Sir, – Fintan O'Toole ("Shining light on abortion – one of Ireland's 'unknown knowns'", Opinion & Analysis, September 15th) ignores the fact that all the aspects of abortion he alludes to have been discussed, openly and repeatedly, in the 32 years since 1983. There are no "unknown knowns" in this regard. Individual revelations by women are nothing new. Such revelations in some instances have not been a matter of shame for decades. In other cases, women who claim to have been damaged by abortion disclose very negative feelings including shame. By and large Irish media outlets refuse to report these latter voluntary testimonies, despite repeated offers to furnish them.
This highlights another serious “unknown known” that Fintan ignores – the lack of diversity of opinion on social issues in the Irish media. This latter is a democratic deficit. Many of the “we” know it and generally ignore it. Media managers and editors create the imbalance and Fintan himself participates in it. The information and commentary provided is deliberately partial.
Irish people travel abroad for services and products other than abortion that are not legal at home. But Fintan implies that because of his theorised “unknown knowns” of abortion (the fact that we know but ignore that Irish women avail of foreign opportunities to procure abortions), abortion on demand should become legal at home. The “we” haven’t supported this frail argument, yet. – Yours, etc,
NEIL BRAY,
Cappamore, Co Limerick.
A chara, – There has been a surprising change of tactics in this debate. Up until now the push to repeal the Eighth Amendment was going the “softly, softly” route, with claims we must change the Constitution to allow for abortion in very limited circumstances, such as when there is a diagnosis that the child is unlikely to survive very long after birth or other equally heart-wrenching situations. And, of course, once the principle that human life was sacred from the very beginning was abandoned it would be far easier to push the boundaries ever further until the unrestricted regime, which is the real goal, finally was achieved.
So it was quite amazing to see a flurry of articles in these pages over the last week taking the “all or nothing” approach, as it were, before the debate even officially kicks off and admitting up front that this is the real agenda.
I quite welcome this bombardment of articles because I think their approach means we will have a more honest discussion of the issue. They make it clear that this is, and always was, a straightforward debate about whether an unborn child has a right to life that must be protected as far as practicable; or if we should we should deny that right and invent a new one whereby a woman may end that life in any and all circumstances. And I welcome this change of tactics because I think, contrary to what those who have adopted them may believe, that knowing the truth of what this is all about can only help people to become even more determined to retain the constitutional protection we have in place for human life from the earliest stages of its development. – Is mise,
Rev PATRICK G BURKE,
Castlecomer,
Co Kilkenny.
Sir, – Jim Stack (September 15th) laments that in the recent referendum on gay marriage "the media adopted a successful formula – one celebrity after another was wheeled out, who was either gay, had someone belonging to them who was gay, or was just well-disposed towards gays, and they were given very sympathetic media coverage". So, it was the media what done it. Substitute the active "stepped up" or simply "came out" for the condescending passive "was wheeled out" and you come a lot nearer the truth – a truthful and frequently painful stepping out of the shadows by real people first and "celebrities" second, if at all.
Mr Stack fears that discussion on the Eighth Amendment may be coloured by the experience of real people. Perish the thought. – Yours, etc,
PADDY McGOVERN,
Dublin 8.
Sir, – Many women who regret their decision to abort their unborn child are not given space in the media. We will never have an honest, fair or open conversation about these social issues as long as the Irish media is leading the conversation. – Yours, etc,
MARY ROSE DOHERTY,
Buncrana, Co Donegal.
A chara, – Maria Mhic Mheanmain (September 16th) states that the "fact remains that Irish people are deeply uncomfortable with abortion" and that there is no public demand for abortion. Yet in the following sentence she indicates that the number of people at the "Rally for Life" outnumbers those at the "pro-abortion" rallies.
Similarly Ms Mhic Mheanmain indicates that there will be thousands of “pro-life” volunteers reminding voters to “identify pro-life candidates” as she then concedes that it will be an election issue. I presume this is to dissuade the potential for a future government which promises a subsequent referendum on this matter.
Ms Mheanmain also states that opinion polls suggest that there is no change in the number of people who wish to see abortion on demand or as a matter of “choice”, yet fails to mention those who would support abortion in the cases of rape, incest or foetal abnormalities.
I’m tired of people determining that they are the conscience of the people in this and similar matters. I was not eligible to vote on this matter previously and sincerely don’t know what way a vote would go if a referendum was held on whether to allow abortion on demand or limited to certain circumstances.
However, if Ms Mheanmain believes that the Irish people strongly feel that the Eighth Amendment should stand as is, then she and others have nothing to fear from a subsequent referendum. I believe that the people should at least be allowed that choice. – Is mise,
ERIC CREAN,
Dún Laoghaire, Co Dublin.