News and Opinion

On August 08th, a Bill legalising abortion-on-demand for any reason up to 14 weeks, and up to birth on the grounds of conception after sexual crime, life-limiting disabilities, and safeguarding maternal life, was defeated in the Argentinean Senate by 38-31.

In the wake of the welcome vote, RTL Executive Officer Peter D. Williams appeared on BBC News (World) to hail the defeat of the abortion Bill and defend right-to-life protections for unborn children:

Dear Senadoras y Senadores,

We write to you as you consider the legislation currently before the Argentine Senate which proposes to allow abortion on demand up to 14 weeks of pregnancy.

This legislation would, by design, remove the right to life from the unborn child at the earliest stages of development. The right to life is a core fundamental right in international human rights law. There is no right to abortion in human rights law; in Europe, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights has reiterated this fact on numerous occasions. Furthermore, Argentina ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1990; the preamble of the Convention declares as follows;

“[T]he child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth” [Emphasis added].

The unborn child is a living human being and is entitled to all of the same rights as other members of the human family. The consistent pressure to introduce abortion in Argentina from foreign organisations lacks a basis in international law and should be ignored.

The destruction of an unborn child up to 14 weeks of pregnancy ignores the scientific realities that the unborn baby has arms, legs, toes, fingers, ears and a face at the 10-12 weeks stage of pregnancy. The ending of pregnancy by taking the life of the unborn child for no medical reason whatsoever is not healthcare.

We would urge Argentina not to make the mistakes of other countries by accepting this legislation. A truly compassionate solution to an unwanted pregnancy is to offer all the necessary support to a woman to use the adoption process to place her baby with a loving family if she does not wish to raise the child. This offers the baby an opportunity to grow up in an environment where they are cherished.

Abortion is not compassionate for either the woman or the child. Real compassion is based on protecting life, not ending it.

A line is crossed when we take away the right to life. We respectfully urge you to uphold true human rights and compassion by rejecting legislation that would remove the right to life from the unborn child. By rejecting the proposed legislation, you would be acting to protect the most vulnerable member of the human family – the unborn child.

Yours sincerely,

Lord Alton of Liverpool & Senator Ronan Mullen

This week the abortion lobby are running a large online and in-Parliament campaign trying to force the Home Secretary, Sajid Javid, to fast-track the date that the draft Domestic Abuse Bill is brought forward to Parliament so they can hijack this Bill and amend it to introduce their extreme abortion proposal to Parliament. If they are successful, we could see the introduction of one of the world’s most radical abortion regimes across England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Sajid is currently being inundated with emails and tweets from the public on this. They are doing this to give him the impression that there is genuine public demand for the abortion lobby’s radical proposals.

HOW YOU CAN HELP

To show Sajid that there are equally many people that want him to stand strong on this, we have launched a petition to him.

We launched it at lunchtime yesterday and have already had a fantastic response with over 6000 people signing, but we need many more signatures on the petition so that it is very clear to Sajid Javid that he should not give in to the demands of the abortion lobby.

Please click the button below to sign the petition – it only takes 1-minute.

Click here to sign the petition to Sajid Javid now

If you have time after signing the petition, we had included some additional actions below that will help get more signatures on the petition and help support Sajid Javid in standing strong against the abortion lobby’s demands.

1. If you are on Twitter, please click here to tweet Sajid Javid with our short video message for him.
2. If you are on Facebook, please click here to LIKE our Facebook page and then share our short video message to Sajid Javid which includes a message and link that will encourage your friends to sign the petition.
3. Forward this email onto some friends asking them to sign the petition to Sajid Javid.

Thank you to everyone that wrote to their MP last week about the threat from abortion lobbyists to try and impose abortion on Northern Ireland.

Unfortunately, now the lobby team at abortion provider BPAS and Stella Creasy MP have decided to go one step further while they have some momentum on the issue and are now proposing to introduce a radical abortion regime right across England and Wales also.

Today at around 2:30pm, they have secured an emergency three-hour debate where they are likely to push for a vote at the end.

