Sir, — The word “conscience” is being used a lot in your newspaper in the context of the abortion issue. Conscience is a slippery term. For example, the people who ordered and carried out the burning of Joan of Arc and the imprisonment of Galileo in medieval times did so following their consciences. A churchman in America recently told a court of law that “I did what I thought was right” when he turned a blind eye to the evil-doing of an abusive priest under his jurisdiction. Presumably he thought he was following his conscience. Would those who tell us to follow our conscience in the matter of abortion please tell us what the ingredients of a true conscience are? — Yours, etc,
Sir, – Ken Mawhinney (January 2nds) complains that Breda O’Brien has covered the abortion issue in six columns since November 10th. I’m glad he is keeping note of her articles, which are always excellent, due to her research and references to background information. I have not kept note of all the articles on the subject of abortion in The Irish Times since November 10th, but I am well aware of the large number of articles advocating legalisation of abortion. Quite a number of them were based on opinions on the tragic Savita Halapannavar case, without reference to the fact that no evidence has yet been heard from any of the medical personnel involved.
Time and time again there is the call for a calm and rational debate on this subject. Sad to say this has not always occurred, but Breda O’Brien has based her articles on fact and research and this is to be welcomed, not criticised. Long may she continue to present this matter of life and death in such a manner, and would that others would follow her example. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Ivana Bacik (January 2nd) asserts that “language is very important in the abortion debate”. I agree. Perhaps then she could clarify what, exactly, she understands “the real needs” of the many women who travel to England for abortions every year to be? – Yours, etc,