and killing slightly older children that are "not working out"? Really, not much, morally, but it is unlikely to ever be too common, regardless of the laws, because of the natural and instinctive attachment mothers get for their children shortly after birth. I suggest we can share "Letter from the Future" among ourselves as a warning, but not use it to inflame the opposition and the middlers. After all, it is only with the help of the middlers that we can win this battle. -Larry Larmore - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ... In an article in a fairly recent issue of _The Human Life Review_, the author mentions a prototype for future euthanasia laws that has been proposed by a university law school. It recommends, among other things, that parents be able to have their children under the age of 6 killed and that children over the age of 6 be able to request and receive "aid in dying." This is the same law school which first drew up prototype abortion-on-demand laws before Roe v. Wade. Perhaps the "Letter from the Future" is not so far off the mark, even if it does make bad propaganda. -Chris Bord - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Since the killing of an unborn child deprives a person of life just as much as the killing of a born child, this equating is what gives the letter much of its power. Of course people object violently when they read this letter to what the lady is supposedly writing. [It is demagogery, after all] And their reasoning can be applied to why people are pro-life. [The "Letter:] emphasizes that arguments pro-abortionists use can justify the killing of this born child. "It's the same thing you know." This letter has an enormous wealth of insight into the terrible tragedy which abortion is. The ideals behind the taking of a born child's life are indeed those used by the pro-abortionists of today. Abortion is here today, forced abortions in China, and they violate the most precious right a person has. -Rob Baker - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Responses to the v2n3 article "Are We Prepared to Win" : We do have to remember all the other social ills of our times - especially those dealing with children. Even with abortion, we have many children growing up without permanent homes or loving parents, in situations of abuse, etc.. This is not some future result of no abortion-on-demand, this is the situation today. However, as a group, I'd have to say that the prolife people I have worked with are very much aware of these problems - much more so than people who support abortion. I know very few prolifers who do not also support (prolife) crisis pregnancy centers, homes for poor single mothers and their children, and other organizations that deal with these problems. It seems to me that one of the biggest lies espoused by abortion supporters is that prolifers care only about the preborn. From my (albeit limited) experience, we are a generous people who would rise to any challenge an increase in births would cause. -Chris Bord - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A hearty "thank you" for the article by Will Liegel Jr.. It is so *frustrating* sometimes when I bring up this very topic, and a flurry of hand-waving ensues among my Christian/ProLife brethren! There are children in orphanages NOW with needs for our care. How can we (with a straight face) go to the mothers-to-be and say "Don't abort your child. We'll take care of it." when we *don't* *do* *it* (unless it's white and perfect). How much more will this be true when 1.6 million more lives are entrusted to the rescuers (us)? Are we ready? I don't think we are. -Dorothy Nelson - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The point made is clearly a reality in the abortion prone world of today, i.e., what responsibility does society have for the care and sustenance of those infants spurned by their parents? However, the the act of abortion of itself without considering the specifics of any given situation is an "objective" moral wrong [i.e. Life as a Civil Right], and justice demands that all in society come to this realization. But there is a distinct difference between one providing the means of support for an unwanted infant and recognizing the injustice of taking its life. This moves pro-life action into the realm of charity. So the question is asked by the vehement pro-abort: "You know, you talk a good deal, but what are you doing to help the situation for young women who are in very tough situations?" Here's one reply: "The rightness or wrongness of my pro-life conviction is not a function of how much money I donate to a crisis pregnancy center or of how much time I put in working at one, or even if I decide to adopt an unwanted child. And, such matters are not really any of your concern...do I ask how much you donate to Planned Parenthood? But...by the faculty of reason innate to all humans it is the truth that abortion is an objective wrong and as such societal justice demands that I willfully work for its end as an accepted social norm of 'privacy.' " -Mark Viz ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (4) READER QUESTIONS (& ANSWERS!) REQUEST FOR STATISTICS: How accurate is it to indicate that most abortions are performed on poor, unmarried women in unstable situations? - Chris Bord ON PRO-LIFE CHECKS: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - They [Identity Check Printers]are advertised in NRL News, in case someone wants more concrete ordering information. I recently ordered these checks. They came promptly, had the correct information, and have good messages on them. It makes it a lot more fun to pay bills! To order, include one of your current checks (void), a blank deposit slip, and a check for payment. - Allan Cargille ON PRO-LIFE SONGWRITERS: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - One I know of: Debby Boone, "Choose Life" Also, I have seen entire albums on this theme advertised in Christian music clubs (either collected from various artists, or by one artist). - Allan Cargille - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Quote Of the Month: "The crime of abortion is not one in which the guilt lies solely or even chiefly with the woman...I hesitate not to assert that most of this crime of 'child murder', 'abortion','infanticide', lies at the door of the male sex." - Matilda Gage "The Revolution", 9 April, 1868 +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Credits: | | 1- From the 24 Feb 1992 issue of THE IRISH EMIGRANT electronic | | newsletter. (Issue No.264) Editor: Liam Ferrie | | 2- From the Feminists for Life: Winter 1992 Sisterlife edition | |QOM- Quoted from a Feminists for Life flyer "What did our Feminist | | Foremothers say about Abortion?" - For more info write: | | Feminists for Life 811 E. 47th St. Kansas City, MO 64110 | +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ Anyone desiring information on specific prolife groups, literature, tapes, or help with problems is encouraged to contact the editor.