Hilary White

‘Abortion is genocide’: UK pro-lifers defend Scottish bishop’s Holocaust comparison

Hilary White
Hilary White
Image

ST. ANDREWS Scotland, September 25, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Abortion campaigners in Britain are furious over comments made by a Scottish Catholic bishop comparing legal, state-sponsored abortion to the Nazi Holocaust. But pro-life campaigners who use graphic images, some of which make the same comparison, have said the comparison is both philosophically and historically apt and that abortionists and their defenders should think hard about their position.

Speaking about the decision given last week by a Brighton court that displaying graphic images to protest abortion is not an offence under the Public Order Act, Bishop Joseph Devine of the Motherwell diocese had said: “All who value freedom of speech and expression will welcome the dismissal of this case by the courts.”

“I have no doubt that the publication of the photographs of the victims of Auschwitz and the Burma Railway brought home the horrors of such evil catastrophes far more effectively than a million pleading words. 200,000 abortions take place in Britain each year,” Bishop Devine continued.

“Why is the pro-choice lobby so desperate to hide the truth about abortion from the public?”

The British Pregnancy Advisory Service, still stinging from the court decision exonerating Abort 67 and the use of graphic images, reacted with fury, calling the comments “very warped.”

“It is staggering that those who invoke morality are comfortable with waving large banners of dismembered foetuses” said Clare Murphy, BPAS Director of External Affairs.

However, Andrew Stephenson, the founder of Abort 67 and the man against whom the charges were laid at the behest of BPAS, told LifeSiteNews.com that the bishop’s comment is spot on.

“Is it wrong to compare abortion with the Holocaust? No one argues that abortion is the same as the Holocaust but to deny they are comparable shows an ignorance of history and the reality of abortion,” Stephenson said.

Ann Furedi chief executive of BPAS has said, “We can accept that the embryo is a living thing in the fact that it has a beating heart, that it has its own genetic system within it, it’s clearly human in the sense that it’s not a gerbil and we can recognise that it is human life….but the point is not when does life begin but when does it begin to matter.”

Stephenson said that the question ought to be, “Matters to whom?”

CLICK ‘LIKE’ IF YOU ARE PRO-LIFE!


“Consider the vocabulary of the Third Reich when dehumanising Jews by calling them ‘Life, unworthy of life’ or ‘parasites’ or ‘useless eaters’ and you may feel a slight crawling sensation under your skin,” he said.

It is this sensation, he said, that is the basis of abortionists’ outrage at the comparison of abortion with the Holocaust and other historic atrocities like the slave trade. These comparisons form the basis of the Genocide Awareness Project’s displays used by Stephenson and his colleagues, who are pioneers in the use of the GAP in Britain.

Founded in the US, GAP is being hailed by those who use it as one of the most effective tools ever created to communicate the pro-life message to the public.

Gregg Cunningham, the founder of the GAP, flew to Britain to give testimony on the project at Stephenson’s trial. People who use the GAP displays, most often at university campuses across the US and Canada, say that accusations of “insensitivity” for talking about the similarities between abortion and the Holocaust, are among the most common objections to their work. But Cunningham says that the differences are only matters of form. Abortion, he says, is simply an as-yet unrecognised form of genocide, no different in outcome for its victims.

On the CBR website, the group quotes Webster’s New World Encyclopedia, 1992, that defines “genocide” as “The deliberate and systematic destruction of a national, racial, religious, political, cultural, ethnic, or other group defined by the exterminators as undesirable.”

“That definition readily applies to abortion,” the group says. In the case of abortion, the “national group” is “unwanted” unborn children “and they are now being destroyed at the rate of nearly 1 out of every 3 conceived”.

“They are being terminated in an elaborate network of killing centers.”

Stephenson says his British group always welcomes opposition, which gives the group more opportunities to explain why abortion is a form of genocide.

“Compare abortion provider’s literature sanitizing the process of abortion with calming keywords like ‘Gentle,’ ‘safe’ and ‘healthcare’ with the Waffen SS calming Jews entering the gas chambers, disguising them as ‘showers’ we might be forgiven for thinking there are some moral similarities here,” Stephenson told LSN.

“Abortion providers want their work hidden from public view because when it is seen it is despised.

“Of course in a ‘Me’ culture the response to seeing abortion imagery is often ‘That’s disgusting…you shouldn’t show it’ as opposed to ‘That’s disgusting…they shouldn’t do it.’”

A major part of Stephenson’s winning argument in court was that the pictures are, simply, the truth, and as such cannot be a form of “abuse” as the police had charged.