While the vote will not be binding on the Government, it will put enormous pressure on them to not only impose abortion on Northern Ireland but also introduce one of the most radical abortion laws in the world to England and Wales.

You can help stop this by urgently writing to your MP asking them to attend the debate, speak against these extreme proposals and if it goes to a vote, encourage them to vote against these proposals. This only takes two minutes on our website by clicking the button below.

Please click here to email your MP now

Please note that if you read this after 2:30pm on Tuesday 5 June it is still going to be useful for you to send an email to your MP so they are aware of the extreme nature of what is being proposed.

For further information on the proposals, see Fiona Bruce MP’s article on this development by clicking here.

We know that again MPs are receiving a large number of emails from abortion campaigners pushing them to support this proposal. It is vital that your MP is aware of the extreme nature of what is being proposed here and that many constituents are encouraging them to oppose these proposals.

Please do therefore ask your friends to write to their MP and share this on social media.

Speaking in Clitheroe, at the Bank Holiday Monday Right To Life Clitheroe Sponsored Walk of Witness, David (Lord) Alton reminded walkers that Mother Teresa of Calcutta had said that in the struggle to safeguard the sanctity of human life that, “we are not called upon to be successful, but faithful”.

Reflecting on the Irish referendum, Lord Alton said that the sponsored walk through Lancashire’s Ribble Valley, to raise funds for Right To Life, was “a chance to both witness and to express solidarity with the three quarters of a million Irish people who had voted against removing protection for the unborn child from the Irish constitution”. He noted, “they campaigned under the slogans that ‘both lives matter’ and that we must always ‘love both’ – mother and child – this should remain the clarion call of the right-to-life movement”.

Lord Alton went on to say that, “No one ever said this would be an easy fight paved with victories. But every life saved, every mind changed, is how we must measure success”.

Lord Alton, whose late mother was a native Irish speaker, has along with his children Irish as well as British Citizenship; and he reflected that anyone who loved Ireland and its people would inevitably “feel dispirited and distressed by this outcome”.

He added that “Every abortion is a tragedy. With one abortion in England every three minutes, Ireland will come to regret following the British law – a law that  allows abortion up to and even during birth in the case of disability – leading to the death of 90% of babies with Down’s syndrome detected in the womb”.

He said: “It was bordering on the obscene to watch people celebrating an event that will lead to the ending of innocent life. Ireland will become like Ramah where Rachel was found weeping and mourning the children that are no more”.

“The spectacle of crowds gathering in castle Yard in Dublin, where mobs once gathered to cheer the public  execution of prisoners, was distasteful in the extreme.  And now they will seek to do the same in Northern Ireland.

“It is beyond belief that ‘liberals’, who say they believe in devolution, quickly abandon their belief in local democracy when it comes to abortion. They gather in the restaurants of Richmond-upon-Thames or the Islington wine bars and plot to impose their political ideology and agenda on the people of Northern Ireland – where 100,000 people are alive today, 5% of the population, precisely because Northern Ireland refused to introduce British abortion laws. This is a matter to be settled in the North by the North and not by Westminster.

Lord Alton said that, “Time and again, those in favour of abortion, embryo experimentation, coercive overseas abortions, and euthanasia have relentlessly campaigned to change laws that since Hippocrates crafted the Hippocratic Oath – with explicit condemnation of abortion and euthanasia – have served society well. There is no such thing as a safe abortion for the baby in the womb”.

Quoting G.K. Chesterton, he said that “when we marry the spirit of the age we become widowers in the next” and added that when we kill the unborn we will be childless in the next.

Lord Alton concluded, “In Britain and now Ireland this is the most dangerous time in history to be an unborn child. For now we weep and stand with Rachel but, as the baton passes to the next generation, we will redouble our efforts until we change hearts, minds, attitudes, culture… and laws”.

Sajid Javid MP (Con; Bromsgrove) is the new Home Secretary, replacing the Windrush scandal-plagued Amber Rudd (Con; Hastings and Rye).

How is the new Home Secretary on issues touching upon the human right to life? The answer is mixed, but relatively positive.

