Colette Douglas Home, in her column of July 15, seems unable to recognise that protecting innocent infants in the womb, supporting pregnant, frightened young women and working to secure a better standard of living and greater opportunities for the poor and marginalised are not mutually exclusive ideals. Indeed, a nation that condemns to abortion our beautiful and blameless unborn babies betrays itself as morally, ethically and politically untrustworthy and disinclined to give due care and attention to the poorest and weakest members of our society.
Certain communities in Glasgow East graphically illustrate that point. Our society appears to prioritise the abortion of unborn babies ahead of the needs of the forgotten and poverty-stricken in our ghetto estates, be they poor souls suffering from mental ill health, pensioners living in destitution or the many decent folk who are victims of violence and crime.
Britain has among the highest abortion rates, the highest rates of family breakdown and the worst social problems in modern Europe. Do not tell me these things are not connected.
Colette Douglas Home admits to "guessing" a lot in her article. Well she has to, of course, because she inhabits a completely different world to the people and communities she is writing about with such "authority". She sarcastically berates Cardinal O'Brien for not "using his muscle for the living". Let me assure her that hardly a day passes when most priests and ministers of all denominations do not serve the poor and marginalised in our communities. But given Ms Douglas Home's distance from those living in poverty, she would hardly be in a position to know that. She could always apologise, of course.
"And will the flock vote as its bishops predict" she asks in her characteristic unfortunate style. Exactly when and where did we make any such prediction Ms Douglas Home? The fact is, we did no such thing. And for whom did we predict our flock would vote? Quite properly, the electorate will decide which issues are their priorities and vote accordingly. We can only hope that they give due consideration to family and life issues. It is certainly our duty to draw such issues to their attention.
But her graceless taunts against Catholic Church leaders continue, myself included. "My question is this" she asks, "when Bishop Devine threatens to pull their (the people of Glasgow East) vote from the Labour Party . . ." Again I ask where and when did I make such a threat? And again the fact is I did no such thing. I am in no position to direct anyone's vote anywhere. And quite properly I would be told where to go (and it would not be Heaven) if I tried.
It is no secret that I have been a high-profile critic of this Labour government. And I do not retract any statement or criticism I have made to date in relation to its anti-family and anti-life legislation. But for the record, let me clarify once and for all that embryology research and abortion are not Catholic issues. Nor are they even multi-faith issues. They are national issues. Opinion polls conducted prior to the vote at Westminster identified that 67% of the population were opposed to the creation of animal-human hybrid embryos. That is the position of the electorate in the UK. And the Catholic Church represents one small part of that majority view.
Rt Rev Joseph Devine, Bishop of Motherwell, Diocesan Centre, Motherwell.
