Sir, – The “worse than Herod” slur levelled against the Taoiseach is most offensive, and no doubt penetrates even a skin thickened by many years of public service. Let us not forget, however, that anybody who is publicly engaged on any side of a sensitive debate is a sitting duck for cranks. It would be very wrong to associate all those who are concerned about Mr Kenny’s intention to legislate for abortion with the kind of boorishness to which he has been subjected.
Any suggestion that the biblically-informed Herod-slur is representative of the broad pro-life constituency would itself be most offensive. It is to be hoped Mr Kenny and his advisers will avoid any comments that might cast aspersions on those whose opposition to abortion is energised by Biblical faith. Such comments might create the impression that an attempt was being made to discredit views that pose a particular challenge to the cohesiveness of the Coalition. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – It seems we are splitting hairs over the abortion question. Debating whether an entity is a “bunch of cells” or a human being with full rights, or what constitutes a threat to life or health is still missing the point.
The anti-abortion promoters are about imposing their will on others who do not share their views and that is the bottom line. Nobody is trying to require the “pro-life” people to do anything against their own choice, whether it is in regard to religious practice, sexual persuasion, or access to divorce or contraception.
Why do these people feel that, no matter whether they are in a majority or not, they have the right to deny others the choices that they have themselves. This “debate” is about old power bases and those trying to deny others powers and the right to choose. The “anti-choicers” should contemplate what it would be like if power was used to remove their choices on key areas of their own lives – do unto others. . . etc.
No name-calling or scripture- invoking can remove that inconvenient truth. – Yours, etc,