Javid was elected in 2010. During the five years of the Coalition Government, there were two Parliamentary debates and votes relating to abortion:

• The Dorries Amendment  to the Health and Social Care Bill in 2011, which sought to prohibit pre-abortion counselling by abortion providers. Javid voted in favour.
• The Bruce Amendment to the Serious Crime Bill in 2015, which sought to introduce an explicit ban on sex-selective abortion. Javid also voted in favour.

Earlier the same month as his vote in favour of the Bruce Amendment, however, Javid voted in favour of the Coalition Government’s Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Mitochondrial Donation) Regulations 2015, a statutory instrument that authorises the practice of embryo-destructive and exploitative mitochondrial donation techniques. As he was not a member of the Government at that time, this was an exercise of his free vote.

Since then, Javid has abstained on the only two matters before the Commons that had right-to-life relevance: the then Rob Marris MP’s heavily-defeated assisted suicide Bill, and last year’s Ten Minute Rule Bill by Diana Johnson MP (Lab; Hull North) to ‘decriminalise’ abortion (i.e. introduce abortion on demand, for any reason, at least up to 28 weeks, if not birth).

This is a mixed record, but certainly a relative improvement on Rudd, who voted against independent abortion counselling, in favour of mitochondrial donation, and whilst abstaining on all other maters is thought to be more sympathetic to abortion lobby aims, such as the extension of abortion funding to Northern Irish women.

Dear Supporter,

Last weekend saw the All Ireland Rally for Life in Dublin, at which up to 100,000 people marched for life, for mothers and babies and to save the Eighth Amendment to the Irish Constitution!

Especially if you’re Irish or have Irish ancestry (but even if you’re not or don’t!), to signify your solidarity with this campaign, please join London Irish United For Life as they attend the St. Patrick’s Day Parade.

The plan for this is:
–> Meet at the Church of the Immaculate Conception in Farm Street (W1K 3AH) at 10:30 for tea/coffee.
–> Walk to the March starting area between Hyde Park Corner and Half Moon Street in Piccadilly (nearest tubes Hyde Park Corner and Green Park).
–> Those coming late, or who miss the 10:30 meeting can come to the London Irish United for Life starting area, which will be in Section E, Number 57, which is predicted to be between Down Street and Old Park Lane. Stewards in pink high-vis jackets will be there to direct people to sections. People should look out for signs saying ‘Section E’. Everyone needs to be in place by 11:15.
–> Posters will be provided. Remember to wear green!

Last year, the abortion lobby received a boost by the London Irish Abortion Rights Campaign forming a section in the St. Patrick’s Day Parade 2017. This will be an important way to give balance, show support for the fight for the right to life of unborn children, and to bolster the Save The Eighth campaign in Ireland.

Please do share, invite others, and come along!

Today, the Prime Minister appointed Maria Caulfield MP (Lewes) as Conservative Party Vice-Chair with Responsibility for Women. Caulfield is a superb MP, and her excellent appointment was greeted very warmly by many commentators.

Members of the abortion lobby and their allies in politics and in the media attacked the decision online, on the basis that Caulfield had led opposition to their key legislative aim: so-called ‘decriminalisation’.

Falsely presented as merely removing criminal penalties for women who buy abortion pills online, decriminalisation really means taking abortion out of the law. This would mean removing all legal limitations on abortion outside of medical regulation, leading to a situation of abortion on demand, for any reason, and (depending on whether criminal penalties were partly or completely repealed) either up to 28 weeks or up to birth.

As it happens, both the removal of abortion from the law and the extension of abortion above the current limit of 24 weeks are extreme minority positions, especially amongst women.

ComRes found in polling last October that 70% of women believe that abortion should be governed by a legal framework, and in May last year they found that only 1% of women favour increasing the upper limit beyond 24 weeks (and another 1% who favour abortion up to birth). By contrast, the same May Poll found that 70% of women want the upper abortion limit lowered, with 59% favouring it to be lowered to at least 16 weeks.

