Personally, Im of the view that as Im a bloke and Ill never give birth (well I hope not anyway, otherwise something pretty odd will be going on :>>), my opinions on abortion dont really count as this is a debate that the women need to have (sorry if that sounds awfully sexist)…but considering current events…Tory bible thumper Nadine Dorries is trying to get the abortion laws changed so that providers of abortions services such as the charities Marie Stopes or the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) will be unable to supply the compulsory counselling that must be offered before an abortion is provided. Her argument is that these services have a vested interest in pressuring women into an abortion, given that they also supply them.
Sounds okay, until you realise that both are charities, how can you argue that they therefore have any financial gain to make by pressuring people into abortions? All Mrs Dorries demonstrates by this statement is her own bigoted religious views that anyone who supplies abortions is a baby killer who only does it purely to further their gay/liberal/socialist agenda, not to mention score some browning points with their buddy Beelzebub. And even if we were to take Mrs Dorries and her bible waving allies seriously, all that the Marie Stopes would have to do to get around these changes, would be to spin themselves off into two separate independent entities, one supplying abortion advice and the other the abortions. In short all you would do is create a bit more red tape and a slower less efficient abortion service (aren’t Torys supposed to be against red tape for these very reasons?).
Furthermore I would argue that the even if we were to let the religious brigade have theyre way here what will be the outcome? Take Ireland, it has very strict abortion legislation with one only being legal in the country if the life of the mother is in danger. The result is total hypocrisy. Women who cant come up with a convincing life in danger excuse just go abroad to the UK (one of the reasons why abortions are so high in the UK is people coming in from Ireland or other former British colonies for this expressed purpose) or Europe and get an abortion there (which with Ryanair these days is not entirely expensive). In essence weve merely exported our abortion debate and dumped it onto some other state because Irish politicans are too spineless to take on the bible thumpers, although the wanning power of the Catholic church post the paedophile priest scandals might change that.
Even if the pro-life lot in the UK or US were to have theyre way, this too is the likely outcome. Women would just go to Canada or Holland and get abortions there. The only women whom youd be preventing from having an abortion would be the lazy ones or those who couldnt afford to travel. And of course thats just the legal abortions, no doubt some back alley abortion clinics would soon be springing up to do the job for women unwilling to travel. Indeed in both the US and UK the hypocrisy would be even starker. Certain US states would never sign up to a ban on abortion (a democrat in NY once told me theyd sooner cede from the Union that accept that) and so it would merely be a case of crossing state lines, or going to Scotland in the case of the UK.
Again my position is, Im in favour of a womens right to choose, but I dont think men should be getting involved in this debate, especially 70 year old German virgins living in the Vatican. But even if you oppose abortions, banning them or wrapping them up in more red tape does more harm than good. It just exports the problem or increases the chances of women resorting to back alley alternatives. The whole reason why we brought in abortion laws in many countries was to ensure that it was done within a proper legal frame work that balanced a womens right to choose with health & safety and morality. The pro-lifers proposed to scrap this frame work and replace it with a bible. And how is that working out for you guys? In the US the religious lot tried out a system of Abstinence Only sex education under Bush, which resulted in a dramatic rise in teenage pregnancies and STDs. So whats the bet the same thing will happen again here with abortion?
But theres little point in me going on. The core of this anti-abortion movement is a group of religious extremist who will ignore all logic and pesky little facts. Theyre sole reason for opposing abortion or stem cells or gay marriage is just so they can score a few browning points with the guy upstairs, because if you read Ezekiel 25.17 backwards he seems to say hes against these things. The social problems that such new rules will create, the fact that they will make worse the very moral questions they were supposed to put right, matters little to such people. They wont be the ones picking up the pieces afterwards. The fact that they are increasing the power of the state at the expense of personal freedom is also ignored, even thought most conservatives think that big government should get off peoples backs yet they advocate a government so big and so intrusive that it literally comes into a citizens bedroom and tells you what to do and also tells you when youre going to have to start a family, and who you can marry. Even communist Russia was more liberal than that!
Fortunately, as I write this, the abortion bill has been killed off 368 votes to 118. Cameron voted against it, as he had previously made clear he would. Diane Abbott described it as “an attempt to import American sensationalism into abortion issues“. Couldn’t have put it better myself. Part of the reason why the religous right talk about abortion or bash the gays so much state side is because if they didn’t, they’d have to talk about something else. And what did Jesus devote the bulk of the bible too? Well talking about the poor, charity and good will, how the rich and the greedy will have trouble getting into heaven, turning the other cheek, loving thy neighbour and other “commie crap” like that ;D! And we all know how keen Perry, Bachmann and Palin are on such topics!
Still it is worrying that 118 MP’s did vote for this, can we have their names such that sensible folk know not to vote for them again?