Sir, – As Brendan O'Regan pointed out (December 31st), "the eighth amendment is one of the most explicit equality measures in the Constitution, and yet those who would normally champion equality remain silent, if they are not actually attacking the measure". How can this be explained? Ireland, according to the World Health Organisation, has one of the safest records for maternal care, and safer than those countries where abortion is legalised, so where is the proof that this amendment should be removed? There will always be hard cases and, as is well known, these make poor law, but how can valuing equally the life of the mother and baby be objectionable? Our safety record is based on just that – seeking to ensure the life of both. At our peril we follow other countries, as pointed out by Mr O'Regan, in "the excesses of abortion" and, once again, it must be repeated that there is no such thing as limited abortion. Once it is legalised the efforts start immediately to extend the limits, as evidenced here in Ireland.
I appeal to The Irish Times to please have regard to that much-prized object nowadays – equality – and ensure that the debate is balanced. – Yours, etc,
MARY STEWART,
Donegal Town.
Sir, – I don't wish to be pedantic, but I note that the neologism at the centre of the mangled syntax of the 1983 anti-abortion amendment is creeping into standard usage in the media. I refer to the quite ridiculous use of the word "unborn" as a noun, which until recently has usually cropped up in inverted commas or italics, pointing to its non-standard status. The attorney general, in correspondence with the taoiseach in 1983, rightly criticised the proposed insertion of the term into the Constitution, calling it "ambiguous and unclear". It is still, in 2014, not defined as a noun in the most up-to-date edition of the unabridged Oxford English Dictionary.
This is to say nothing of the flat-out incorrect use of the word “mother” in the same amendment. Another neat ideological semantic trick, of course – anti-abortion campaigners naturally seek to make mothers of women against their will, including in their choice of words. – Yours, etc,
JOHN CALE,
Dublin 8.
Sir, – Article 40.3.3 of Bunreacht na hÉireann may be a patently flawed and nebulous amendment but it can’t be repealed without the consent of the people.
Is yet another divisive and factious referendum on the emotive issue of abortion now inevitable? The question is purely rhetorical. – Yours, etc,
PAUL DELANEY,
Dalkey,
Co Dublin.