Standing up for the right to life of the unborn is not an attack on women

SIR, I feel it necessary to respond to Dr. Meave Mahon-Ferriter’s letter to The Kerryman on December 21, which was headlined: ‘if men could have abortions, they would be available at ATM machines’. IN her contribution, Dr. Mahon Ferriter disagrees with views expressed by Cllr. Michael Gleeson, regarding the right to life of unborn babies. She referred to the views expressed by Cllr Gleeson in an earlier letter to The Kerryman as sanctimonious and misogynistic. As I have read and listened to his views on this issue on many occasions, I consider it grossly unfair and unjustifiable to associate Cllr. Gleeson with these terms.

Dr. Mahon Ferriter, like so many of our political and cultural leaders, refers to the issue of the Eighth Amendment and abortion as complex. I disagree with this assertion. As late as last July a High Court judge ruled that the word ‘unborn’ in the Irish Constitution means an ‘unborn child’, with rights beyond the right to life which “must be taken seriously” by the State. Mr. Justice Richard Humphries said that the unborn child, enjoys “significant” rights and legal protection at common law, by statute and under the Constitution “going well beyond the right to life alone”. He also stated that article 42a of the Constitution obliges the State to protect “all children” and that because an unborn child is “clearly a child”, article 42a applied to all children “both before and after birth”.

In my humble opinion there is nothing complex in this clear ruling. The judge is merely confirming an obvious and undeniable fact: that the life of a human being begins at conception.

A human life goes through many stages of development, the first stage begins at conception, the second at birth, then to toddler, to adolescent, to adult and finally to natural death. The Eighth Amendment protects human life in that first stage of development. There are many laws to protect human life at all other stages of development and again there is nothing complex in this. However, there are those who wish to believe that a human being, in that first stage of development, in its mothers womb, is not a human life at all and therefore is not worthy of any legal protection.

If the Eighth Amendment were to be repealed, this would have the effect of removing this protection from preborn babies. Now this issue becomes very complex, because this would mean society would be giving its implicit consent to individuals to put different values, or no value at all on the life of preborn babies, depending on the babies’ individual circumstances.

At a recent council meeting I was accused of being judgemental for expressing my opinions on the importance of protecting the Eighth Amendment. I have never judged anyone in my life, because I am not fit to do so. I have and will continue to express these views, not with the intention of judging or offending any person but rather with the intention of explaining the importance of protecting the Eight Amendment of our Constitution.

It is all too easy for people like Dr. Mahon Ferriter to accuse any person who disagrees with their views as misogynistic, judgmental, sanctimonious, etc. I can only presume that the use of these terms in such a derogatory manner is to silence those of us who wish to keep the Eight Amendment in our Constitution. It will not have the desired effect. Sincerely, John Joe Culloty MCC, Killarney.