Roman Catholic-run Irish hospitals to be forced into abortion acts.

I believe that the Catholic Church has, and always will, taken the right stance when it comes to some matters of conscience. I am a comparatively recent convert to the ideal of disliking the very idea of abortion; having, for many years hewed to the idea that a woman alone should hold the right regarding what happens to the child she carries within her womb. But I examined the evidence, including the UK Legislation regarding abortion, and, having determined that one could lead a regiment  of cavalry through the loosely-worded clauses, I honestly believe that we now have, in this oh-so-liberal Nation of ours: abortion-on-demand! That, folks, is plain wrong. Human life is precious, it should never be extinguished on a whim, and I believe that the Noble Lady Nuala O’Loan’s Religious Conscience Bill; whilst still a very short step, should have at least a fair hearing when it eventually arrives at the House of Commons.

I was raised in the Roman Catholic Faith. I absorbed the teachings of that Faith in the times of my childhood, I married in a Catholic Church some fifty years ago, in the Roman tradition, and all three of my children were baptised in that Faith. Despite no longer associating myself in any way or form with the Catholic Church, having determined that I could no longer sit silent when priests spoke from the pulpit to traduce the politics I have held for decades. I also decided to absent myself from the church when the very laws of our land were being breached by many Catholic priests bent on the abuse of innocent children, those same priests who were then protected and virtually concealed by a Catholic Hierarchy, who were intent on the outer carapace of that Church seeming intact: whilst concealing the cancer inside that religious body.

But today I do not write about British attitudes to abortion, but instead to the deep and devious planning by Irish Republican politicians, which is only now unfolding after the recent Irish Abortion Referendum; and the acquiescence of an Irish voting majority which is only now realising the extent to which the very ‘wool’ has been pulled over their collective eyes within the Republic.  The Irish Prime Minister confirmed that, under the terms of the proposed Abortion legislation, all publicly funded hospitals will be required to provide abortion services once legislation is enacted in the Irish Parliament. This confirmation was in reply to a question from Solidarity MP Mick Barry, who asked would abortion services be provided by the new national maternity hospital to be built in the grounds of St Vincent’s Hospital in Dublin, “a campus controlled by a company with a board dedicated to a Catholic ethos”.

The Irish Prime Minister (Mr Varadkar) said the Government would use the same model is used for the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act, which provides for abortion where a woman’s life is at risk. “Hospitals such as Holles Street, which has a Catholic voluntary ethos, the Mater, St Vincent’s and others will be required and expected to carry out any procedure that is legal in the State.” In other words, the Irish Prime Minister is stating that Catholic concerns and objections to the act of abortion will be overruled; and it will be soon be seen that employment within hospitals, in whatever area, shall be governed by the Rule of Law, with no allowance made for conscientious objectors to absent themselves from the practice of killing the unborn baby!

So, the question surely must be whether the Roman Catholic Church in the Republic will, stand fast against the abortion orders, and close the hospitals down, rather that bow down to the demands of the baby-killers? I wonder why THAT particular question wasn’t highlighted during the run up to the Referendum vote? I also wonder if the Irish voters will now consider that they have been ‘conned’ by experts, who always stated that their one concern was for the safety of the future mother; but never, ever, mentioned the fact that the full weight of the Law would be slammed down on any doctor, nurse or hospital administration who dared to stand against the Government: especially when the Referendum result was a vast majority in favour of killing the unborn?

 

15 comments for “Roman Catholic-run Irish hospitals to be forced into abortion acts.

  1. Mudplugger
    June 29, 2018 at 8:34 pm

    The key phrase is ‘publicly funded’ – if any wholly private institutions choose not to undertake legal procedures, then that’s entirely their business decision but, whether they are hospitals, schools, nurseries or other bodies, if they are taking their revenue from the public purse, then ‘the one who pays the piper calls the tune’.

    The State is the customer here, ‘the piper’, and it’s the State’s terms & conditions , ‘the tune’, which apply. If any school/hospital decides it doesn’t like those terms, no-one’s forcing it to take the money, they can shut up shop and go pray somewhere.

    • Dogleg4
      June 30, 2018 at 10:17 pm

      Mudplugger
      It would be trivial to leave all the current facilities and financial arrangements as they are, while creating parallel, state funded, abortion clinics.
      I presume this solution is not attractive because at least part of the motive is for the victors in the culture wars to humiliate the losers, and to grind the losers faces in it.
      That is not a good look.

  2. Tom
    June 29, 2018 at 11:28 pm

    The Catholic Church is, I believe, the largest charitable healthcare provider on the planet. However taxation is raised by force and can never be charitable, no matter how it is spent. As a previous commenter says, this only affects hospitals where they have accepted such tainted money from the state. Charities that make that mistake become state agencies and in the end take on its characteristics.. Not that I believe the tyrants will stop at “regulating” state funded hospitals. In the end they will demand everyone complies. They forced the closure of the Catholic adoption agencies in the U.K. after all.

    Time to “render into Caesar” and move on.

    • June 30, 2018 at 12:24 pm

      We haven’t had a Caesar to render to for nigh on 1400 years, so let’s chuck that one out. The modern pollies who would try on a Caesar mantle are just the blokes down the street that were elected by other blokes down the street. Caesars thay ain’t. They are supposed to serve us.

      As for ‘public monies’ that is something of a two-edged sword. The public is coerced into handing over its money : at sword point (or these days, cops with guns). The Catholics in the pews who collectively, every Sunday on the plate, donated their after-tax leftovers to build the hospitals should not be cut down by the back edge of the sword that demand that the hospitals comply with the thousand and one strings attached to the coerced monies by atheists and baby-murderers.

