The debate on the devolution of legislative powers on abortion has been prominent in your pages in recent months and I recognise that the Sunday Herald has taken a pro-choice position. Unfortunately, your most recent coverage of the issue makes little contribution to anything resembling debate (Seen but not heard: Anti-abortion protesters are impossible to ignore, Comment, and Pro-choice supporters rally in Glasgow, News, February 14).
Shona Craven’s reference to “a man with a tight-lipped smile” sets the tone in a piece that can find no visible sign of harassment by the pro-life vigil outside the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital but chooses to interpret this as, nevertheless, menacing.
In contrast, we move to the sunny uplands of the pro-choice rally, where Karin Goodwin offers a picture of positive civic protest. No interrogation of the issue or questioning of the actual numbers who turned up (around 50 but then they were there “despite snow and freezing temperatures”), instead a reinforcement of the idea that the “quiet prayer vigil” horrifies by its “intimidating presence” (in the same snow and freezing temperatures, of course).
Perhaps the reality is that there is no debate and that the Sunday Herald is doing no more than reflecting a presumed consensus. If so, why the need to demonise dissent?
Alan McGinley
Clydebank
The vilification of pro-life protestors amazes me. Should an abortion not go ahead and a child is born it would be interesting when that child reaches adulthood to ask him or her if they are glad they weren’t aborted. I suspect I know the answer.
Michael Watson
Rutherglen
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel