Sir, – Reading Colm O'Gorman's article on Ireland's abortion issue, I have to conclude that he is in serious denial ("Public support for greater abortion access is overwhelming", Opinion & Analysis, July 7th).
At one stage, he asserts that “abortion is no longer a divisive issue in Ireland”. He knows full well (although he might wish it otherwise) that abortion, being a life and death issue, is a divisive issue worldwide and always will be. Conveniently he wants the imagined consensus to be reflected in media discussions – as if the pro-life view were not screened out enough already.
He rightly says that “respect for human rights can never be subject to the vagaries of public opinion or politics” and yet uses an opinion poll as a basis to take rights away from living unborn children. He rightly says that human rights law aims to “ensure that all people are afforded a minimum level of protection of a defined set of human rights”. Minimum level? Yet he won’t even accept the right to their very lives for unborn children!
Mr O’Gorman relies heavily on what he calls “international human rights law”, but again he knows that his take on this is hotly disputed. Even if such law did give a right to abortion, which it does not, it would not make terminating the life of an unborn child any less unjust or objectionable. Anyway, I would expect Amnesty to be challenging unjust laws rather than accepting them and using them as a tool to further deprive unborn children of rights.
Mr O’Gorman says that “many believe that life begins at the point of conception”. Only many? That’s just plain bad science.
Mr O’Gorman seems willing to go along with the “citizens’ assembly” idea, but only if the outcome is predetermined. He says the Government must “must mandate the assembly to expand access to abortion”. – Yours, etc,
BRENDAN O’REGAN,
Arklow, Co Wicklow.