Swedish MP Seeks to Force Ireland, EU to Accept Abortion as “Right” with 1,000,000 Signature Campaig

By Hilary White

BRUSSELS, July 17, 2009 ( - A Swedish liberal party MP and feminist activist has launched a campaign that, if successful, could see abortion enshrined as a "human right" across the EU - potentially forcing Ireland, as well as Malta and Poland, to abolish their protections for the unborn. 

Birgitta Ohlsson, an extreme left member of Sweden's Liberal People's Party, has founded the group "Make Noise for Free Choice" that hopes to obtain the one million petition signatures necessary for a "citizens' initiative" to force acceptance of abortion as a "human right" under the new Lisbon Treaty. According to the Treaty, a proposal which gains one million signatures from a sufficient number of countries must be considered by the European commission. According to the Times Online the number of countries necessary has yet to be determined.

The website for the initiative specifically targets Ireland, Malta and Poland, saying: "All around the world, women are denied their right to free, legal and safe abortions. ... It is the everyday reality facing women in Ireland, Poland and Malta."

Patricia Casey, a professor of psychiatry at University College Dublin, reacted strongly to the effort, telling the Times Online, "It's ironic for a country like Sweden, with such a track record of protecting human rights, that campaigners from there are campaigning for the killing of unborn children. There is certainly a contradiction."

Pat Buckley, the representative at Brussels of Britain's Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), told (LSN) that the chance of success for the initiative depends upon how much support the group has in the European Parliament. He was not optimistic that the initiative would certainly fail, however, since he pointed out that MEPs have already voted several times for "reproductive rights and choice" in recent years. "There is a very strong support in the Parliament for the concept of abortion as a human right," he added.

The group, he said, assume they have the right to dictate to a sovereign nation. "Their attitude is that they're the experts on human rights, and abortion is a human right, therefore Ireland must change its laws."

So far, however, the petition has only been signed by 3489 people, although organizers intend to continue the campaign until October of 2010.

The Ohlsson initiative highlights the concerns of Irish pro-life campaigners who have long warned that the attempt to force Ireland to accept the Lisbon Treaty is a direct threat to the country's pro-life laws and to its sovereignty. Life and family issues were found to be prominent among the Irish voters' reasons for rejecting the Treaty in a referendum a year ago.

Since the failure of the 2008 referendum, Irish politicians have obtained what they claim are "cast-iron guarantees" from the EU on key areas of discontent including abortion law, taxation and neutrality. These, they said, would provide an opt-out for Ireland, to be voted on by all member states, at the time of the next accession treaty to bring in new member states to the EU.

But Buckley said that promises obtained by the government mean little because it is the European Court of Justice who interprets the Lisbon Treaty. The danger of these "guarantees," he said, is that "heads of government are not in any position to make a commitment on behalf of the EU Court of Justice."

The guarantees, he said, do not change the Lisbon Treaty itself "one iota." "It will be precisely the same treaty that we voted down last year."

"When the Court of Justice is called upon to interpret the Treaty with regard to abortion, they could interpret it to mean that there is a right to abortion. Ireland will then be bound to that because they would already have voted to ratify Lisbon."

Abortion activists have long known the clout of the European courts to force a change in law. Three women are currently taking the Irish government to the European Court of Human Rights to attempt to overthrow the Irish law. 

Buckley said that the only "clear way" to deal with the threat "would be a protocol, attached to the Lisbon Treaty itself, to give Ireland a direct opt out. This would be a message to the Court of Justice who would then be obliged to interpret the Treaty according to that protocol."

Another factor in the possible success of the Ohlsson initiative is what Buckley calls "competence creep" in EU institutions. He explained that ostensibly there are certain issues over which the EU has no competence, including social areas like family and abortion. But slowly over the years, "competence creep" has eroded that principle under different ideological agendas such as that of so-called "equality rights."

These activists, he said, introduce legislation related to "equality" which include issues like abortion and marriage in the sections on definitions. "In theory they're not supposed to have any competence whatsoever in these areas, but in practice, because of competence creep, they continually expand their remit to include areas which should not be part of their brief."