It was later revealed that police only made the arrest after PBAS had pressured the local council into acting against the pro-life group, raising the suggestion that they are feeling the pinch in their business because of the demonstrations. BPAS, officially a registered charity, listed their income with the Charity Commission last year as a total £25.536 million. 

Clare Murphy, Stephenson said, is upset that these “distressing” images are being shown to women coming to BPAS for abortions. But in doing so, she is merely admitting that abortion, when it is clearly and accurately depicted, is deeply upsetting.

But having made the admission, Murphy and her BPAS colleagues will only question the “morality of those showing the pictures,” not her own in condoning the act they depict, said Stephenson.

“She wants exclusive access to these vulnerable women with no accountability.”

“Clare Murphy and Ann Furedi don’t want you to see what they will do to the unborn child because they don’t want to defend genocide.”

FREE pro-life and pro-family news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Subscribe today. 

Select Your Edition:


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Lisa Bourne

,

Pressure mounts as Catholic Relief Services fails to act on VP in gay ‘marriage’

Lisa Bourne
By Lisa Bourne
Image
Rick Estridge, Catholic Relief Services' Vice President of Overseas Finance, is in a same-sex "marriage," public records show. Twitter

BALTIMORE, MD, April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Nearly a week after news broke that a Catholic Relief Services vice president had contracted a homosexual “marriage” while also publicly promoting homosexuality on social media in conflict with Church teaching, the US Bishops international relief agency has taken no apparent steps to address the matter and is also not talking.

CRS Vice President of Overseas Finance Rick Estridge entered into a homosexual “marriage” in Maryland the same month in 2013 that he was promoted by CRS to vice president, public records show.

Despite repeated efforts at a response, CRS has not acknowledged LifeSiteNews’ inquiries during the week. And the agency told ChurchMilitant.com Thursday that no action had been taken beyond discussion of the situation and CRS would have no further comment.

"Nothing has changed,” CRS Senior Manager for Communications Tom said. “No further statement will be made."

LifeSiteNews first contacted CRS for a response prior to the April 20 release of the report and did not receive a reply, however Estridge’s Facebook and LinkeIn profiles were then removed just prior to the report’s release.

CRS also did not acknowledge LifeSiteNews’ follow-up inquiry later in the week.

“Having an executive who publicly celebrates a moral abomination shows the ineffectiveness of CRS' Catholic identity training,” Lepanto Institute President Michael Hichborn told LifeSiteNews. “How many others who hate Catholic moral teaching work at CRS?”

CRS did admit it was aware Estridge was in a “same-sex civil marriage” to Catholic News Agency (CNA) Monday afternoon, and confirmed he was VP of Overseas Finance and had been with CRS for 16 years.

“At this point we are in deliberations on this matter,” Price told CNA that day.

ChurchMilitant.com also reported that according to its sources, it was a well-known fact at CRS headquarters in Baltimore that Estridge was in a homosexual “marriage.” 

“There is no way CRS didn't know one of its executives entered into a mock-marriage until we broke the story,” Hichborn said. “The implication is clear; CRS top brass had no problem with having an executive so deliberately flouting Catholic moral teaching.”

“The big question is,” Hichborn continued, “what other morally repugnant matters is CRS comfortable with?”

While the wait continues for the Bishops’ relief organization to address the matter, those behind the report and other critics of prior instances of CRS involvement in programs and groups that violate Church principles continue to call for a thorough and independent review of the agency programs and personnel.

“How long should it take to call an employee into your office, tell him that his behavior is incompatible with the mission of the organization, and ask for his resignation?” asked Population Research Institute President Steven Mosher. “About thirty minutes, I would say.”

“The Catholic identity of CRS is at stake,” Hichborn stated. “If CRS does nothing, then there is no way faithful Catholics can trust the integrity of CRS's programs or desire to make its Catholicity preeminent.” 

Advertisement
Featured Image
Thousands of marriage activists gathered in D.C. June 19, 2014 for the 2nd March for Marriage. Dustin Siggins / LifeSiteNews.com
The Editors

, ,

Watch the March for Marriage online—only at LifeSiteNews

The Editors
By

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- At noon on Saturday, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and dozens of cosponsors, coalition partners, and speakers will launch the third annual March for Marriage. Thousands of people are expected to take place in this important event to show the support real marriage has among the American people.

As the sole media sponsor of the March, LifeSiteNews is proud to exclusively livestream the March. Click here to see the rally at noon Eastern Time near the U.S. Capitol, and the March to the Supreme Court at 1:00 Eastern Time.