Moreover, removing abortion from the criminal law would also legalise abortion for any reason whatsoever, including sex-selective abortion. The May poll taken above confirmed that 92% of women supported sex-selective abortion being explicitly illegal in law.

Not only would decriminalising abortion mean abortion on demand, for any reason, either up to 28 weeks or birth – an extreme minority position, contrary to the opinion of the vast majority of women – it would remove important protections for pregnant women. Section 58 of the Offences Against The Person Act 1861, and the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929, both of which criminalise self-abortion, also criminalise men who try to force women to have abortions by causing their miscarriage. Removing either statute would remove important protections.

Meanwhile, women have only been prosecuted in the last few decades in Britain for self-aborting in extreme, callous, and late cases. In R v Catt (2009), a woman called Sarah Catt was prosecuted for aborting her baby at 40 weeks, just before the baby could be born. In R v Towers (2015), a woman was prosecuted for causing her baby to be smothered to death at 32 weeks, when she took prostaglandins that caused her have heavy contractions. There has not been a single prosecution in England and Wales or Scotland before 24 weeks.

In opposing decriminalisation, Maria Caulfield not only represented the views of the majority of British women, but stood for better protections and safety for pregnant mothers and unborn children. Contrary to abortion lobby claims, this makes her an excellent choice for Conservative Vice-Chair, especially with responsibility for women.

RTL Executive Officer Peter D. Williams said:

“Maria Caulfield is a great MP, and an excellent choice to be a Vice-Chair of the Conservative Party. Her views and actions in the House of Commons on abortion represent the view of the moderate majority of women, contrary to the inhumane extremism of BPAS and the rest of the abortion lobby.

The Prime Minister is to be congratulated for this superb appointment, and we hope more appointments in areas such as this involve Parliamentarians who represent the humane instincts of most Britons, especially most British women”.

END

This morning, the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee heard from Ealing Councillors, abortion industry representatives, and right-to-life campaigners, on the issue of alleged harassment taking place outside abortion facilities.

The proceedings illustrated that there is currently no probative evidence that has been presented of harassment taking place outside abortion facilities, whether in Ealing, Portsmouth, Birmingham, or elsewhere in the country. All that is presented is hearsay by abortion lobby groups who claim to speak on behalf of women going for abortions.

Last week at Birmingham City Council, a Councillor for Edgbaston in Birmingham, despite being in favour of legalised abortion, also complained about the lack of any evidence of public order disturbance outside the abortion facility in her area.

A series of individuals and groups who have either an ideological support of abortion, or a material interest in stopping pro-life vigils, have alleged women telling them of upsetting experiences outside abortion vigils, but have provided no hard evidence of any such activity going on.

When invited by Clare McCullough of Good Counsel Network to give details that could be checked and thereby proved or falsified, Marie Stopes UK representative John Hansen-Brevitti demurred, needing to be supported by pro-abortion Select Committee Chairperson Yvette Cooper MP, who throughout her own remarks considered reports of subjective upset by anyone to be evidence of harassment. This instead of more objective criteria and substantive proof of the truth of such allegations.

Despite this dearth of evidence, abortion advocates on the Committee and in front of it tried to twist it in their favour. Rather than a lack of prosecution evidencing a lack of prosecutable behaviour, it was taken by them as evidence that the police did not have the powers or confidence to arrest genuinely harassing behaviour. When McCullough pointed out that shouting outside abortion facilities was from aggressive pro-abortion protesters ‘Sister Supporter’, Cooper took this as evidence that no group at all should be allowed outside abortion facilities, rather than just those who cause disturb public order.

By contrast, right-to-lifers McCullough and Antonia Tully pointed to the burden of proof on abortion advocates to substantiate their claims, and also offered alternative testimony from hundreds of women who have been positively affected by Good Counsel Network. Cooper ruled such evidence irrelevant.