"I'd like to think that [the Ohlsson initiative] hadn't a hope, but knowing how the system works in Brussels, it is likely they will have the support they need. It would be difficult for them acting alone to do it - it depends upon what sort of assistance they get - there's certainly a possibility this could happen."

Supporting the initiative are MEPs and community leaders from Britain, Denmark and the Netherlands, including Baroness Sarah Ludford, a Liberal Democrat MEP who sits on Euro-Parliament's committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and Vice-Chairwoman of the European Parliament's Human Rights Sub-Committee. Also listed as supporting are Sophie in 't Veld, a Dutch Member of the European Parliament for the social liberal party Democrats 66, and Lone Dybkjur, a member of the Danish Parliament for the Radikale Venstre party.

Read related coverage:

Irish Who Voted Against Lisbon Treaty Had Abortion Fears in Mind

"Difficult" Ireland Must Ratify Lisbon Treaty or Lose International Influence: Prominent EU Rep.

Eurocrats Refuse to Take "No" for an Answer on Lisbon Treaty

EU to Solve "Irish Problem" with Second Referendum in Autumn '09

To contact Birgitta Ohlsson:
Phone: 08-786 47 30
Mobile: 0709-687 106
[email protected]

To contact Sarah Ludford:
Phone: 020 7288 2526
Fax:020 7288 2526
E-mail: [email protected]

To contact Lone Dybkjur
DK-1240 Copenhagen K
Phone: +45 3337 4711
e-mail: [email protected]

To contact Sophie in 't Veld
ASP 10G 157
Wiertzstraat 60
1047 Brussel
Phone: +32 2 2847796
[email protected]

Share this article

Featured Image
Prof. Robert Spaemann, a close friend of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, says Amoris Laetitia directly contradicts St. John Paul II’s teaching.
Claire Chretien Claire Chretien


Pope’s exhortation is a ‘breach’ with Catholic Tradition: leading German philosopher

Claire Chretien Claire Chretien

April 28, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – A prominent Catholic philosopher and close friend of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI said Thursday that Pope Francis’s exhortation Amoris Laetitia is a “breach” with Catholic tradition and directly contradicts the teachings of Pope St. John Paul II in his exhortation Familiaris Consortio.

"If the pope is not willing to make a correction, it is up to another pontificate to officially put things back into order."

Professor Robert Spaemann told the Catholic News Agency’s German branch that changing the Church’s sacramental practice would be “a breach with its essential anthropological and theological teaching on human marriage and sexuality.”

“It is clear to every thinking person who knows the texts that are important in this context that [with Amoris Laetitia] there is a breach” with the Church’s Tradition, Spaemann said.

The professor’s remarks were translated by Dr. Maike Hickson in an article at OnePeterFive.

In Familiaris Consortio, Pope St. John Paul II upheld the Church’s longstanding approach to the question of admitting to the Sacraments remarried divorcees, by writing:

…the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist. Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church's teaching about the indissolubility of marriage.

Footnote 351 of Amoris Laetitia seemingly contradicts the above passage by asserting that in certain cases, integrating back into the Church the divorced and remarried and others in “irregular” situations “can include the help of the sacraments.”  The footnote then mentions both Confession and the Eucharist.

Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Maria Santissima in Astana, Kazakhstan criticized Amoris Laetitia for its lack of clarity on the subject.  “Analyzing some of the affirmations of AL with an honest understanding, as they are in their own context, one finds that there is a difficulty in interpreting them according to the traditional doctrine of the Church,” wrote Schneider.

Spaemann also condemned the exhortation’s seeming embrace of “situation ethics” as opposed to universal norms and its call to not judge people’s actions that directly contradict the Church’s sexual ethics.

“When it comes to sexual relations which are in objective contradiction to the Christian order of life, I would like to know from the pope after which time period and under which conditions such an objectively sinful behavior becomes a conduct which is pleasing to God,” said Spaemann. 