And don't forget to pray that God's Will is done on Tuesday, when the Supreme Court hears arguments about marriage!

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

, ,

Hillary Clinton: ‘Religious beliefs’ against abortion ‘have to be changed’

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

NEW YORK CITY, April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Speaking to an influential gathering in New York City on Thursday, Hillary Clinton declared that “religious beliefs” that condemn "reproductive rights," “have to be changed.”

“Yes, we've cut the maternal mortality rate in half, but far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health,” Hillary told the Women in the World Summit yesterday.

Liberal politicians use “reproductive health” as a blanket term that includes abortion. However, Hillary's reference echoes National Organization for Women (NOW) president Terry O’Neill's op-ed from last May that called abortion “an essential measure to prevent the heartbreak of infant mortality.”

The Democratic presidential hopeful added that governments should throw the power of state coercion behind the effort to redefine traditional religious dogmas.

“Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper. Laws have to be backed up with resources, and political will,” she said. “Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed.”

The line received rousing applause at the feminist conference, hosted in Manhattan's Lincoln Center by Tina Brown.

She also cited religious-based objections to the HHS mandate, funding Planned Parenthood, and the homosexual and transgender agenda as obstacles that the government must defeat.

“America moves ahead when all women are guaranteed the right to make their own health care choices, not when those choices are taken away by an employer like Hobby Lobby,” she said. The Supreme Court ruled last year that closely held corporations had the right to opt out of the provision of ObamaCare requiring them to provide abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives, and sterilization to employees with no co-pay – a mandate that violates the teachings of the Catholic Church and other Christian bodies.

Clinton lamented that “there are those who offer themselves as leaders...who would defund the country's leading provider of family planning,” Planned Parenthood, “and want to let health insurance companies once again charge women just because of our gender.”

“We move forward when gay and transgender women are embraced...not fired from good jobs because of who they love or who they are,” she added.

It is not the first time the former first lady had said that liberal social policies should displace religious views. In a December 2011 speech in Geneva, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said perhaps the “most challenging issue arises when people cite religious or cultural values as a reason to violate or not to protect the human rights of LGBT citizens.” These objections, she said, are “not unlike the justification offered for violent practices towards women like honor killings, widow burning, or female genital mutilation.”

While opinions on homosexuality are “still evolving,” in time “we came to learn that no [religious] practice or tradition trumps the human rights that belong to all of us.”

Her views, if outside the American political mainstream, have been supported by the United Nations. The UN Population Fund stated in its 2012 annual report that religious objections to abortion-inducing drugs had to be overcome. According to the UNFPA report, “‘duty-bearers’ (governments and others)” have a responsibility to assure that all forms of contraception – including sterilization and abortion-inducing ‘emergency contraception’ – are viewed as acceptable – “But if they are not acceptable for cultural, religious or other reasons, they will not be used.”

Two years later, the United Nations' Committee on the Rights of the Child instructed the Vatican last February that the Catholic Church should amend canon law “relating to abortion with a view to identifying circumstances under which access to abortion services may be permitted.”

At Thursday's speech, Hillary called the legal, state-enforced implementation of feminist politics “the great unfinished business of the 21st century,” which must be accomplished “not just for women but for everyone — and not just in far away countries but right here in the United States.”

“These are not just women's fights. These have to be America's fights and the world's fights,” she said. “There's still much to be done in our own country, much more to be done around the world, but I'm confident and optimistic that if we get to work, we will get it done together.”

American critics called Clinton's suggestion that a nation founded upon freedom of religion begin using state force to change religious practices unprecedented.

“Never before have we seen a presidential candidate be this bold about directly confronting the Catholic Church's teachings on abortion,” said Bill Donohue of the Catholic League.

“In one sense, this shows just how extreme the pro-abortion caucus actually is,” Ed Morrissey writes at HotAir.com. “Running for president on the basis of promising to use the power of government to change 'deep seated cultural codes [and] religious beliefs' might be the most honest progressive slogan in history.”

He hoped that, now that she had called for governments to change religious doctrines, “voters will now see the real Hillary Clinton, the one who dismisses their faith just the same as Obama did, and this time publicly rather than in a private fundraiser.”

Donohue asked Hillary “to take the next step and tell us exactly what she plans to do about delivering on her pledge. Not only would practicing Catholics like to know, so would Evangelicals, Orthodox Jews, Muslims, and all those who value life from conception to natural death.”

You may watch Hillary's speech below.

Her comments on religion begin at approximately 9:00. 

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook