The Belief That's Now Unmentionable

Reading this article in the Mail this week, I was struck by the way that those who do not agree with abortion now seem to be scared of voicing that belief to the world. Which ever way they wish to dress it up with quotes about 'leading-edge medicine', the very act of banning it suggests that there are moralistic reasons behind this decision.

But, I will not be too harsh on Ms Czernin. I can understand why simply coming out and saying that you do not agree with abortion would be a problem. For they probably realise that such an admission would set themselves in opposition to the pro-abortion lobby. A lobby composed of death-threatening, maniacal feminists.

The end of the article also has some quotes from a pro-abortion bint, named Anne Quesney:

Forty years after abortion was legalised in Britain, women's rights continue to be under threat from those who oppose abortion and want to impose their personal beliefs across the country

No, actually, they want to stop abortions within their own clinic – how is that ‘imposing their personal beliefs across the country’? It is you, in fact, who is imposing your beliefs on people, and when they disagree with you it’s your lobby that is the one that seeks resort to violence in attempt to silence opposition.

As for myself, I have said before that my view is that the less abortions there are in this country, the better. There's nothing unreasonable in that! And, considering that I do accept that there is always going to be a demand for abortions so a ban would not be in feasible, I would regard my views as moderate and sensible. How airing of such views is threatining 'women's rights', I do not know.

Ultimately, it’s Anne Quesney’s world that we live in, not mine. Britain’s abortion laws are not ‘under threat’, but have recently been given a massive vote of confidence by the Liberal Democrats and Labour. Instead of making it harder for women to have abortions, we are as liberal as just about anywhere in the world. The result has been increasing abortions year after year.

This is where we are at, morally. We have what seem like the vestigial remains of Christianity - with some aspects completely disregarded - surviving in the sort of Secular Religion that I talked about a few weeks ago. Where we believe that abortions should be as ubiquitous as appendix operations, but when it comes to the remains of Tasmanians, taken in the name of science, we regard it as immoral. We sneer at Polygamous Mormons, and retain a prohibition on polygamy, yet are desperate to welcome in ‘civil partnerships’ and gay adoption. This is a fundamentally illogical stand to take, after all aren’t they also ‘loving’ relationships, which take place behind closed doors?

It all feels like a great contradiction. And that is the point: this is an experiment that has no logic, doctrine or stability, and is, therefore, doomed to failure sooner rather than later.