The Committee hearing excellently showed the substance-less attempts by the abortion lobby to justify their illiberal aim of using draconian ‘buffer zones’, whether through locally-imposed Public Space Protection Orders (PSPOs) or national legislation, to chill free speech and the right to free assembly, both of which are guaranteed under Common Law and the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). It also showed the dignity and seriousness with which pro-life vigil organiser McCullough answered the falsehoods and misinterpretations put before her.

RTL Executive Officer Peter D. Williams said:

“The Commons Home Affairs Select Committee hearing his morning was very illustrative of the truth of this issue.

On the one hand, it exposed the utter lack of probative evidence that the abortion lobby has to justify its campaign to shut down pro-life vigils through illiberal buffer zones, imposed either locally or nationally. The lengths to which abortion advocates will go to close down their opposition is astonishing in its mendacity.

On the other hand, we saw the real story of what abortion vigils intend, and do. So far from being hostile and angry, they are loving and peaceful. They almost always are about offering help and practical support for women who would often actually like to keep their babies, but feel they have no option to do so. Such vigil keepers do not attack or shame women. Allegations that they try to force women to accept leaflets, or block entrances, or shout at women, are without  meaningful foundation.

More generally, the hearing also showed the need for us to have a serious discussion in this country about the importance of free speech and assembly vs. the purported right of people not to be offended. On university campuses as now outside abortion facilities, some politicians and groups are tying to shut down certain forms of activism, even charitable ones, on the basis that others will perceive them to be upsetting or harassing. That is a ludicrous notion, and could undermine our status as a free and open society.

One excellent way to maintain our liberal and democratic traditions is to oppose buffer zones and any effort like them that uses evidence-bereft and slanderous hearsay to dishonestly justify the closing down of peaceful vigils that simply try to help women who feel abortion is their only ‘choice’”.

Right To Life is criticising the Faculty of Reproductive and Sexual Health (FRSH) of the Royal College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians (RCOG), which today follows the RCOG in affirming so-called abortion ‘decriminalisation’.

‘Decriminalisation’ refers to the removal of abortion from criminal law, which despite claims made that this would not preclude ‘regulation’, would mean that abortion would be legalised on demand, for any reason, up to birth or up to 28 weeks (depending on what legal form it took). It would mean abortion would be taken away from the democratic accountability of Parliament, and left in the hands of unelected medical bodies dominated by abortion lobbyists and their allies.

The FRSH and the RCOG are already two such bodies, as the RCOG voted to support ‘decriminalisation’ earlier this year, without consulting their membership. This un-democratic decision provoked a revolt from 650 doctors who were outraged at the move.  Other medical trade unions who have done likewise, and also seen significant objections from their own members, include the Royal College of Midwives (RCM) and the British Medical Association (BMA).

Even though the FRSH surveyed their members, many will be those who are already involved in abortion provision, and so it is no surprise that they would vote this way. Others still will be misled by the claims that ‘decriminalisation’ only means minor changes favouring women and doctors, rather than the full radical implications such a move entails.

The FRSH have issued this affirmation on the basis that young medics are being put off training to provide abortions by the threat of criminal sanctions, with the RCOG reporting in March that only one doctor had been trained to provide abortions between 14 and 19 weeks since 2009.

Yet whilst it is true that doctors are being put off training to provide second and third trimester abortions, there is no evidence to suggest this is because of the threat of prosecution. No doctor has ever been prosecuted since the passing the Abortion Act 1967. Indeed, of 67 doctors caught pre-signing abortion forms in 2014, and two doctors caught on camera offering sex-selective abortions in 2012, none were prosecuted despite their flagrant flouting of the law.

The handful of abortion prosecutions that have taken place in the UK, have only happened when very late or very callous examples of abortion have taken place.

Not only is there no probative evidence that medical professionals are not entering into late term abortion provision for fear of criminal sanction, evidence from the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and academic studies that have taken place over time show that it is the emotional toll on medical professionals from ending fetal ‘life’, especially late in pregnancy, that may dissuade doctors from going for training for later abortions.

The FRSH are not only out of touch with the evidence and with medical opinion more widely, but with the vast majority of public opinion. A ComRes poll from May found only 1% of women wanted to see the time limit for abortion increased beyond 24 weeks, whereas 70% wanted to see the upper limited lowered, with 59% wanting to see it decreased to at least 16 weeks.

