Friday, December 17, 2010

European court rules- No human right to abortion, but asks Irish government for clearer regulations

Article by Marc Aupiais

Despite misleading arguments in media, the Council of Europe (not the EU) European Court of Human Rights, in Strasbourg, in France- has not ruled that Abortion is a human right. The court found that a Lithuanian woman living in Ireland was due Euro 15 000 as she had not been given information as to how her pregnancy related to the success of her Chemotherapy or on what risks it could pose to her health. The other two applicants who wanted ordinary therapeutic abortions were turned down by the court. Ireland was fined for having vague laws on the matter of abortion.

The Irish constitution bans abortion outright, while allowing for the right of life of a woman to be on equal footing: with wording suggesting that procedures not aimed primarily at abortion of a child, but which none the less result in it's collateral unintended/undesired death are acceptable. Procuring an abortion which is not "medically necessary" is considered a crime in Ireland, and both doctor and woman involved could be arrested.

In Attorney General v. X, in 1992,

"In this case in which a 14-year-old girl said she had become pregnant after being raped by her friend's father, the Attorney General of Ireland had enjoined the girl and her parents from traveling to England for an abortion. A psychologist had testified that in her present state of mind, the girl was suicidal. The Supreme Court of Ireland held that the right to life supersedes all other rights, including the right to travel. However, if there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother which can only be avoided by termination of the pregnancy, then an abortion is permissible. The Court determined that the girl's risk of suicide satisfied this condition, and therefore the girl was allowed to terminate her pregnancy."
U.S. National Library of Medicine
National Institutes of Health (US Government)
Ir Law Rep Mon. 1992 Mar 5;12(47):401-80.

A 1992 decision by the Irish Supreme Court, said that if a woman's life was endangered even by her own suicide threats then she should be allowed an abortion, however the Irish government never legislated on the decision, with many Irish claiming that it was based on false medical science and not real statistics and science. Furthermore, the girl was a 14 year old in the case, with very different anatomy, and unlike an adult immigrant from Lithuania was more of a suicide risk. Also the X case also involved not an abortion denied in Ireland but the right to travel to another jurisdiction to procure it. The girl's age of 14, just past puberty, makes her case very similar to the Recife incident, where the Catholic church none the less stated that the young girl's abortion was unacceptable and murder of her twin children. It also involved rape and a child.

The Irish Times reports that no woman has ever died in an Irish hospital due to lack of an abortion. American murder statistics show that pregnant women are the most vulnerable to murder as compared women at any other stage of life. Abortion is legal in America. Ireland is known for having some of the best maternal health statistics in the world. C-Fam has in the past shown correlation between legal abortion and poor medical practice in many countries such as India etc. In South Africa over half of pregnancies are aborted, with doctors claiming that life threatening situations are not addressed due to an essentially cosmetic surgery.

KPMG, has warned that if the South African population does not grow significantly, an aging longer living older population, without skilled youths to replace it may result in a collapse of the state: in South Africa and in other developing and developed countries with declining population growth rates. One of the reasons given by sources as to why black/Ethnically African South African women used to have such large families according to academically studied work, lies in ANC pressure on women to have more children under threat.

Fertility awareness which is between 95% and 98% effective year on year at preventing unwanted conceptions is permitted by the Catholic church when used "unselfishly" and is generally accepted in African culture which sees western devices such as condoms as an insult to a man's integrity and authority.

According to C-Fam and the Irish lawyers in the case, it was highly irregular for the case to appear in a European court before being judged by Irish courts which could have given clarity on the matter. While the European Court rejected this, it does seem contrary to its purpose.

The court explicitly said the European right to privacy does in no means create a right to abortion, thus rejecting the argument of Rode v Wade.

The Associated Press quotes Ireland's pro-abortion health minister, who notes that Irish anger about submission to the European Union, means that they will not legislate on the matter:

"The judges lambasted Ireland's defense claiming that the woman should have petitioned the Irish High Court for the right to have an abortion in Ireland. They said Irish doctors must be given clear legal guidance on the eligibility rules for abortions.

Health Minister Mary Harney said she was confident that Ireland would draft legislation to bring the country's laws into line with its own Supreme Court — but said the step would have to wait for the next government. Ireland faces an unscheduled national election in the spring.

"Clearly we have to legislate, there's no doubt about that," Harney said. "But I don't think we have the capacity to bring forward proposals in a matter of weeks."

