Abortion

Baby, the rock n’ roll spirit should be on your side

I am a rock ‘n’ roller by origin and inclination. I started off in rock journalism writing about bands and song and gigs. I wrote a book vaguely about U2, though not really. I loved the blues, where the whole thing started: the cry of the slave waking up to the theft of his life. I revered Lennon and Dylan because they tuned into that cry and sought to mobilise its power into the modern world. For a few years in my youth I nestled into the cool embrace of modern rock ‘n’ roll culture of protest and hope. But then I began to sense something amiss. Rock stars were talking

Why are animals more important than unborn children?

Most of the time I feel perfectly at ease in my own country, and that would be the case had we voted Brexit or Remain, Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn. But just occasionally Britain seems to me an utterly alien place – bizarre even. Today, Jeremy Corbyn launched his manifesto for pets. He wants to ban foie gras, make it mandatory for motorists to report that they have run over and killed cats, and pass a law giving tenants the right to keep a pet. I don’t suspect that he will encounter a great deal of opposition on these things – bar a token protest on the last from buy-to-let investors.

Labour’s new intolerance of the pro-life cause

I didn’t want to write this piece. I supposed I always hoped that Labour would come back to its roots; back to being a broad-church drawn from diverse backgrounds and cultures united in solidarity with workers and the poor, standing up for free speech and the weakest, most vulnerable in society. But as time has passed the drumbeat of intolerance has only grown louder. Labour used to be a party where conscience and difference were respected. A party where Jim Dobbin (of fond memory) and Harriet Harman could link arms against economic injustice while being diametrically opposed on matters of social policy. It is a sad irony that, while so

Pregnant silence

Brian Sewell once wrote an article about abortion headlined: ‘Women, the killers in our midst.’ He got an awful lot of flak for it, which he took in his stride. He came to mind during the screening of Abortion On Trial, the documentary hosted by Anne Robinson and screened this week to mark the 50th anniversary of the passing of the 1967 Abortion Act. In it, one of the participants described abortion as murder. ‘Are nine of us here… murderers?’ asked Mrs Robinson with a flourish, to which the only tactful answer was no, of course not. Brian would unhesitatingly have said yes. Abortion is one of those issues about

Ireland’s abortion debate will be next year’s big culture war

If you’re fed up with endless bickering over Brexit, spare a thought for the citizens of Ireland. The government here recently announced plans for a new referendum on abortion, currently prohibited by the Constitution with a few limited exceptions. So the starting pistol has been fired on what is sure to be twelve months of hyperventilating hipsters, jangling rosary beads and a stampede from both the pro-choice and pro-life lobbies towards the moral high ground. The majority of the population – broadly in favour of a liberalisation of the law but against abortion in all circumstances – is already donning figurative hard hats and bracing for the worst. The vote is

Jacob Rees-Mogg has said the unsayable. Good for him

There are any number of reasons to feel irritated about the reaction to Jacob Rees-Mogg’s frankly expressed views about abortion – which hold that it’s wrong in all cases, including rape. One is the entirely characteristic, reflexive intolerance of his opponents: see Suzanne Moore’s piece in the Guardian to the effect that the abortion stuff is all of a piece with being a quasi fascist, that being a Catholic pro-lifer is part and parcel of being ‘a neoconservative bigot’, and that his views on benefits and zero hours contracts are more of the same package. Except of course they’re not; they’re separate issues. But part of my own irritation is to

Can leading politicians get away with opposing abortion and gay marriage?

What can politicians with socially conservative beliefs expect from public life? Is there now a faith glass ceiling under which lurks would-be party leaders whose views on abortion and homosexuality are just too unpalatable for voters? If there is one, Jacob Rees-Mogg might have a good chance of telling us where it is located. The alleged contender for the Tory leadership told Good Morning Britain today that abortion was ‘morally indefensible’ in any circumstances and that he opposed same-sex marriage because ‘marriage is a sacrament and the decision of what is a sacrament lies with the Church not with Parliament’. William Hill has already cut the North East Somerset MP’s

Freddy Gray

In defence of Jacob Rees-Mogg

The art of Jacob Rees-Mogg is to be preposterous and sincere at the same time. It’s the reason why he is increasingly popular. It explains Moggmania. It’s also why people are now beginning to take him seriously as a Tory leadership contender; why he is topping the polls for that job. It helps that he is a gent, a man who treats everyone with courtesy, which has always been popular. But it is his ability to be genuine while coming across as absurd – or is it the other way round — that makes voters warm to him. A bit like Jeremy Corbyn. Take Mogg’s interview this morning. His views about

What part of ‘devolution’ does Stella Creasy not understand?

Abortion is a matter devolved to Northern Ireland’s representatives. Today, Belfast’s Court of Appeal ruled abortion law in Northern Ireland should be left to the Stormont Assembly, not judges – which overturns an earlier ruling that the current abortion laws are incompatible with human rights laws. Yet Stella Creasy has taken it on herself to carry on a campaign to undermine abortion law in Northern Ireland by requiring the NHS to fund terminations for women travelling from there to England. That’s why the government conceded today that when Northern Irish women travel to Britain for an abortion, it will be funded by the NHS, so they won’t, as now, have to pay

Tom Goodenough

The Government backs down over Queen’s Speech abortion amendment

In the face of a possible rebellion over an amendment to the Queen’s Speech, the Government has backed down. Chancellor Philip Hammond announced this afternoon that women from Northern Ireland will be given the right to an abortion in England on the NHS. This wasn’t a change ministers wanted, but for a weak minority Government propped up by the slenderest of margins, this is the new reality. It’s unlikely this will be the last time in this Parliament that ministers relent where they would have once stood their ground. Ever since the amendment was tabled by Labour MP Stella Creasy, the Government had looked under pressure. There were reports that as many as 40 Tory MPs

Why is the BMA trying to decriminalise abortion?

It’ll be news, I expect, to most people that the BMA wants abortion to be decriminalised. Most people probably didn’t know it was a criminal offence in the first place. And you’ll be hearing a lot from women who’ve had abortions about how it’s obviously not a criminal matter but a mere medical procedure. Nothing criminal or moral about it. In fact there’s a section of the commentariat who employ a familiar syllogism in these cases: 1. I have had an abortion; 2. I am a good person; 3. Abortion is therefore not wrong. The BMA is going down this route with its vote today, that abortion is not a

The evil that men do

Early one summer’s morning in 1994, Paul Jennings Hill, a defrocked Presbyterian minister, gunned down a doctor, John Britton, as he arrived for work at an abortion clinic in Florida. Unrepentant by the time of his execution nine years later, Hill (who I really don’t recommend Googling) was associated with the Army of God (ditto), which urges the murder — or ‘justifiable homicide’ — of abortion providers in the United States. Given how often Joyce Carol Oates’s awesomely prolific output concerns male violence and women’s bodies, it’s no surprise to find her using this as material; with Trump vowing to undo Roe vs Wade, it’s timely. By turns icily subtle

Labour’s abortion stance is the final straw

Well, that didn’t last long: in April, I rejoined the Labour Party. Last Sunday, I cancelled my subscription and cut up my membership card. Being part of the official opposition to a Tory Government, my conscience can live with; being the official opposition to the unborn, it cannot. I’ve always leaned towards backing Labour. And while my radicalism may have mellowed somewhat in my old age, I would certainly have voted for Jeremy Corbyn in the first leadership contest. So when the snap election was called, it seemed like an obvious move to put my money where my ballot is. But the first sign of trouble came almost immediately afterwards, when Labour’s

A new poll shows there is a good deal of unease with the current abortion law

Really interesting, the new figures about public attitudes to abortion, specifically women’s attitudes, reproduced below and published in the Mail on Sunday today. They suggest a good deal of unease with the current law, an unease I would guess has something to do with advances in pre-natal screening. It’s hard to square a six month cut-off limit for abortions with ubiquitous images of foetuses at 12 weeks looking embarrassingly, palpably, human. They may not be viable – ie capable of surviving outside the womb – but they’re human all right. On the most important issue, the period during which abortion is legal, there’s a large majority – 7 in 10

Is Tim Farron prepared to defend any of his beliefs?

