Join us for what is anticipated to be one of the most significant abortion debates of the decade.
Ann Furedi, CEO of the UK’s largest private abortion provider, BPAS, will be going head to head with Gregg Cunningham, the founder and director of the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, a group that makes pictures of aborted babies available for public education projects across the globe.
The point of contention is the use of graphic abortion images outside of abortion clinics in the UK.
The Resolution:“This house believes that it is morally wrong for groups to approach women and display abortion imagery outside facilities which provide abortion services.”
The event will be charied by Brendan O’Neill, Editor of Spiked Online. It will take place at 18:30 on 3rd of October at the Emmanuel Centre, Marsham Street, Westminster, SW1P 3DW.
The chief executive of Britain’s biggest abortion charity has said women are legally free to arrange an abortion because they are unhappy with the sex of their unborn baby.
Ann Furedi, of BPAS, said the law does not prevent women from choosing a termination on the grounds of gender and she even compared it to abortion after rape.
Mrs Furedi’s comments come weeks after it was disclosed that the CPS had decided not to prosecute two doctors who were exposed by a Daily Telegraph investigation arranging terminations purely because the unborn baby was a girl.
[…]Writing for online magazine Spiked, she said: “A doctor agreeing to an abortion on grounds of rape would be breaking the law no more and no less than a doctor who agrees an abortion on grounds of sex selection,” she said.
“While it is true that the sex of the foetus is not a legal ground for abortion, nor is rape, or incest, or being 13 years old. Nor is being homeless, or abandoned, or just feeling there’s no way you can bring a child into the world… yet they are all reasons why a doctor may believe a women has met the legal grounds of abortion.”
She added: “The woman gives her reasons, the doctor decides on the grounds as set out in the law … there is no legal requirement to deny a woman an abortion if she has a sex preference, providing that the legal grounds are still met.
“The law is silent on the matter of gender selection, just as it is silent on rape.”
When you talk about being pro-choice, sex selective abortion is often slung at you as the triumphant gotcha. “You love women so much you want them to be in charge of what grows inside their bodies, but what about the women who are aborted, have a go at answering that? ZING!”
The answer is actually remarkably simple, and it’s this: it doesn’t matter whether what’s growing inside you is liable to end up as a man or a woman. What matters is whether the person it’s growing inside – the person who is going to have to deliver the resulting baby, at not inconsiderable personal peril – actually wants to be pregnant and give birth to this child. In a world where it’s possible to end a pregnancy safely and legally, it seems like rank brutality to force anyone to carry to term against her will.
And as far as I’m concerned, it doesn’t matter why any woman wants to end her pregnancy. As the conscious and legally competent entity in the conception set-up, it’s the woman’s say that counts, and even the most terrible reason for having an abortion holds more sway than the best imaginable reason for compelling a woman to carry to term.
The article goes on to accuse pro-lifers of “misogyny” for opposing the murder of unborn girls, just because they are girls.
WINTERY KNIGHT 