Friday, 21 March 2008

My correspondance

I recently wrote to my MP, Colin Challen, asking him to seek ammendments to the HFE Bill which would favour the dignity of the person. He replied saying:
On abortion, should any bill come to the House I will support the status quo. It is my view that the existing law provides sufficient protection for all concerned and maintains the principle that ultimately it is a woman's right to choose whether to have an abortion of not. ... On the issue relating to human tissues, and indeed inter-species embryos, I support research into the former, but am somewhat nervous about the latter. ... I do not consider an embryo in any sense can be described as a human being. I am concerned about inter-species tissue development, since I personally would prefer that experimentation on animals for human benefit were phased out as we develop better methods of addressing our own health concerns. I will not support inter-species proposals.
Actually, I wonder how prepared most of our MPs are for the kinds of decision-making that goes on now in Parliament. What kind of education did they have to form their understanding of what comprises the basic platform of human existence: human nature, ethics, society, culture, history and law. Anyway, I replied to him with the following letter:
Dear Mr Challen,
Thank you for your letter regarding the HFE Bill and for the indications which you have made to me. I am glad that you don’t want to extend the legal provision for Abortion, but I have to remind you to that it is not possible to say that the Law “provides sufficient protection for all concerned”, for Abortion, as you know, involves the killing of the pre-born child.
Later in your letter you explain that you “do not consider an embryo in any sense can be described as a human being”. This is extremely dishonest of you, since we know from science that a human life begins at fertilisation. Discussion over vocabulary and terminology such as “person” and “human being” is made at a philosophical level, whereas science has already clarified the status of the human embryo. And it is questions of science that are being put before Parliament at this time.
The reason for this Bill is because the UK wants to lead the global scientific community into the unknown. Whereas we should be refocusing our attention on adult stem cell research; not to do so will be a grave injustice to people with spinal cord injuries and other illnesses who could benefit from these technologies.
As for the “right to choose” which you speak about: freedom is not a political category but flows from the right to life. To place freedom before life actually goes against the fabric of political life and will tend to destroy it.
Sadly, I have to say, on the basis of your views, that in an Election I could not vote for you to represent me or any other human beings. Nor, on the same basis, would I recommend that anyone vote for you.


Niamh said...

wonderful letter padre. On the day when we remember the death of Our Lord, you have defended the killing of these innocent children. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Anonymous said...

At least the man has the honesty to state his case. We know where we stand. We pray for him and all MPs. If they cannot even attempt to uphold God's law, we have clearer direction for our prayers and actions. God has promised that he will build His church, prevailing even against the gates of hell. There was a wonderful loal witness today after the Stations of the Cross, to a local abortion clinic, to pray for an end to the loss of life.

Anonymous said...

May I, a non-Christian, suggest a way to strengthen your message?

I have spent the past three years exposing embryonic stem cells as a scientific fraud. I knew it was a fraud in 2005 when I observed that virtually every stem cell item in newspapers and so-called medical journals contained lies denigrating the ability of adult stem cells.
The lies continue to this day. A real science does not need lies to survive. Embryonics needs lies, for who would bother to support it if they knew the truth, that adult stem cells can do in 2008 what embryonics will not be able to do in 2018.

From Prof.McGuckin, one of UK's most prestigious embryonic researchers:
“The best estimates of the embryonic scientists in our own university in Newcastle is that embryonic stem cells may not be able to help people this side of 50 years. That’s my lifetime. And that’s worrying. We can’t wait that long.”

Contact me if you would like more details.

Don Margolis

John Paul said...

Thanks for this padre! It never ceases to amaze me how either through dishonesty or blind ignorance people fail to see the embryo merely as something with the potential to be human, rather than a human being with potential. I'm so glad our priests are fighting for us on this!

Kate said...

Fr., that's an excellent letter,thanks for publishing it as it will inspire many to follow suit.At previous general elections, the Bishops have encouraged Catholics to vote with due regard to something called 'the common good', and have cautioned against rejecting a candidate on the basis of his [pro] abortion views, describing this as single issue voting.Well, it seems that the chickens are coming home to roost.I believe that pro-life candidates are much more likely to have more in common with Catholic teaching and ethos, as JP2 often said, the right to life is the basis of all other rights.
Our good Bishops were not poorly advised, but very poorly advised, possibly even misled.I hope that they will have the courage to get rid of those around them with secularist and sometimes, feminist, agendas.I am reminded of an NBCW study day in April 2000, attended by a pro-life delegate.When she put forward a pro-life suggestion, she was shouted down, the loudest voices being a Bishop and the development officer for NBCW.NBCW is a consultative body to the Bishops' Conference of England and Wales.

Fr Richard Aladics said...

Thanks Don Margolis. Your website is very interesting; I hope that its is a source of enlightenment for many.(