      No, not render unto caesar, but doctors and nurses need encouragement in refusing to be cowed into performing these unspeakable acts. They will be threatened with ten thousand dollar fines and a year in jail, as they were in Tasmania. But the people will rise up if any such medical practitioner was so treated.

      The homosexual Prime Minister of Ireland, who stood for office on a pro-life platform, should be ousted asap. The Irish know how to bring such terminal pressures to bear very well from experience.

      The Catholic Church in Oz is under great pressure these days. It is getting as difficult as several generations ago when the Catholic Archbishops told the atheistic, anti-Catholic government to back off or it would sell off all the Catholic Hospitals and Catholic schools and let the government pick up the entire tab for providing those massive ‘public’ services.

      As for Mike, take courage old fella. You are much admired, but do yourself no service showing how you ‘left’ because some ( a very few) of your clerics were nasty human beings. The rest are just about ok, and some are the finest men you could meet. You were given a solid moral grounding that cannot be found elsewhere. Keep it. Honour thy Father.

  3. Pcar
    June 30, 2018 at 12:36 am

    I believe that the Roman Catholic Church has, and always will, take the wrong stance when it comes to some matters of conscience. Their doctrines; subservient adherents; segregated education; and intolerance are – like Islam – stuck in medieval times. This has resulted in lack of progress and poverty reduction in RC countries..

    Sorry Mike.

    • June 30, 2018 at 12:32 pm

      Sorry Pcar: rearrange the following to make a well known evaluation…. lloxob

      • James Strong
        June 30, 2018 at 6:36 pm

        Why is Pcar’s comment lloxob?

        Subservient adherents – bearing in mind the authority of the Pope and the priests in the RC church how can you deny that the RC church wants subservient adherents?

        Segregated education – isn’t this a long-standing desire and practice of the RC church?

        Intolerance – I don’t know about this. I guess the RC line is that followers of other religions are destined for The Fire, but there are other religions that think the same.

        It’s not that Pcar’s comment is lloxob.
        More that your response is oblxol.

        And *all* religions are ssnnoeen.

        • Pcar
          July 2, 2018 at 1:04 am

          @James Strong

          Well said. I was hoping someone would point this out.

          imho RC, like RoP, often behaves like an authoritarian cult. Hence Luther.

          Thanks.

          • July 2, 2018 at 1:31 pm

            The Catholic Church has no ability to behave like an authoritarian cult. No one is forced to become or remain catholic. Subserviant adherents? Golly that sounds like condemning an airline that insists on its pilots following procedures. Intolerant !!! I am suprised you didn’t use Capitals. The very idea is nonsense. Intolerant? So if you tell a person who is about to jump off a cliff that they will be smashed to painful death on the rocks below, is somehow ‘intolerant’? To tell someone that their actions will cause them to suffer an eternal death in pain too is ‘intolerant’? Segregated education is ‘intolerant. Gordon Bennett. Some say that single sex toilets are ‘intolerant’. Some say that we must tolerate women’s ‘Right’ to kill their babies. Some do not know what tolerate means.

            One tolerates people. One is intolerant to bad principles.

            • James Strong
              July 2, 2018 at 5:43 pm

              ‘No one is forced to […]remain catholic.’

              Threats of going to Hell don’t count,of course. That’s just how members are ‘persuaded’ to stay.

              Social ostracism in Catholic countries, no more than another persuasion method?

              Or Purgatory. Or Limbo, like the others a made-up state, now unmade-up.

            • Pcar
              July 2, 2018 at 9:03 pm

              You are diverting, none you list were classed as such by me.

              Segregated education is divisive and often leads to intolerance and violence against those not in segregated education.

              RC Segregated education is depicted as compelled by evil Prods in NI, but accepted as normal justified (why?) RC Self segregated education in GB.

  4. June 30, 2018 at 1:59 pm

    “So, the question surely must be whether the Roman Catholic Church in the Republic will, stand fast against the abortion orders, and close the hospitals down, rather that bow down to the demands of the baby-killers? ”

    Agree with Mike here. Meanwhile:

    https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/06/30/uk-elderly-anglican-priest-defends-marriage-to-25-year-old-romanian-male-model/

    • James Strong
      June 30, 2018 at 6:46 pm

      ‘Agree with Mike here’

      Are you saying that you agree with Mike, in which case it’s much better to write ‘I agree with Mike here.’

      Or are you giving an instruction, an imperative, to your readers that hey should agree with Mike.

      In English the base form of the verb is used as an imperative. Because of the paucity of inflections it is necessary to specify the subject of the verb, if you want to make your meaning clear.

      It is not ‘hip’, ‘cool’, down wiv da yoof, man’ or even anything positive at all to use unclear language. Why do you do this?

      On the other hand, using an adjective without a subject or verb before it doesn’t obscure the meaning in the same way.

      Example – Counter-productive to write opaque language.

      You might think this is nit-picking, you are entitled to your opinion.

      My opinion, clearly stated before this evening, is that nobody who thinks he has something important to say will take the chance of being misunderstood.

      • June 30, 2018 at 8:21 pm

        James S is now officially my guardian angel. 🙂

  5. Dr Evil
    July 1, 2018 at 6:58 pm

    Destroying a human being whether a gastrula, morulla or foetus is morally wring and murder. These are all terms for an immature baby. If there is something wrong with it nature usually destroys it. But not always. However, men are not Gods and destroying it is simply wrong. Destroying it for no valid reason is also wrong. 200,000 UK citizens get murdered ever year but vile killers just end up in jail for 12 to 20 years. We are an imbecile society that deserves to be destroyed unless this madness ends.

Comments are closed.