Revisiting Ireland's Pro-Life Civil War

In a recent issue, Review contributor David Quinn, editor of The Irish Catholic, wrote about Ireland's Pro-Life Civil War (Winter/Spring 2002). It was the story of the March 2002 abortion referendum, in which the issue was a proposed Protection of Human Life in Pregnancy Bill. The hope was that the new referendum could reverse the "suicide exception" which had resulted from the 1992 "X-case" (in which a 14-year old girl was allowed an abortion on the grounds that if she did not have one she might commit suicide). However, the major pro-life groups in Ireland were at odds over the wording of the proposed bill, and a "pro-life civil war" ensued. The Bill was defeated. Mr. Quinn, who was in favor of the Bill's passage, wrote:

The bid to reverse the X-case was undone in large part by an inability on the part of some pro-lifers to tell the difference between a political compromise and a moral compromise. ... On March 7, the day of the count, the enemies of the culture of life cheered their victory as the final result came in. They knew that the defeat of the government proposal had brought much closer the day when abortions would take place in Ireland. What a pity those pro-lifers who opposed the amendment couldn't see that also. Instead they played right into the hands of their enemies. A disaster.

Interest in the Irish referendum was not at all limited to the Irish, and several international pro-life organizations were involved in lobbying for or against the Bill. Soon after the Review was published, we received several letters of protest, from abroad (England, Ireland and Italy) and here in the States, from members of some of the organizations which had mobilized "No" votes. They took exception to Mr. Quinn's portrayal of their objections, insisting that the wording of the Bill would have actually allowed for more exceptions, and less protection for human life.

We decided the Review ought to revisit the issue. Although we greatly appreciate hearing from our readers, space considerations prevent us from printing all the letters we received (nor does the Review have a regular "Letters to the Editor" section). In the pages which follow, we have selected one letter, from lawyer Robin Haig of London, as well as a more lengthy response, also from a lawyer (hailing from New Jersey) Richard Maggi. Finally, David Quinn himself has kindly written for us a response to his critics.

Copyright Human Life Foundation, Incorporated Fall 2002
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved