Michael Kelly
As I predicted in this newspaper some time ago, Fine Gael is increasingly trying to frame the debate around legalising abortion in all circumstances up to 12-weeks as a moderate position. The reality, of course, is that there is nothing moderate about the state-sanctioned killing of children – whatever the Taoiseach’s spin doctors try to say.
Many Fine Gael backbenchers have been wheeled out into the media to speak about the ‘journey’ that they have been on. Some have claimed that they were against abortion until hearing the evidence before the Committee on the Eighth Amendment.
Setting aside the fact that the committee was heavily weighted in favour of pro-choice voices, it’s hard to take seriously politicians who claimed that they were against abortion a few months ago and yet voted for Enda Kenny’s abortion legislation in 2013.
It’s a classic case of doublespeak so masterfully articulated by George Orwell in Nineteen Eighty-Four – a crass combination of ‘doublethink’ and ‘newspeak’.
Best place
Take, for example, a Fine Gael backbencher who was on RTÉ Radio One this week articulating how her mind had been changed on abortion. She simultaneously claimed to be pro-life while at the same time supporting the right to kill vulnerable children in their mother’s womb.
There have been other politicians who have claimed that the campaign to repeal Article 40.3.3 – which guarantees the equal right to life of the unborn child – has nothing to do with abortion. They claim simply to believe that the Constitution is not the best place to deal with such issues.
This rings hollow when the question is asked what they would do in the event of repeal. The inevitable answer is legislate for some form of abortion.
I have also heard other politicians claim that they are personally opposed to abortion but they think that it is up to other people, as if they have no obligation to defend the weakest in society. There is no other rights issue in which such a flimsy argument would be taken seriously.
Take, for example, if the Oireachtas proposed to introduce exploitative legislation that would permit employers to ride roughshod over the rights of employees. How many TDs and Senators, I wonder, would go in to a television studio and try to argue that while they wouldn’t exploit workers themselves, they don’t see it as their duty to stop others exploiting vulnerable people? It would be laughable.
The protection of the rights of the unborn, it would seem, is the only issue with which politicians are expected to leave their conscience at the door before voting on.
In a functioning democracy, people are entitled to different views on abortion. I will never agree with someone thinking abortion is okay, but I defend their right to articulate sincerely-held views that are contrary to mine. However, people ought to have the courage of their convictions. One can’t be in favour of abortion and pro-life at the same time – it’s a logical and moral contradiction.
Politicians should stand by what it is they support rather than talk out of both sides of their mouths. Voters should be wary of doublespeak and call it out where they find it.
