Saturday, October 6, 2012

The Desert of British Politics: reduction in abortion time limit "chilling".

As Britain's Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, expresses his personal opinion (The Guardian Newspaper: Jeremy Hunt attacked from all sides...) that the time limit for abortion should be reduced from the current twenty four weeks to twelve weeks, he is berated for expressing his own opinion, and the thought of restricting abortion is described as "chilling" (see my previous chilling post) by Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper.

His own party leader has come out as clearly pro-abortion in stating:
I personally have voted for a modest reduction from the current limit of 24 weeks because I think there are some medical arguments for that. But I don't agree with the 12-week limit...
Of course, Mr Hunt's view that
... 12 weeks is the right point for it. It is just my view about that incredibly difficult question – about the moment we should deem life to start. I don't think the reason I have that view is for religious reasons.
cannot be justified for religious reasons. There is never a "right point" for abortion.

Meanwhile, the UK's largest and oldest pro-life group, the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) has dismissed recent newspaper stories about ministerial support for reducing abortion time-limits as "journalistic hype".

SPUC was responding to recent stories in The Times and The Telegraph newspapers in which ministers were asked whether they support reducing time-limits for abortion.

Anthony Ozimic, SPUC communications manager, told the media earlier today:
"These stories are in reality media-generated hype. There is no 'news' in these stories. The voting records of Jeremy Hunt, Maria Miller and Theresa May on abortion time-limits, over four years ago, are public knowledge. The Telegraph supports reducing abortion time-limits while The Times is strongly against any abortion restrictions, and between them they are generating some heat but little light on the real politics of abortion. There is some scare-mongering by pro-abortion figures, and some groundless hope for success by Nadine Dorries MP, whose amendments in 2008 were clearly defeated.

There is a large pro-abortion majority in Parliament which will ensure that any time-limiting amendments are rejected while using the opportunity to push for pro-abortion amendments. The real political debate about abortion in the UK should focus - as it does elsewhere in the world - on the right to life of all unborn children and on way governments bankroll abortion access at home and abroad."
SPUC is right. There is no point in fighting for reduced abortion time limits. The only way is to seek its abolition.

See SPUC's release of last Thursday (4 October 2012) Fresh perspective, not time-limit debate, needed on abortion, says pro-life group SPUC


  1. Good post. Colin Harte has explored in detail what would be a just form of law reform in his book Changing Unjust Laws Justly. It deserves careful study.

    Look also at posts dated 18 and 27 Sept 2012 which contain articles written in 1988 at the time of David Alton's amendment bill and before the abortion amendments which appeared in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. The articles explain clearly what is wrong with the "time limits" approach to law reform and predict accurately what would happen if pro-lifers continue to press for time limit amendments. This is precisely what did happen in the 1990 Act and the results were as predicted.

    The articles were written by a senior lawyer; there are too many people promoting law reform who do not even know what the present law is.

  2. What I find "chilling" is the way the pro-abortion lobby ignore the right to life of unborn children.

    Presumably because having already been born they know they are safe from destruction.


Please avoid being 'anonymous' if at all possible.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...