‘Abortion: The Elephant in the Room’ by Donal Lavery

Abortion is a proverbial ‘hot potato’, an issue upon which people  disagree and even, in the USA, shoot dead surgeons as a result of opposition to it. Let me start by saying I utterly condemn any such behaviour as completely unacceptable and abhorrent in a civilised society. I am an opponent of any attempts to introduce abortion ”on demand”, and could never bring myself to willingly vote for it. All of our main political parties here in the North are fairly anti-abortion and I am glad it is one thing on which there exists a consensus. But many political analysts around the world regard this to be an issue more closely associated with the Right than with the Left; given the many Christian and Evangelical groups which are virulently opposed to the act. As a left-wing Christian, I want to advance and advocate a leftist case against abortion.

Before abortion was introduced by Harold Wilson’s Labour Government in 1967, taxes on the highest earners were up to and including 95%. As a society, we used the money of the affluent to build our infrastructure, to create a National Health Service free at the point of need, to enhance educational facilities for pupils and students, and to provide social services/welfare to those who need it. Prior to its introduction, people had large families and the Government regarded this as a good thing as it meant there would be plenty of people within the labour market who would work and pay taxes which supplement revenue for state spending. This was the era of John Maynard Keynes and full employment, when running deficits to invest was seen as a good thing, before Thatcher destroyed this golden age with Monetarism. If children were unwanted or unable to be cared for, the state regarded it as its rightful and moral duty to provide them with the support they needed via well- funded social services. Nobody cared about the money required, rightfully. The same Labour Government abolished the death penalty and legislated for abortion – Myra Hindley & Ian Brady missed state execution by just three weeks, as the trial judge claimed ”Life imprisonment is the only sentence for which the law now allows.”

What does that say about priorities and values, that two people who abducted, raped and murdered children had their right to life protected while a practice was initiated with state sponsorship which deprived unborn infants of the very same right? The rates of abortion tend to increase under Conservative governments and this is the result of a simple fact: Caring for other people’s children costs money – Money which has to be raised via progressive taxation on the most wealthy. British Conservatives care nothing about the right to life for unborn infants because it hits the pockets of their ”mates” who form the Establishment-club. To have a well-regulated, Scandinavian-type social democracy, like Norway or Finland, where investment in children and young people is sufficiently high (as it should be) means a return to the post-war consensus of ”Tax & Spend” economics. Instead, the Monetarists and the Thatcherites want a ”small state”, with fewer resources and services, and for people to be discouraged from having children which the affluent have to subsidise via the welfare system. It is a morally repugnant indictment of the ”selfish society”, knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. And remember, the Tories are well aware that working and middle-class families have more children, all of whom will gain the right to vote; but not usually for them. So, less working-class voters in the big urban areas, means more Conservative seats. To put it bluntly.

I do not doubt that there are reasonable arguments which can be put forward for accessing abortion, not least that unsafe back-street clinics will be perpetuated, but the irony I always encounter with the people articulating them is that someone already preserved their right to life – after all, the pro-choice crowd have obviously been born! Edward Heath was not necessarily a tireless advocate for women’s rights, having only one woman in his Tory Government (a younger Margaret Thatcher), yet he was quite clearly pro-choice in his leanings. This was the Prime Minister who took the free pints of milk off  school-children to save money – so, are these people really pro-child either? In fact, I think it’s simply a question of money to them. A ”Don’t have what you cannot afford” sort of thing. But nonetheless a rotten ethos and example for the world.

But although opposed, I’m no fundamentalist – if the mother’s life is in danger, then we have a duty to protect her life. My morality is not based around Canon law or biblical leanings, but simple empathy, that I would like for someone to stand up for my right to exist, whether I am 6 months old or 60 years old. Nor am I ever going to have to go through with the procedure myself, being a man. So unlike some men, who strongly denounce women for having abortions or the practice per se, I think the solution must lie with women. Men in Ireland, the UK and the Western World would not accept female-dominated parliaments legislating to restrict access to condoms, so why should women be forced to accept male-oriented legislatures dealing with an issue that impacts on their bodies? I fully support equal rights for women and believe women are smarter and better at most things than men, proposing strongly that we must become like Scandinavian society as a means of ending such inequalities; so no ultra-feminist can read my writings and shout chauvinism because it isn’t going to hold up in light of previous advocacy. But on this issue, women must have the right to choose, but rather in a female-only referendum throughout the island of Ireland. A referendum is necessary in the Free State, to address the ban on abortion which exists within the Constitution there. But in the North, it would give the politicians the ultimate test of public inclinations on the matter. And who knows how it will go?

None of the mainstream political parties on this island can come up with anything which avoids controversy surrounding the issue, with any proposal being acceptable to one group of voters but isolating to another. However, the closest thing that exists to a silver-bullet is to let women decide the issue directly, once and for all. I don’t like the idea of abortion, but I recognise the necessity and value of democracy: So let’s have the referendum and campaign accordingly. To all the men out there, yes we should not have a vote but we do have a voice and the task must be to persuade voters to do what they think is right for society in Ireland and set an example that we care.