Dear Editor, The State-funded Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC) is now campaigning for abortion. In its statement to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women on February 13 in Geneva, and in its report submitted to the committee in January, it focused on “a woman’s right to bodily autonomy” and called for Ireland “to revise its legal framework on abortion”.
In other words, repeal the Eighth Amendment which saves lives of innocent babies who should enjoy the most basic human right to life and to equality.
The IHREC view is that the “bodily autonomy” of a mother always trumps the human right of a baby to its life, and that the baby has no dignity or worth in this re-engineered interpretation of human rights and equality that is promoted by the liberal elite with help from a supportive and campaigning media. The IHREC ignores the responsibility of the mother in its blind pursuit of her rights.
In its report to the UN Committee, the IHREC produced evidence stating that after consultation with women, 212 responses out of 217 received favoured repeal of the Eighth Amendment. What a contrast to 70% of the published responses to the Citizens’ Assembly consultation favouring retention of the life-saving Amendment? What a contrast between a culture of death and a culture of life and equality? Is this a case of the IHREC discovering ‘alternative facts’?
Its report disguises the vast extent of the opposition to repealing the Eighth Amendment. Is that what is called ‘fake news’?
Dear Editor, When first I learned that Dr Patricia Lohr, Medical Director of British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), was to address the Citizen’s Assembly (CA), I was pleased that this would occur. Dr Lohr would be in a position to explain exactly what is involved.
Ms Justice Laffoy, of the CA, made it clear that speakers were to dwell on facts only. However, Dr Lohr took it from this that, while she would dwell on facts, she was free to omit those facts she considered unpalatable.
And so it was. According to her supplied script, she omitted any reference to the deliberate taking of human (unborn) life, any reference to the words ‘baby’, the 3rd trimester (when the taking of life is most gruesome), ‘feticide’ (related to ‘homicide’), or other words that might cause offence. The wording was so clinical that she might have been referring to the removal of a defective appendix.
With her address thus sanitised, she was able to avoid the truth, and deal instead with differences between Irish and British women seeking abortions.
Equally surprising, her audience seemed to play along with this. She was indeed asked questions, including cost comparisons between those of medical and surgical abortions. But these did not address the main issue, i.e. how does the need arise in the first instance, the consequences for women, and particularly, the deliberate taking of human (unborn) life. She was thus able to avoid also, the ‘roasting’ she deserved.
The questions asked were not at all adequate to be put to the medical director of a leading organisation. This organisation (BPAS), carries out abortions in the UK in its 40+ clinics. It is thus deriving benefit from an abominable trade.
Favouring accuracy of translation over aesthetics
Dear Editor, Oscar Wilde once said of the Palace of Westminster, “The Lords Temporal say nothing, the Lords Spiritual have nothing to say, and the House of Commons has nothing to say and says it”.
Not that Fr Tom Whelan (IC 09/02/2017) has nothing to say, but he is imposing on us another era of liturgical turmoil in pursuit of yet another English translation of the Mass without firstly and indispensably addressing the meaning of the Mass itself. The disagreements surrounding the current translation reflect, inter alia, conflicting Eucharistic and other theologies.
Lex orandi, lex credendi!
His argument is primarily one of compromising accuracy of translation in favour of aesthetics. He equates translation with interpretation despite the latter’s dependence on its faithfulness to the former. He resorts to the old chestnut “consubstantial”, any difficulty with which can be offset by suitable catechesis as happened with “transubstantiation” in the past.
Fr Whelan seems to imply that the text of the Mass should promote selective politico/social agendas. He overlooks that we already pray for ecumenism and that Anglican communities closest to Catholicism dislike the pre-2011 translation as do the Ordinariate today.
Given the inter-regional chaos pertaining to Amoris Laetitia, his confidence in the “competency” of de-centralised decision makers in core matters liturgical seems rather presumptuous.
Cappamore, Co. Limerick.
Right to question Obama honour
Dear Editor, The article ‘Priest questions Dublin city honour for Obama’ in IC 09/02/2017 was well received. Fr O’Cochlain of Finglas rightly asks “Why honour a man who fermented war in Arabian countries and forced Catholics to wage war on innocent unborn?” He defended funding for abortion providers Planned Parenthood and through the Affordable Care Act sought to force religious institutions to offer contraceptives and abortion through insurance schemes.
He also contrived a scheme to swindle service personnel out of their earned Pension Funds – therefore rendering them unable to afford a visit to grandparents’ graves – while Mr Obama will wine/dine in Phoenix Park and visit some distant roots in Offaly. I look forward of more opposition and thank People Before Profit who led the walk-out by Dublin councillors.
It’s time for Ryan Tubridy to apologise
Dear Editor, I write in order to protest at the mockery of the Eucharist on The Late Late Show. Describing the Eucharist as ‘haunted bread’ was an outrageous slur against the Eucharist and Catholics across the island of Ireland. Think of all the young boys and girls who will be making their first Holy Communion this summer and all the people who do an hour in the Adoration chapel every week. Shame on Ryan Tubridy!
The recent episode of The Late Late Show for St Valentine’s Day was another low. The language and double meaning talk that went on was appalling. So it is time for the powers that be in RTÉ to have a chat with Ryan Tubridy and all our prayers would be answered if Mr Tubridy apologised to all the viewers next Friday night.
Will society object to Muslim schools too?
Dear Editor, All of the main faiths in Europe and the Near East – Christianity, Islam and Judaism – are to some extent ascetic.
While the 2011 census indicated that 84% of the Irish population identified themselves as Catholic (Roman) it seems that the same census reported that the Muslim population had increased by just over 51% since the 2006 census.
The devastation in the Near East, Syria especially, is not only the fault of the EU and NATO but shows no sign of abating. The increase of Islamic cultured people may therefore be expected to continue.
As Article 44 of the Constitution makes it virtually impossible for the State to forcibly acquire schools from the Catholic Church, (it is assumed that Protestant schools are sacrosanct), it is likely that the only body of people who will be able to buy the schools or build their own will be the variously ascetic adherents of Islam.
I suspect that today’s Christiano-phobes will not find this to their liking. But I could be wrong.
Rathfarnham, Dublin 16.
Thank you to our priests
Dear Editor, Having listened to a priest on the Late Late Show saying that he felt his life was wasted, I would like to say a big thank you to all our hard-working Catholic priests.
Every day, by your word and the sacraments, you give us strength and direction to deal with whatever is happening in our lives and in the lives of those we love. Thank you also for your celibate state which means that you are fully available to help those in the parish who are going through difficult times.
It is no wonder that the Curé d’Ars exclaimed: “If we once understood the beauty of the Catholic priesthood, we would die of joy!”
Strandhill Road, Sligo.