Harney noted that the government twice tried to resolve the issue with referendums in 1992 and 2001, but voters on both sides of the abortion argument rejected that constitutional amendment. In both cases, the government sought to limit the right to legal abortion only to cases where the woman was at risk of death — but excluding suicide threats.

She said lawmakers would face a "highly sensitive and complex" debate over what specific definitions should apply for life-threatening conditions. She said pregnant women suffering from cervical cancer, exceptionally high blood pressure or ectopic pregnancies already were receiving abortions in Irish hospitals.

The vast majority of nations in the 47-member Council of Europe permit broad access to abortion, most recently Spain, which legalized first-trimester abortions in July. Only Malta and Vatican City ban the practice outright, while several others seek to limit it to exceptional cases including rape and fetal abnormalities.

European Court of Human Rights judgments are legally binding but difficult to enforce. Council of Europe nations often take years to enact the legal reforms ordered. An offending nation that refuses to observe a court order could be expelled from the Council of Europe, but this has never happened."
Associated Press (American based; Secular special interests; non-governmental; story hosted by Yahoo)
December 16 / 2010

Whether the Council of Europe decisions are in any way binding is a matter of much debate. The court after all is not a representative of the Irish people.

Homosexuality was legalized following a similar decision by the court in Ireland. The same court banned crucifixes in Italian schools. The judgement is de facto unenforceable and according to C-Fam based on false facts:

"It thus seems that the third applicant (and, following her, the Court) completely distorted and confused the facts of the case. Had the applicant been in need of another cycle of chemotherapy, she would (also under current Irish law) have been entitled to receive it. Indeed, withholding such treatment from her would certainly have raised an issue under Article 2 of the Convention (i.e., the third applicant’s Right to Life). But this does not seem to have been the case. (Yet again, we notice how regrettable it is that the Court made this judgment without ascertaining the facts…) No chemotherapy was withheld from the applicant, nor was the loss of the unborn child caused by any chemotherapy or other treatment. Instead, the woman’s decision to have abortion was based on the irrational and unfounded assumption that the pregnancy might cause her cancer to recommence. This irrational thought would never have sufficed as a ground for “legal” abortion – especially not in a system where, as the ECtHR requests, the eligibility of a woman for having recourse to abortion on grounds of a risk for her life must be ascertained on the basis of objective criteria. One does not see, therefore, how the existence of such a system would ever have resulted in the applicant having access to a “lawful” abortion in Ireland…."
C-Fam (American based; Independent of the State; UN, EU and European and American legal coverage; Catholic, family, human rights and other special interests coverage)
December 16 / 2010

Monday, November 1, 2010

Lancet article considers alcohol more dangerous than drugs

(SACNS Europe; SACNS Audio-Visual; Social Justice South Africa)

​ ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​ ​​​​​

Download/Stream Audio Article

​​​​​Lancet Publishes contrary and controversial alcohol/drugs study|​
​01 | November (11th Month) | 2010 AD​
​Article by Marc Aupiais​
​In a controversial article, the Lancet Medical journal has given a platform to David ​​Nutt, a controversial scientist who was fired from the British government for his ​​controversial view that dangerous drugs should be classified as less dangerous ​​than they are by the British government. He has suggested that horse riding is ​​more dangerous than ecstasy use, and was angered when the British government ​​refused to accept some of his more controversial views.​
​The Lancet study considers Alcohol the most dangerous drug in use, 8 times ​​more dangerous than ecstasy. Over a dozen factors were taken into account ​​ranging from lost friendships to damage to the environment, with the acute ​​danger to drugs users themselves only one of many factors. A commentary also ​​appearing in the edition of Lancet noted that the study did not look at cross ​​usage of drugs, but said this was beyond its scope.​
​Professor David Nutt was fired by then home secretary Alan Johnson for ​​demanding ministers listen to the controversial advice of his government Advisory ​​Council on the Misuse of Drugs, which had fronted his views on drugs in a ​​different format, according to the Daily Mail. Professor David Nutt told the BBC ​​that alcohol is a terrible societal ill in his perspective and that this is because it is ​​so available.​
​The direct connection between drugs, violent crime, the Taliban, drug lords, and ​​organized crime has not seemed as important to the Lancet "experts" as Alcohol's ​​negative effects. It also does not seem to note that alcohol when taken in ​​moderate amounts is not extensively dangerous to health, and that there are ​​many forms of alcohol.​
​The study was released just as California considers legalising Cannabis use by ​​the population in general. Cannabis is known to cause schizophrenia in those with ​​genetic predispositions.​
​The study seems to have relied on value judgements in every case made by "the ​​experts". David Nutt, and another scientist who quit after the British parliament ​​had him fired, are two thirds of the authors of the study.​
​CNN, and a BBC blog, appear to have portrayed the Lancet study very ​​favourably. A possible factor in Alcohol's high danger rating is the fact that ​​alcohol is legal and openly used and acceptable in society, while drugs are not. ​​The study is being used by drugs legalization special interests campaigners to ​​attempt to get narcotics legalized, despite the fact the study does nothing to ​​reduce the huge personal harm of using narcotics.​
​While most adults consume alcohol, many with no negative effects, much fewer ​​people regularly take narcotics, giving heed to laws introduced due to high road ​​accidents, deaths, and other preventable societal ills.​​​


All sources are Secular.

British Sources:

Daily Mail (Independent of 
the state)
"Alcohol 'more dangerous 
than crack, 
heroin and 
01 / November | 11 / 2010
BBC World News (British 
Corporation) (Not 
Independent of the state)
"Alcohol 'more harmful than heroin' says Prof David Nutt"
01 / November | 11 / 2010
Staff report

American, Independent of 
the State, Liberal
CNN (Central News 

Study: Alcohol 'most 
harmful drug,' followed by 
crack and heroin

01 / November | 11 / 2010
staff report

Sunday, September 19, 2010

Cardinal John Henry Newman Beatified

(SACNS Europe; Tridentine South And Southern Africa)

Update by Marc Aupiais

Our Great and Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, the human power, divinely ordained beyond other human power, hath Beatified the Great Theologian John Henry Newman.

Rather than setting the Feast day of this great Blessed on the date of his death and thus his possible entry into heaven, the Great and Wise Holy Father, hath instead chosen the date at which this great man, this leader of the Oxford Movement within the Anglican Separation entered into the Holy Flock of Rome, in pursuit of his great Conscience. The Great Man Benedict XVI has also decided to put aside for this memorable occasion: (the second visit of a pontiff to Great Britain since it rejected the Holy Faith, and the First Papal State Visit since that sad day:) the rule he had made that the Holy Pontiff at Rome should only canonize and not merely beatify the great men and women who are to be upheld one day as the saints of heaven.

While some thousand men and women did protest at the date of this momentous honour given an Englishman: most within the Island's famous population had had no real view of the great occasion for Great Britain and the World. Some objected to taxpayer funding of this great event- made all the more expensive given the much more real threat against the pope by Great Britain.

The Daily Mail attacked those opposing the state visit, saying simply enough: where exactly were the protests, and great indignation, and arrest threats when South African President Jacob Zuma landed in great Britain?

This visit has been a catastrophe for Great Britain globally, which having invited a visit to Britain for the pope as Head of the Great Vatican State, then mocked his visit, in the Independent and The Guardian and other outlets. As Australian Broadcasting Corporation noted, Benedict XVI is the one who first requested powerfully in the Vatican that sex abuse cases be dealt with by the Vatican, and not complicit bishops, and that these cases be reported to authorities. It is also this pope who has decided to apologise to victims, and to appoint the exact traditionally inclined men into authority which should rid the Holy Body of this terrible blemish of sin!

An event more emotional and important to a nation than the Olympic games, while so far not a failure, has shown to Great Britain's Great Shame: that it is a country, where anything but righteousness is acceptable.

Fortunately Cardinal Kasper's comments and withdrawal, which Australian Broadcasting Corporation saw as a move by a political adversary of the pope, did not wreck the entire event. He called Great Britain a third world country, and a place of terrible secularism. Perhaps why it has taken the wait for Benedict XVI to have the Vatican put aside its view of Great Britain to honour a man notably British!

Sunday, August 22, 2010

Murmurs, lies, holocaust reduction check: but is a recent newsletter by SSPX Williamson, a hint that reunification with Rome is on the horizon for the infamous fraternity

(SACNS Europe; Tridentine South Africa)

Article by Marc Aupiais

For our source quotes, analysis, and additional information, please see:

SACNS Quote Analysis:
Murmurs of a separatist - SSPX Bishop alleges that Rome will accept their schism back

A recent newsletter sent out by Bishop Richard Williamson, of the SSPX, has raised eyebrows, suggesting that he may be reacting to a possible coming reunification with Rome.