Are there any matters of principle, do you reckon, that Tim Farron isn’t prepared to give up on under pressure from a television journalist? After caving under repeated questioning from Channel 4’s Cathy Newman (how brave, Cathy!) to declare that he does not, in fact, consider homosexual acts to be sinful, he’s now had to conform again, this time on abortion. In an interview with ITV, he said he strongly believed that ‘when procedures takes place, it should be safe and it should be legal,’ and supported the law as it stands. Pressed on his personal view, he said: ‘Again, what one believes in one’s personal private faith is just

Cinderella in China

She was a foundling in her own family, shunted to adoptive parents for two years, then to the edge of China, to a fishing village on the East China Sea, and to a furious, alcoholic grandfather and a grandmother sold at 12 into marriage for some pottage, and never given a name. Is that colourful enough for you? But there is more: the life story of the young Chinese filmmaker and novelist Xiaolu Guo makes Cinderella’s seem bland. The hovel she lived in until she was seven was on Anti-Pirates Passage. Her grand-father, a failed and bitter fisherman, lost his livelihood in the 1970s, when the Chinese state collectivised fishing

Norma McCorvey: the woman who made the choice to be pro-life

Norma McCorvey, who died on Saturday, was unknown; as the Jane Roe in Roe v Wade, she became one of the most famous women in America, her name synonymous with abortion rights. When pro-choicers want to defend the abortion status quo, or pro-lifers want to overturn it, they’ll say it’s about Roe v. Wade. She was the woman who sought to have the restrictions on US abortion law overturned. Or at least, she and two ambitious female attorneys did. When she was 21, pregnant with her third child, she sought an abortion in Texas. She was referred to Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington, who were looking for pregnant women wanting

A female culture war has begun

I didn’t go on the women’s march last weekend, and it’s not the kind of thing I’d go to. However, Trump’s previous form with regards the female sex is a reasonable cause for at least registering a protest. This is not to deny there are things I wish would be protested more, such as Rotherham, but I accept that’s basically whataboutery and no reason to ignore Trump’s behaviour. But you’d think, looking at an event like this, that there was a sort of culture war in which women were set in conflict with the patriarchy, represented by the three-times married president. Lots of women were marching for the right to have

Trump is right to reinstate the ‘global gag rule’ on abortion

It has, to be honest, been rather hard to keep up with the flow of executive orders, policy pronouncements and big name appointments from the new US president: they’ve been coming thick and fast. So it’s been tricky drawing up any sort of running audit of debits v credits, though some changes, like the appointment of Jared Kushner to preside over the Israeli/Palestinian peace process, are sufficiently surreal to make you wonder why the Women Against Trump brigade didn’t put it on their placards. But there are pluses, depending on your point of view. And from where I’m at, Trump’s executive order reintroducing the ‘global gag rule’ – which sounds unhelpfully

Only the right kind of women are invited to march against Donald Trump

The Women’s March on Washington is going to be big. Officials say 1,800 buses have been registered to park in the city today. The subway will open at 5 a.m. (it usually starts running at 7 a.m. at weekends) to accommodate the numbers. In all, 250,000 people are expected to join the rally to show their disapproval of Donald Trump, dwarfing the numbers that attended his inauguration and parade a day earlier. It is fitting that women are taking the lead. Trump’s misogynist language and disregard for half the population has been one of the most shocking parts of his aggressive campaign. So it is a shame that the march