US Billionaires funding new push for abortion in Ireland

NACF newsletter March 15th reports: 

IRELAND'S experience in banning abortion is hugely important for the global pro-life community. That's because the country's record proves that it best serves mothers and babies when its laws protect unborn human life. Ireland is the example pro-life activists the world over can point to, because the Irish experience shows that abortion is never necessary.

The abortion industry is, of course, particularly discomfited by the fact that, according to the United Nations, Ireland, without recourse to abortion, is the safest place in the world for a mother to have a baby. And Irish medical experts have testified that their experience shows abortion is not needed to preserve the lives of mothers - whatever conditions arise during pregnancy.

Little wonder, then, that enormous global pressure is being brought to bear on Ireland right now. However, most people would be surprised to hear that the push to legalise abortion in Ireland is being funded by wealthy Americans: with funding coming from billionaires George Soros and Chuck Feeney, and from multinationals like Microsoft and Goldman Sachs through donations to legal centres supporting Planned Parenthood.

The most recent legal attack on Ireland's pro-life laws was a court case - the ABC case - taken to the European Court of Human Rights. The court case was sponsored by the Irish Family Planning Association, the Irish affiliate to International Planned Parenthood. The lead attorney in the case, Julie Kay, has worked for both Planned Parenthood and the Legal Momentum Fund - which works to make abortion legal.

The US based Legal Momentum Fund enjoys massive funding, with multinationals like JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, Pfizer and others helping them to raise almost €8 million in 2008 alone. Their Annual Report for that year describes Kay as a Senior Staff Attorney and reveals its involvement in planning the ABC case. Also supporting Kay with the ABC case was the US Centre for Reproductive Rights - a legal centre headquartered on Wall Street. Their 2010 Annual Report shows income for that year at $18 million with donations from the Ford Foundation, Google, Microsoft and others. The Centre boasts in the same report of their involvement in 'fighting' Ireland's pro-life laws.

It is difficult for local pro-life advocates to match such lavish funding, especially when additional resources for abortion campaigns also comes from wealthy individuals, such as Chuck Feeney, the American billionaire. Feeney made the headlines in Ireland recently when it was announced that he had given €1,500,000 to ensure a 'Yes' vote to a forthcoming referendum on children's rights. But the billionaire has given millions to organisations pushing for social change in Ireland for a decade or more. For example, according to the website of his foundation Atlantic Philantrophies, he has funded the Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) to the tune of some $7.7 million.

The ICCL has long been an advocate of legalising abortion in Ireland, but recently it caused major controversy when it claimed it had the support of major Catholic charities for a report it put together to submit to the United Nations which contained a strong call for abortion legislation.

The report, entitled 'Rights Now', cost a whopping $190,000 to produce and was funded entirely by Feeney's foundation. It said that 'By restricting abortion, the [Irish] State disproportionately interferes with women's rights to health, privacy, life, freedom from inhuman or degrading treatment and non-discrimination'. The ICCL claimed that major Catholic organisations such as the development aid charity Trócaire supported the contentious report, but in a major embarrassment for the Feeney-sponsored lobbyists, Trócaire and other charities withdrew support when the Life Institute raised a controversy regarding the call for abortion.

However, the ICCL report encouraged other countries to attack Ireland's ban on abortion at the subsequent UN hearing in Geneva. What's also interesting is that, without Feeney's support, the ICCL would hardly exist since it receives almost no support from the members of the public. For example, in 2009 the organisation only managed to raise €8,822 in donations from the Irish people, but received more than €2 million from Feeney's foundation the following year.

Feeney has also given more than $1,000,000 to the National Women's Council of Ireland, who last month launched a drive to lobby politicians in support of abortion legislation.

As if that wasn't enough, there are also other massively wealthy figures funding the push for abortion in Ireland. George Soros, the New York based investor billionaire, gave €100 million to the self-styled rights organisation, Human Rights Watch (HRW) , in 2010 - the same year that the outfit visited Ireland to attack that country's ban on abortion. HRW slammed the Irish government in a document provocatively titled 'A State of Isolation: Access to Abortion for Women in Ireland,' and demanded that 'immediate steps' be taken 'toward decriminalizing all abortion for women living in Ireland'. The document even suggested that the authorities do more to shift public opinion towards abortion.

The funding being lavished on abortion campaigners amounts to unwarranted and unwanted interference in Ireland's affairs in a bid to smash the pro-life ethos that protects both mothers and babies. Two decades of persistent public engagement and education has maintained Ireland's pro-life majority, and, in that time, abortion campaigners have failed to win the necessary public support to build momentum for abortion legislation. But they are now openly availing of the massive global funding being made available to efforts to overturn Ireland's pro-life laws. As in many other jurisdictions, since they cannot get the people to agree with abortion, they want to use the courts and the massive wealth and power of a tiny elite minority to foist abortion on the nation.