By turning “chaos into principle” with “one stroke of a pen,” Pope Francis is leading the Church “into the direction of schism,” Spaemann said—and he warned that such a schism would not be “at the periphery, but in the middle of the Church.” 

Spaemann also warned that Amoris Laetitia may be used to bully faithful priests. He wrote:

Each individual cardinal, as well as each bishop and each priest is now called to preserve in his field of authority the Catholic Sacramental Order and to confess it publicly. If the pope is not willing to make a correction, it is up to another pontificate to officially put things back into order.


Famed German Catholic philosopher makes waves for criticizing Pope Francis’ ‘autocratic’ style

Share this article

Featured Image
The Institute for Family Health, a federally qualified health center, has been running an abortion facility in apparent violation of federal law.
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben


Federally funded community health center may have illegally performed abortions: Report

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 28, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – A federally qualified health center (FQHC) apparently performed abortions, although nearly all federal funds are forbidden from being used for that purpose, sources tell LifeSiteNews. Now, pro-life congressmen are demanding further investigations into the use of U.S. taxpayer funds to promote abortion-on-demand.

The issue came to light when a federal inspector general's report found that six Americorps volunteers had been acting as "abortion doulas," giving emotional support to women who chose to have abortions.

The National Association of Community Health Centers (NACHC) allowed the volunteers – who received tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars – to support abortions that took place inside a New York abortion facility run by the Institute for Family Health (IFH).

Americorps “volunteers” illegally supporting abortion at taxpayer expense is an ongoing problem. But there's more to the story.

The IFH proudly advertises itself as a federally qualified health center (FQHC). Federal dollars are restricted from underwriting most abortion at FQHCs, in line with the Hyde Amendment. This does not hold true for the Affordable Care Act, conventionally known as ObamaCare.

To ease qualms raised by pro-life Democrat Bart Stupak and others, on March 24, 2010, Barack Obama signed Executive Order 13535. It states that “the Hyde [Amendment] language shall apply to the authorization and appropriations of funds for Community Health Centers...I hereby direct the Secretary of HHS to ensure that program administrators and recipients of federal funds are aware of and comply with the limitations on abortion services imposed on CHCs by existing law.”

Pro-life groups warned at the time that an executive order was insufficient to prevent taxpayer funding of abortion, and the law itself had to be amended – or defeated.

Stupak, who voted for ObamaCare before retiring from Congress, later said he was “perplexed and disappointed” by President Obama's “double cross” during the law's implementation.

Pro-life experts today say Congress must investigate whether the law is being violated and, if so, if the offense is isolated to IFH.

"For years the Obama administration has claimed that the Affordable Care Act and federally-funded health centers do not subsidize abortion, and the president finally signed additional provisions, passed last year by Congress, to ensure that community health centers do not use federal funds to support abortion,” said Arina Grossu, the director of the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council. “Now we learn that CNCS is violating the law by helping women obtain abortions.”

“This blatant violation of federal law by CNCS and AmeriCorps demands that Congress investigate government-funded community health centers,” Grossu said. “It's time for this administration to stop foisting its radical abortion agenda on the American people and using their tax dollars to do so.” 

Pro-life advocates have long said that there is no need to fund Planned Parenthood, because federal women's health dollars could be reappropriated to FQHCs, which do not perform abortion.

There are 9,170 federally qualified health centers compared to about 700 Planned Parenthood facilities, according to the Charlotte Lozier Institute. FQHCs see 21.1 million patients a year, while Planned Parenthood saw 2.8 million people, the institute reported.

The latest example of federal dollars being channeled to support abortion, the law notwithstanding, has undermined some confidence in the FQHCs.

Rep. Diane Black, a pro-life Republican from Tennessee, said, “NACHC didn’t just break the rules; they broke trust with the American people. My constituents expect that federal funding given to our community health centers will be used to protect and enhance people’s lives, not to be a willing partner in their destruction.”

At least two Congressional leaders – the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the chair of the House Health Subcommittee – have promised they will take action immediately.