Meanwhile, another ComRes poll this month found that 72% support the idea that abortion should be governed by a legal framework (rejecting ‘decriminalisation’). This reflected the findings of an ICM poll organised by the BBC in October, which found that pluralities supported having two doctors approve an abortion (36%) over just one (7%), or a midwife or specialist nurse (12%), or with no legal approval (15%). 39% supported abortion being considered a criminal matter, compared to 34% not.

This is just another example of a body being co-opted by a small group of abortion lobbyists, holding an extreme and inhumane minority position.

RTL Executive Officer Peter D. Williams, said:

“This vote today is nothing more than a publicity stunt, as the RCOG have already, without consulting their membership (as with other trade unions like the Royal College of Midwives and the British Medical Association), voted to support so-called ‘decriminalisation’.

This is just one example the steady drip of similar stories we can expect from bodies co-opted by the abortion lobby as they wait to attempt to achieve their ultimate goal of achieving abortion on demand, for any reason, up to birth, which they are attempting to dress up as mere ‘decriminalisation’.

Such an extreme move would be horrifically inhumane, and polling shows has no support outside a tiny minority of the population. Rather, the vast majority want to see lower abortion time limits, more support for women in unplanned pregnancies, and tighter legal controls on abortion.

Let’s not be misled by such propaganda, but see it as an opportunity to remind ourselves of the full reality not only of what decriminalisation truly will involve, but what sort of abortion reform the majority of Britons would really like to see”.

END

PRESS RELEASE – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Parliament hears woman’s powerful message against abortion clinic ‘buffer zones’: daughter would not be alive today if MPs had their way

In a Parliamentary debate on ‘buffer zones’ lead by Rupa Huq MP this evening, MPs heard a powerful testimony from a woman who had kept her baby after receiving support from a pro-life group outside the Ealing abortion clinic.

The message, read out by Sir Edward Leigh in the debate, detailed the pressure the women had come under to go through with a termination. She then leapt out the ground floor window of the abortion clinic and cleared three fences to escape.

It was after meeting a pro-life women at a vigil outside the clinic, who offered her the support she felt she needed to keep her baby, that she felt she had the confidence to leave and she was then supported by the group the women worked with to continue the pregnancy.

She ended her testimony with a clear message for MPs, such as Rupa Huq, who want to introduce buffer zones outside abortion clinics:

“I had my baby who is now three and a half years old. She’s an amazing, perfect little girl and the love of my life. I want MPs here today calling to introduce buffer zones to realise, that she would not be alive today, if they had their way.”

Peter D Williams, Executive Officer, Right To Life said:

“It was so good to finally hear in public from one of the many women who have kept their babies because of the support they have received from pro-life vigils outside an abortion clinic. Buffer zones would remove this option for women. Instead they would be left with the high pressure sales tactics of an industry that has just been investigated by the Care Quality Commission who reported that they had been paying bonuses to staff for persuading women to go ahead with abortions.”

ENDS

• A full transcript of the testimony is available below.
• A video of the testimony is available here: https://youtu.be/ciC6dUuMsv4
• For interviews, contact Peter D Williams, Executive Officer, Right To Life – press@righttolife.org.uk

FULL TRANSCRIPT OF TESTIMONY READ BY SIR EDWARD LEIGH:

“I never wanted to go through with an abortion but I felt a lot of pressure from people around me who offered it as a no brainer solution.

On the way into the clinic at the Marie Stopes clinic at Ealing I was offered a leaflet by a woman who I spoke to briefly. She just told me she was there if I needed her. I then went into the clinic, still not happy about being there for an abortion, but under immense pressure from a group of people that were with me to go through with it.

Once in the clinic, while the group were distracted I leapt out of the ground floor window and cleared 3 fences to escape. I talked to the woman on the gate again, who offered any support I needed to keep my baby and this gave me the confidence to leave where I was supported by the group that this women worked with.