Some context

The SSPX is a group which broke off from the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church through the consecration of four bishops, not authorized by the Holy See, including Williamson, by the late Archbishop Lefebvre, as the leaders of their Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX/SSPX) in 1988. The consecration saw Lefebvre, and his four bishops excommunicated. The SSPX believes that the Second Vatican Council, was not infallible in moral and doctrinal matters. It opposed the translation of the Catholic Latin Rite Mass into colloquial languages. According to the Vatican, all priests in the said priestly organisation, are in schism.

Recently, as part of negotiations with the fraternity, the Vatican official applicable, lifted the excommunications automatically incurred by the four leaders of what the Vatican sees as the SSPX schism. Just before this, an interview by a television station, conducted with Williamson was aired, in which he portrayed the Holocaust against Jews in World War II by the National Socialists of Germany, as much less than that believed to have occured by mainstream historians, and war records. In his view, the holocaust was only a minor event.

The bad publicity received by Rome, due to his interview, being released, caused an international storm, which Benedict XVI, was himself hit by, through choosing to take the full blame for the actions of the bishop, who lifted the excommunications, of the said SSPX four, as part of negotiations.

Traditionalist Catholic, and Latin Mass special interests coverage service, Rorate Caeli, has now released a copy of Williamson's recent newsletter, which besides its negative portrayal of the Vatican, suggests that seemingly because Benedict XVI will likely die soon, as the schismatic against Rome suggests, most popes do: that the Pope will pass over many doctrinal differences, and on condition the SSPX accept the Catechism of the Catholic Church, allow the group's members back into the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic church. Williamson, like many SSPX members, believes that Vatican II, considered infallible on morals and doctrine by the mainstream Catholic Church and hierarchy, has no legitimacy, and is heresy.

The logic of the SSPX bishop is highly flawed, but given the fact his holocaust denial interview was aired just before the excommunications were lifted by the bishop in charge of negotiating with the SSPX (contrary to media reports, Benedict XVI is not the negotiator, it is a bishop assigned the task), it may be possible that the SSPX bishop, is attempting to stifle an agreement his fellow bishops have made with Rome.

South African Catholic News Service: Twitter|Facebook|Facebook Discuss|CAF|YouTube|UStream News|UStream Editorial | Email

As an internationally collaborative: initiative to provide a more transparent, accurate view of the world: This service is brought to you by the Scripturelink Search Engine (quotations, or confers in this service/initiative, are provided to give perspective independently, or reference some external sources: and do not imply collaboration, or any kind of affiliation, or co-operation with other services, or initiatives, which are quoted or noted in articles)

Check the accuracy, and perspectives of our contents via the above listed search engine: against other "Catholic" services

Italy: Interior Minister's statements against legitimate immigrants on welfare are unacceptable according to the Italian Bishops

(SACNS Europe; Social Justice South Africa)

Article by Marc Aupiais

SACNS Quote Analysis:
Italian Bishops oppose throwing out EU immigrants who rely on benefits- Italy
And : Interior Minister from federalist party, not that of Berlusconi - Italy

Italian Interior Minister Roberto Marconi (EuroNews spelling- seems incorrect) (Minister Roberto Maroni), of the Lega Nord Padania federalist party, which is working in coalition with the Popolo della Libertà of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi- has made a statement which has reportedly put him at odds with the official body of Catholic bishops in Italy.  Maroni has called for immigrants in Italy from other European Union (EU) states, who are receiving financial support from the government to survive, during the financial crisis, to be expelled from Italy. The move has upset the Italian Catholic Bishops, according to European service EuroNews, which quotes Giancarlo Perego as representing the Italian Episcopal Conference, to state their criticism of the move, by a minister of Silvio Berlusconi's broad coalition government.

The Catholic Bishops' representative reportedly, has expressed the view, that such a move would cause a societal shift favouring a more nationalist tendency, over one of a more European perspective. The representative stated, seemingly that restricting the movement of Europeans in Europe could have a negative affect on the achievement of a particular vision of the European Union, which the bishops, it seems to be suggested, support.

European citizens are officially welcomed in Italy, which has taken actions against non-European-Union-origin immigrants.

South African Catholic News Service: Twitter|Facebook|Facebook Discuss|CAF|YouTube|UStream News|UStream Editorial | Email

As an internationally collaborative: initiative to provide a more transparent, accurate view of the world: This service is brought to you by the Scripturelink Search Engine (quotations, or confers in this service/initiative, are provided to give perspective independently, or reference some external sources: and do not imply collaboration, or any kind of affiliation, or co-operation with other services, or initiatives, which are quoted or noted in articles)

Check the accuracy, and perspectives of our contents via the above listed search engine: against other "Catholic" services