An 'up-beat' Irish pro-life group

The Hermeneutic of Continuity blog recently referred to Youth Defence (YD) as ‘the up-beat Irish pro-life group’. For nearly twenty years, YD has held weekly information sessions in Dublin city centre, and they now happily announce that the 1000th such street session has taken place. In sun and rain and wind, in cold and icy weather, and hot weather, the young YD volunteers have stood patiently and courageously in Dublin’s O’Connell Street, week after week. During the afternoon they hand out information leaflets showing the humanity of the unborn child and his/her development from fertilisation until birth, and they speak to people who – very often – are quite ignorant of the wonderment surrounding unborn life, its sacredness and the dignity that must be afforded to it, and the fact that the right to life is the first and most basic of all human rights. YD are also the organisers of the Irish annual pro-life march which is held in both Dublin and Belfast in successive years.

Congratulations to YD, and may their members increase and remain faithful to the cause of protecting life – born and unborn, mothers and their unborn babies. Please pray for them, and also for the success of their upcoming celebrations to mark twenty years of pro-life witness against all the odds – official and unofficial. Typical of these young people is the fact that Holy Mass is the starting point of their celebrations

UN Secretary General sees the UN as “the voice of the voiceless and the defender of the defenceless.”

One of my colleagues, Vincenzina Santoro Chief United Nations Representative – American Family Association of New York, writes - Let’s hold UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to his words! and then continues:

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s year-end press conference did not exactly make it to the front pages of the world’s newspapers. However, for the occasion, Mr. Ban was keen to remind reporters that he was completing his first five-year term at the end of 2011 and was looking forward to his second mandate. In his remarks, he stated that the world needs the United Nations now more than ever. This is debatable, but he gave us some food for thought. According to Mr. Ban, over the past five years, he tried to “advance a practical, action-oriented vision of the UN as “the voice of the voiceless and the defender of the defenceless.”

Reflecting on his words, who could be more voiceless and defenceless than the unborn? Is this not especially true of the unborn who are to be aborted – their very tiny existence about to be crushed, dismembered and terminated, yet they cannot utter a word or take a stand? They were not part of his “action-oriented vision.” If the Secretary-General were truly sincere about defending the “voiceless and defenceless” he should be a defender of all the unborn. Mr. Ban indicated that in January he would present the outline for his second term, making references to commitments to the rights of women and children with the Rio+20 conference on sustainable development to be center stage among 2012 events. Perhaps he should include the unborn.

While Mr. Ban conducted his news conference, given the season, elsewhere in New York theatre troops were busy presenting the Dickens classic: “A Christmas Carol.” The character of Ebenezer Scrooge early on, in his unrepentant stage, refuses to give alms to the poor and ill so that the “ranks of their populations” could be thinned! Was such an attitude the forerunner of today’s population controllers? Possibly. But Scrooge saw a guiding spirit and soon enough experienced a conversion. Can we be a modern day “ghost of Christmases past” for the Secretary-General and use his very own words to draw their rightful conclusion?

There is something else that could boost a pro-life stance with the Secretary-General. Mr. Ban’s country of birth, South Korea, has the lowest fertility rate among developed countries: 1.15 children per woman, the result of all too successful official family planning policies pursued for decades. Today there is much hand wringing in South Korea about the implications of a shrinking population. Such concern ought to work in favor of the voiceless, defenceless unborn.

Starting with the Secretary-General’s own words, if all pro-lifers – at the UN and elsewhere –began a (massive?) writing campaign and asked him to support the voiceless and defenceless unborn child, would this not be the true meaning of his words and a new, right vision for the UN?

The address is:
Hon. Ban Ki-moon
Secretary-General of the United Nations
United Nations Headquarters
New York, NY 10017

New poll shows significant majority of Irish people want protection for unborn babies

According to an Irish Times article a Millward Brown Poll carried out on behalf of the Pro-Life Campaign found that over two thirds of Irish people want to see the right to life of the unborn child protected in law.

The poll was based on a national random sample of 984 adults.

To the question: “Are you in favour or opposed to constitutional protection for the unborn that prohibits abortion but allows the continuation of the existing practice of intervention to save a mother's life, in accordance with Irish medical ethics?”

61% were in favour of constitutional protection for the unborn child, with 17% opposed. 22% didn't know or had no opinion.

When the “don’t knows” are excluded, 78% are in favour of legal protection for the unborn, while 22% are opposed.

The survey also asked the following question: “In a recent Supreme Court decision, the judges said that human embryos were not protected by the Constitution but deserved respect and that their protection was a matter for the Government. Do you think the Government should legislate or not to protect human embryos from deliberate destruction either by experimentation or by methods of assisted human reproduction that destroy embryos?

59% were in favour of Government legislation to protect the human embryo, 16% were opposed and 26% did not know or had no opinion.

When the “don’t knows” are excluded, 79% are in favour of legislation to protect the human embryo and 21% are opposed.

The importance of informed conscience in casting our votes

The ‘race for the presidency’ occupies much of the media’s attention at the moment in Ireland.   Catholics, in particular, should be reminded that no matter what public opinion says, no matter what their individual likes or dislikes are, each voter in the upcoming presidential election must follow her or his own informed conscience in the choice she or he makes.  As Cardinal Raymond Burke said in Knock recently:

‘An erroneous notion of the moral law and of conscience has led to an equally erroneous exclusion of the discussion of the moral law and of questions of conscience from public life.  In many so-called advanced nations, we witness an increasing tendency to deny to citizens the most fundamental right, the right to observe the dictates of one’s conscience, formed through right reason and the teaching of the Church.  We witness the phenomenon in the language of political leaders who profess to be Catholics and yet vote for legislation which violates the moral law, claiming to hold personally to what the moral law demands but, at the same time, to be obliged by their political office to follow a different law in making decisions for those whom they represent and govern.’

He went to say that today: ‘The struggle is fierce, and the opposition is powerful.’

[Emphasis added]

We must inform ourselves of the views of the candidates who say they are Catholic (this is most important), but we must also, of course, make ourselves aware and take note of the ideologies and agendas of those candidates for the presidency who are not Catholic, or who are not Christian.   What do these people stand for, what are their beliefs with regard to the sacredness of all human life from conception to natural death?  

What are their beliefs with regard to the dignity of marriage – the union of one man and one woman?  Will they uphold the Constitutional pledge to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack? 

What are their beliefs with regard to the Constitutional recognition of the Family as the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society?  Will they uphold the Constitutional guarantee to protect the Family in its constitution and authority, as the necessary basis of social order and as indispensable to the welfare of the Nation and the State?

All of these questions must be answered satisfactorily before we enter the polling booth on presidential election voting day.

We call on all our Archbishops and Bishops of Ireland – please make a public statement now, well in advance of the voting day, so that all Catholic voters are made aware of the importance of knowing the stance of each candidate with regard to the questions posed above

Day for Life

When Blessed John Paul II, in his Encyclical, Evangelium Vitae, proposed that a special Day for Life should be held throughout the world he said that he wanted this Day for Life to be celebrated ‘each year in every country, as already established by some Episcopal Conferences.  The celebration of this Day should be planned and carried out with the active participation of all sectors of the local Church.  Its primary purpose should be to foster in individual consciences, in families, in the Church and in civil society a recognition of the meaning and value of human life at every stage and in every condition.  Particular attention should be drawn to the seriousness of abortion and euthanasia, without neglecting other aspects of life which from time to time deserve to be given careful consideration, as occasion and circumstances demand. …’

It is very encouraging, therefore, to read the message of the Irish Catholic Bishops’ Conference for the 2011 Day for Life, which this year takes place on Sunday, 2 October.

In their Day for Life message, the Bishops quote Pope Benedict XVI – 

‘ …. We need to have the courage to place our deepest hopes in God alone, not in money, in a career, in worldly success, or in our relationships with others, but in God.  Only he can satisfy the deepest needs of our hearts.’

Continuing, the Bishops tell us:

‘As a Christian, the deepest joy in life does not come from what I have or what I can achieve.  It comes from the knowledge that even before I was formed in my mother’s womb I was known and loved by my Creator (Jer 1:5; Psalm 139): that from the first moment of conception to natural death I am loved personally by God and have an eternal future. … Building a culture of life also commits us to building a civilisation of love: it involves showing practical solidarity and concern for those around us who are in need.  A society that protects those who are vulnerable and weak contributes to our shared happiness: a society that shows love and concern for others who are in need enhances our quality of life.  … In one of the most powerful affirmations of the sacredness of life in the womb, [St.] Luke tells us that as soon as Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the child in her womb “leaped for joy” (Lk 1:44). …  By embracing a culture of life, and standing with those marginalized and deemed “useless” or a “burden” on society, we can turn the values of our consumer society upside down.  We can contribute to the happiness and quality of life of all by ensuring respect for the life of every person, from conception to natural death.  … Day for Life 2011 is a call for us to work for a society in which all are valued as created, loved by God, redeemed by Christ; not for their fame, or power or what they own but for their intrinsic worth. …’

The Bishops also quote from Pope Benedict’s Encyclical Caritas in Veritate: ‘Openness to life is at the centre of true development.  When a society moves towards the denial or suppression of life, it ends up no longer finding the necessary motivation and energy to strive for man’s true good. … The acceptance of life strengthens moral fibre and makes people capable of mutual help.’

[Emphasis added]

It is good to hear the Bishops talk about the vital importance of respect for human life at every stage, from the moment of conception to natural death.

But why, oh why, is this message not being announced from the pulpit of every church in Ireland?   Why is this message not being handed out personally to everybody as they are coming out of the church, particularly after Mass