Monday 7 July 2008

 

The latest culture as recommended by our staff

Liz Anderson

Liz suggests


Wednesday, 21st May 2008

Why the abortion time limit will soon come down

James Forsyth 5:59pm

Sadly, the abortion vote last night pretty much split down party lines with 83 percent of Tories in favour of a lower limit and 80 percent of Labour MPs supported the 24 week status quo. It would be a disaster for British politics if abortion was to become a partisan issue—imagine the Commons continually changing the time limit after an election in much the way that US administrations suspend or enact the Mexico City policy. Indeed, my one criticism of the campaign against the 24 week timeframe for so-called ‘social abortions’ is that some of its advocates veered too quickly into partisan language.

But I am hopeful the time limit for ‘social abortions’ will soon come down regardless of which party has a majority in Parliament. Looking at the pictures in the papers today of foetuses—The Mail’s front-page photo of a 23 week old one is particularly arresting—and the medical evidence on both viability and when foetuses begin to feel pain it is hard not to think that the law is going to have to be reformed. Considering that is also what the public appears to want, one feels justified in thinking that this will happen sooner rather than later.

Click here for this week's magazine

Blogs: Americano | Trading Floor | Clive Davis | Melanie Phillips | Stephen Pollard

Actions: Email to a friend  |   Permalink  |   Comments (9)

Post this entry to:   del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Comments

Ian C

May 21st, 2008 6:13pm

Another glaring example of politicians being out of touch with the country.

Tanuki

May 21st, 2008 7:51pm

I'm glad that parliament threw out the proposed changes to the abortion time-limit; for me it would be a disastrous waste of parliamentary time for an incoming Conservative government to waste further time discussing the issue when there are matters like the excess taxation/regulation resultant on 15 years of Labour misrule that would be a far better and productive use of their time.

People in the pub don't fret about abortion time-limits; they worry about petrol at £1.20/litre and whether their rubbish gets collected weekly or fortnightly.

Pete, Scotland

May 21st, 2008 8:45pm

I viewed the pictures in the paper.

I heard the testimony of the nurse where she was handed an aborted baby struggling for breath.

Anne Widecombe was right, how can we come to such a conclusion in the 21st century.

Ben Stevenson

May 21st, 2008 9:33pm

I voted Labour in 2005. I have since voted Conservative in this years local council elections, and plan to vote Conservative in the next general election.
My dislike of Labour's positions on issues like abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and IVF, are a major reason why I have switched allegience - even if these are not officially party political issues. I would welcome the chance to vote for a party that took a pro-life position.
(My economic views have also changed in recent years.)

Ray

May 22nd, 2008 9:06am

Personally, I'd question Tanuki's assertion that the British people care little about abortion.
However, if he is right then we are no different to those wartime Germans who were not unduly worried about trainloads of Jews heading east.

authenticdasein

May 22nd, 2008 2:35pm

"Looking at the pictures in the papers today of foetuses—The Mail’s front-page photo of a 23 week old one is particularly arresting—" time to stop reading the Daily Hatemail perhaps.
@Pete: I heard the testimony also; but I wonder how many testimonies of women who needed to make this difficult decision you listened to, and heeded their particular circumstances. No one, incl. Labour Party MPs, takes abortions lightly.

Tiberius

May 22nd, 2008 3:04pm

I really would like to repeat my post from the earlier thread on this subject, which I believe was censored for being too offensive against Dawn Primarolo.

So I won't, but would say that the general ad hominem attacks allowed on the DT comment boards are just as bad if not worse.

Ben Stevenson

May 22nd, 2008 5:14pm

Tanuki,
Excess regulation may be a problem, but there is no way that it is a bigger issue than 200,000 deaths a year.

Puncheon

May 22nd, 2008 8:55pm

Oh! God spare us the boring sentimentality - like all animals we are programmed to be nice to wee, small thingies. Who cares abour 200,000 useless and unwanted mouthes. Babies and children have no economic value. They are parasites with nothing to offer but charm and egotism, and who have only have the value of the opportunity cost of a pregnant women, ie practically zero. It is no business of politicians, religious maniacs or other busy bodies what a mother or father decides to do with their offspring.

Post a comment

Your comment:*

Your name:*

Your email address:*
(We won't publish this)

*Required information

Please click the button only once - your comment will not be published immediately

Blog
Spectator recommends

Sky - Official Site

Build your own Sky package online. Sky TV, Broadband & Talk only £16.

Sky TV, Broadband & Talk from £16 a Month

Sky TV & free broadband packages available from £16 a month. Choose from a standard free sky box, sky plus...


Spectator classifieds

ROME CENTRE

PORTA METRONIA, ROME Standing high on the top of one of the seven hills of Rome- the Coelian- this unique

City Breaks. ROME and PARIS

ROME and PARIS: over 350 holiday rentals apartments listed: visit  www.romanreference.com  and  www.parisreference.com or call +39 0648 903612.

Jewellery. RUFFS (Estd. 1904).

Goldsmiths by Design Welcome to Ruffs!  You have found a company of Goldsmiths that specialises in the manufacture, amongst other