I didn’t find any aggression from the people offering support outside the Ealing clinic at all. They did have leaflets documenting the development of a baby, a fetus, in the early stages.

The potential introduction of buffer zones is a really bad idea because women like me, what would they do then? You know, not every woman that walks into those clinics actually wants to go through with the termination. There’s immense pressure, maybe they don’t have financial means to support themselves or their baby, or they feel like there’s no alternatives. These people offer alternatives.

I had my baby who is now three and a half years old. She’s an amazing, perfect little girl and the love of my life. I want MPs here today calling to introduce buffer zones to realise, that she would not be alive today, if they had their way.”

This morning, representatives from right-to-life groups from across the UK came together at Old Palace Yard outside the Palace of Westminster to commemorate the final passage of the Abortion Act 1967. Royal Assent for the Bill was declared by the Speaker of the House of Commons at 11:05am on Friday the 27th of October 1967, and so a Minute’s Silence was held from 11:04-11:05 this morning 50 years later.

Before the Minute’s Silence, Lord Alton of Liverpool, a veteran human rights campaigner, including for the right to life of unborn children, spoke at the event, describing the reality of the scandal and shame of legalised abortion, and encouraging those present.

The Abortion Act did not come into effect until six months later on the 27th April 1968, which is when abortions could be legally obtained. Since that time and by today, 8,894,355 abortions have taken place, and at least that many unborn children have been killed through abortion practice in the NHS, or through the private sector abortion industry.

Today begins six months of remembrance and public education by Right To Life and other groups before the commemoration of the Act coming into effect, by which time almost 9,000,000 abortions will have taken place.

Lord Alton of Liverpool, speaking at today’s commemoration, said:

“With courage, with integrity, with a passion for the best principles of our civilisation firing our efforts, let us rededicate ourselves to making sure that by the time the centennial commemoration of the Abortion Act is marked, our society will be one in which human equality and dignity is so fully respected and protected, that the violence of abortion will be consigned to where every human abuse and cruelty ultimately belongs: in the dustbin of our history.

We mourn today the failures of our society in capitulating to the hopelessness and cruelty of industrialised death. Yet we steel ourselves to work for the day when we succeed in establishing a lasting justice and a true peace.

May our indignant sorrow today be outdone by courageous hope, and may our current and future efforts secure a Britain in which those who succeed us are able to celebrate the ultimate and glorious triumph of human life”.

Sarah Haire, who attended the commemoration event, said:

“I was really glad to be there for the Minute’s Silence and for Lord Alton’s speech. It was deeply moving to be reminded of both the human cost of the killing that abortion always entails.

I really feel that with enough effort, we can inform the rest of the country about the humanity of the unborn child, establish adequate support for mothers in unplanned pregnancy, and create a society in which everyone is included and loved”.

RTL Executive Officer Peter D. Williams, said:

“Today is a day of great sadness and indignation due to the national shame of abortion. Millions of our fellow Britons have died due to a culture that prefers the easy false compassion of abortion, over the harder but real humanity of supporting pregnant mothers and their unborn children in unplanned and difficult pregnancies.

Despite this, we may have great hope for the future. With public awareness of the humanity of the unborn child greater than ever before, as well as ever-improving medical technology for pregnant women and babies at the foetal stage of their development, public opinion is moving in a more humane direction.

This May, a poll by ComRes showed that 70% of the public, including 70% of women, favoured a reduction in the upper time limit, with only 1% wanting to raise it, and only another 1% wanting to raise it up to birth. Another recent ICM poll commissioned by the BBC showed that 39% wanted to retain abortion in the criminal law, compared to 34% wanting to decriminalise it (many of whom will be unaware that ‘decriminalisation’ entails abortion on demand, for any reason, up to 28 weeks or else birth).

Public opinion is clearly against the abortion lobby’s inhumane agenda, and more in sympathy with the right-to-life movement’s concern for human equality, dignity, and rights. This is, and should be, the future of our laws in a society where more than ever before we affirm and protect the most vulnerable members of the human family”.