Sir - If life begins at conception (and, indeed, there is no other logical point at which it can be said to begin), then any deliberate ending of life is wrong. It does not become "more wrong" the closer it approaches to the time when a baby, if born, could survive.
On the contrary, it seems instinctively more wrong to remove from a place of safety a baby who would not otherwise be able to survive.
It has been suggested by Michael Howard and others that the upper limit should be reduced from 24 to 20 weeks. This is misleading, because in fact the upper limit is not 24 weeks for all abortions. For babies diagnosed as having a disability, and for some others, there is no time limit, and abortion is allowed up to the moment of birth.
In ignoring these abortions, a strong message is sent out that disabled babies matter less than those aborted for other reasons. I have spina bifida, and 90 per cent of babies with my disability are now aborted - a fatal discrimination against those with disabilities.
Any upper-limit Bill will always exclude the most vulnerable of the unborn - for instance younger babies and those with disabilities, who are most in need of the protection of the law.
The only logical amendment to the law would be to legislate against all abortions, and put support mechanisms in place for women with crisis pregnancies. This would be just towards both the unborn and women facing difficulties. Anything else sells both groups short.
Alison Davis, Blandford Forum, Dorset
1 comment:
The law should be such that equal human kindess and humanity is accorded to both the unborn baby and the parents. Abortions will always happen whatever the legislation so banning abortion entirely does not arrive at a net bonus for human life or happiness. I think we should always err towards life and agree that everything must be done to offer the support necessary which is needed to prevent many abortions. But as Gandalf says in Lord of the Rings:
"Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends."
I can't say I support his view that "many who live deserve death" but in general I agree that none us are able to see clearly enough to make these decisions with certainty.
My question is which of us can truly say what is best in each situation? Therefore whatever our personal views let us hope that we never fall into the trap of judging others and thinking that we know better or are morally superior.
Post a Comment