“Federal law demands that taxpayer dollars are never to be spent on abortion activities. Not one penny. Period. But a disturbing report from an independent watchdog reveals that was not the case with brazen pursuits by the National Association of Community Health Centers,” said Congressmen Fred Upton and Joseph Pitts of Pennsylvania, both Republicans. “The law was violated and this shameful failure of trust will not be tolerated.”

Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben


Abortion lobbyists demand Ted Cruz renounce pro-life leader Troy Newman

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

WICHITA, Kansas, April 28, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – The nation's largest abortion providers, an abortion lobbying group, and an ultra-liberal political organization are demanding that Senator Ted Cruz cut ties with Operation Rescue President Troy Newman – something that only proves how effective he has been, Newman's organization says.

Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America, and People for the American Way are asking Cruz to fire Newman as national co-chair of the “Pro-Lifers for Cruz” coalition, claiming that Newman supports violence.

“Troy Newman’s history of violent rhetoric and harassment toward women’s health providers is truly beyond the pale,” the three say in a letter to Sen. Cruz, linking to quotations from his 2000 book, Their Blood Cries Out.

“What Planned Parenthood and their cohorts call 'violent rhetoric' is really a discussion of Old Testament Bible verses taken out of context,” said Cheryl Sullenger of Operation Rescue and co-author of the book Their Blood Cries Out. The work establishes the sinful guilt of abortion before highlighting the mercy available in the New Testament for those who accept Jesus Christ, Sullenger said.

The letter also cites a report from the National Abortion Federation stating that abortionists have experienced an increase in “hate speech and internet harassment” since the release of CMP's undercover videos of Planned Parenthood, “which Newman was a driving force behind.”

“What they call 'harassment' is peaceful activism that is completely protected by the First Amendment,” Sullenger responded.

Newman has consistently denounced criminal action and violence of any kind during his decades in the pro-life movement, Operation Rescue said of the allegations – many of which were circulated to prevent Newman from entering Australia last year.

“Newman’s position on abortion-related violence is clear. He denounces violence against abortion providers as well as the violence perpetrated by the abortion cartel against innocent babies in the womb and their mothers,” Sullenger said.

“Attacking the messenger is the only way they have to try to discredit the hefty volume of evidence against them. This most recent attack is all about manipulating the public’s perception against those who exposed Planned Parenthood in order to deflect attention from their own crimes.”

But the three groups poured vitriolic scorn on Newman. Michael Keegan, president of People for the American Way, called Newman's role “completely unacceptable...No politician should be allowed to pander to violent anti-choice extremists without being called out.”

NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue said, "Troy Newman is an anti-choice extremist and misogynist ideologue.”

A Planned Parenthood executive said the choice proved Sen. Cruz and his vice presidential choice, Carly Fiorina, are unfit for office.

“It is not surprising to see Ted Cruz embrace this type of violent extremism -- after all this is the same man who has told malicious lies about Planned Parenthood, would criminalize abortion, and tried to shut down the government” to defund Planned Parenthood, said Dawn Laguens, executive vice president of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. “This is what the Cruz-Fiorina ticket stands for."

Sullenger dismissed their rhetoric as “a feeble attempt to hurt the presidential candidacy of Sen. Ted Cruz, who they know will seek to enforce the laws against them.”

Cruz has repeatedly stated that, if he is elected president, he will defund Planned Parenthood – before prosecuting them.

Their letter has led to a number of articles in the mainstream media, including Politico, the Huffington Post, and Glamour. The last publication, a feminist magazine aimed at young women, slammed Ted Cruz's choice of Carly Fiorina for vice president, telling its readers to “hold on to your uterus.”

“Not one of these publications bothered to reach out to Newman or Operation Rescue’s staff for their response,” Sullenger said.

This morning and afternoon, both sides of the abortion debate have used the Twitter hashtag #FireTroy to get their message across.

Sen. Cruz has not responded to the call, but the letter implies that purging Newman from the campaign would not satisfy the pro-abortion coalition. “There are a number of coalition members whose records raise serious concerns,” they say.


Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook