New Zealand PM criticised for supporting abortion up to birth as election race heats up

New Zealand’s Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, has been criticised by an MP for supporting the introduction of a Bill allowing abortion on-demand, for any reason, up to birth.

Responding to recent comments Ardern made that New Zealand could be doing more to improve infant mortality, Whanganui MP Harete Hipango said the “hypocrisy is astounding” given the Prime Minister supported the Abortion Legislation Bill. 

In a Facebook post on Monday, Hipango stated, “This recent stance by the PM is rank and riles me as a woman who is a mother and has also advocated for children’s welfare all my professional working life as a lawyer.” 

With the 2020 election just seven weeks away, Labour MP and Justice Minister Andrew Little leapt to Jacinda’s defence and said there was “no such thing as full-term abortion, people who say that are idiots.”

Andrew Little repeatedly used the same tactic when the Bill was progressing through Parliament earlier this year. Rather than admitting that the Bill did allow abortion through to birth and evidence from Victoria, Australia, where there is a similar law, shows 1,418 late-term abortions (between 20-weeks’ gestation and birth) have been performed, allowed by doctors for ‘psychosocial’ reasons with one of these occurring at 37 weeks gestation, he has continued to repeat the line that there is “no such things as full term-abortion.” 

National list party MP Agnes Loheni, who was on the select committee for the abortion legislation, said the legislation “definitely” supports abortion up to birth.

“What is written in our legislation definitely supports that you could have an abortion post 20 weeks up to birth. If you look at the words yourself – there are no hoops to jump through because it is so broad and ill-defined. In my view the unborn child now is the equivalent of having an appendix removed,” she said.

She added that many MP’s who were for the bill changed their vote on the third reading because they felt uncomfortable with the “loose terms around the criteria for late term abortions”.

Hipango was also supported in her comments against the Labour Prime Minister by fellow National MP, Simon O’Connor.

In the comment section of Hipango’s Facebook post, O’Connor said the Government had “pushed through” the law ahead of the COVID-19 lockdown and that aborting a full-term baby “sure has” been legalised.

Extreme abortion regime

Earlier this year, New Zealand MPs voted to introduce the world’s most severe abortion law in the world by 68 votes to 51.

The new law scraps the previous 20-week limit and will allow terminations on-demand, for any reason, up to birth.

Additionally, there is now no requirement doctors must be involved with an abortion ‘procedure’ and MPs – including Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern – voted against an amendment requiring medical care for babies born alive after a ‘failed’ termination.

The new law has also legalised sex-selective abortion.

New proposals could deny pregnant women practical and emotional support

Four-months after introducing the extreme abortion law, a New Zealand Labour MP has introduced a Bill to make it even worse.

Labour MP Louisa Wall‘s Contraception, Sterilisation, and Abortion (Safe Areas) Amendment Bill would deny women practical and emotional support outside abortion clinics.

The proposal states this will be done through the creation of so-called “safe areas” up to 150 metres from any part of an abortion facility, with a fine of up to $1,000 for anyone deemed to be breaking the rules.

New Zealanders ignored

In light of extremely low public support and falling support from MPs, Jacinda Ardern’s Government rushed the final stages of the Abortion Bill’s progress through Parliament while politicians, the media and the rest of the country were distracted dealing with the coronavirus pandemic.

This included progressing the final sitting of the committee stage and the Bill’s third and final reading through parliament on the same day.

Polling, conducted by Curia Research revealed strong opposition to the new law by the public in New Zealand, and in particular by women.

Only 2% of women said they support abortion being available on-demand right up to birth. Meanwhile, 93% of women opposed sex-selective abortion being legal and 94% of women supported the previous legal standards for abortion providers and premises.

However, despite the extremities of the new law and little public support for the regulations, MPs voted to deny the public a final say on the legislation.

Additionally, over 40,000 New Zealanders have signed a petition urging the Government to hold a referendum giving the people of New Zealand an opportunity to repeal the extreme abortion legislation which passed earlier this year.

To put this in perspective, if New Zealand had the same population as the UK, and the same proportion of the population signed the petition this would equate to well over 500,000 signatures.

The petition’s author, Pamela McIlwraith, has said: “In my view the abortion legislation was rushed through Parliament while the entire country was distracted with COVID-19.

“I think there needs to be a referendum so the people can have their say—MPs should not be able to vote against giving the people their say in such important matters, especially a law legalising full term abortion.”

Most extreme abortion law in the world 

Canada is the only country in the world that has no abortion law, as their law was struck down by a case brought to their Supreme Court in 1988.

Amongst the rest of the jurisdictions in the world that have abortion legislation, Victoria, Australia, previously had the most extreme law.

The law in Victoria allows for abortion right through to birth on physical, psychological and social grounds when approved by two doctors; this can be the abortion operating surgeon and anaesthetist.

This has, in practice, allowed for abortion on demand, for any reason, right through to birth in Victoria, Australia.

Ahead of the legislation being introduced in Victoria in 2008, abortion activists claimed that, although abortion would, in practice, be allowed for any reason, doctors would ensure that the vast majority of abortions would only occur in rare circumstances. Such cases may involve when a baby has a condition where they would either die in the womb or shortly after birth (a fatal foetal abnormality or life-limiting disability) – similar claims were made about the NZ abortion legislation by abortion campaigners and MPs in New Zealand before it became law.

Data from the 12 years of the law being in operation in Victoria, shows that this has not been the case. Right To Life UK’s Public Affairs team have undertaken an extensive analysis of published abortion data on late-term abortions in Victoria from The Consultative Council on Obstetric and Paediatric Mortality.

This data shows that since the law changed in 2008, 1,418 late-term abortions (between 20-weeks’ gestation and birth) have been performed, allowed by doctors for ‘psychosocial’ reasons – these were terminations where the baby did not have a disability and the abortion was performed on social grounds. In 2011, one of these abortions on social grounds occurred at 37 weeks.

Under the previous New Zealand law, abortion was allowed post-20 weeks on very strict grounds (when the abortion is “necessary to save the life of the woman or girl or to prevent serious permanent injury to her physical or mental health”). 

This strict law has meant that abortions post 20-weeks have been rare – for example 72 abortions occurred after 20-weeks in New Zealand in 2017. 

Victoria has a population that is only 32% larger than New Zealand’s, but the number of abortions that occurred post 20-weeks were much higher, 324 or 348.61% higher than the number that occurred in New Zealand that same year (published data for Victoria has not been released for 2018 yet).

Another side effect of the very high late-term abortion rate in Australia is that scores of babies have been left to die after being born alive during a number of ‘botched’ terminations.

The Victorian Consultative Council on Obstetric and Paediatric Mortality and Morbidity reported that in 2012 there were 53 ‘terminations of pregnancy’ after 20 weeks ‘resulting in live birth’. 

By contrast, a 2008 report for England and Wales found that 66 infants were born alive after NHS terminations in one year. While these figures are comparable in number, Victoria’s population of 6.36 million is just a tenth of the size of the population in England and Wales.

A Channel 7 news broadcast, on April 17 2010, reported that there had been a large increase in late-term abortions being performed at the Royal Women’s Hospital since the introduction of the 2008 Abortion Law Reform. Presenter Jennifer Keyte stated how “midwives and doctors feel traumatised” by having to perform so many late-term abortions at the Royal Women’s Hospital. Journalist Louise Milligan said that there had been some ‘alarming requests’ for late-term abortions, including a request for a termination at 32 weeks because the baby had a cleft lip. 

The new abortion law in New Zealand is even more extreme than the law in Victoria, Australia – making it the most extreme abortion law in the world.It allows abortions between 20-weeks’ gestation and birth with the go-ahead from just two health practitioners (this could include nurses and midwives) rather than the higher threshold of two doctors that are required in Victoria.While the legislation in New Zealand was progressing through parliament, the Abortion Legislation Committee widened the, already loose, criteria to include “overall well-being” – making it even easier for abortions to happen between 20 weeks and birth in New Zealand. These are undefined terms and it will be up to the healthcare practitioner involved as to how they interpret them.

Further evidence of China forcing abortions on Uighur women

Further details have emerged about the Chinese Government forcing women into unwanted abortions and surgical sterilisations in an attempt to limit the Uighur minority population.

Last month, an investigative report highlighted the brutal treatment of women and unborn babies through the eyewitness accounts of those affected.

It was released alongside damning new research by German researcher Dr Adrian Zenz, which argued the severe human rights abuses in Xinjiang met the United Nation’s criteria for genocide.

Now, a number of women have shared their heartbreaking stories with the Mail on Sunday about the abortions they have been forced into.

Sumayya: Forced to have eight abortions

Sumayya’s (a pseudonym) story is perhaps the most harrowing story of those disclosed.

Initially, she was relatively protected from strict birth control measures and forced abortions, as her husband was the only son of a senior local party official.

But, he lost power soon after the birth of Sumayya’s third child.

Sumayya has since been forced to have eight abortions.

“I would cry each time,” she said.

“Usually the nurses would take it away, saying if it was a boy or a girl. One time when the baby came out, it was obviously a boy and I could hold his little hand. I slept with him all night, crying beside him.”

After becoming pregnant again in 2016, medics said her body was so damaged by the previous forced abortions that she must spend weeks in hospital preparing for another termination.

Instead, she decided to flee. Her husband was subsequently arrested, while other relatives cut off contact, scared of all the surveillance.

Desperate to find her daughter back home, Sumayya traced her through social media with the help of a neighbour.

Aware they are being monitored, Sumayya and her 17-year-old daughter sometimes just sit there silently weeping together.

Sumayya said: “My daughter texts me to say that she is losing all hope in life. I am so worried about her I cannot sleep more than a couple of hours. I tell her to focus on her studies but she responds aggressively that she is done with hope.

“How is this fair? Why are we treated worse than animals just because we are Uighurs?”

Amina Mamtimin: ‘All I can do is hope we will one day meet again’

When Amina Mamtimin became pregnant with her fifth child four years ago, she knew she had to leave her country or risk losing her baby to a forced abortion.  

“I was very happy to be having a baby but also so scared,” she said.

“[Women] are forced to have abortions and then stopped from having more kids. It was happening to almost everyone in my neighbourhood.”

As Amina had already given birth to four children, two more than is currently permitted by China’s two-child limit, she and her family decided to flee from China.

Amina’s third and fourth child had been registered as belonging to her sister, but the family knew they couldn’t dupe Communist Party officials by doing the same with their fifth child. 

The family applied for passports, but only Amina and her youngest daughter were successful.

Amina agreed with her husband, Kurbanjan, that she must go first to save their fast-growing child in her womb.

The plan was for the rest of the family to follow.

“But they never made it,” Amina revealed.

Her husband was jailed for 15 years, disappearing into China’s sinister network of ‘re-education centres’ and prisons. She doesn’t know the whereabouts of her other three children, aged between nine and 12.

Now living in Turkey with her daughter and new son, Abdullah, she said: “All I can do is hope we will one day meet again – but for now I feel barely alive and can’t feel any happiness.”

Far from unique

Tragically, stories like Amina’s are far from unique. Amina was one of about 25 Uighur women who spoke to the Mail on Sunday in Istanbul, Turkey.

One woman revealed how, like Amina, she had fled China in a panic during her pregnancy.

Unlike Amina, she managed to escape with one of her children and her husband.

However, when he returned to China after ten days to collect their other children – he was detained.

“I’ve never heard from him again,” the woman explained.

Before the end of 2018, she was scrolling through news feeds on her phone in Istanbul when she spotted her daughter singing in a video that had been filmed in a state-run orphanage called Angel’s Garden.

Zumret Abdullah: ‘They just threw the foetus in a plastic bag like it was trash’

Zumret Abdullah estimated she must have seen about 90 forced abortions in three years whilst working as a nurse on a hospital maternity ward at Urumqi Medical University.

She disclosed how expectant mothers were made to swallow medical abortion pills or, in cases where the mother was more than five months pregnant, had to have fatal injections into the heads of their unborn child.

“I witnessed a lot of tragedies there,” the young healthcare professional said.

“The husbands were not allowed inside. They take in the women, who are always crying. Afterwards, they just threw the foetus in a plastic bag like it was trash. One mother begged to die after her seven-month-old baby was killed. It took three more days to give birth. It was a proper baby. She asked if they could bury it but the doctors would not give it to the family.

“These women suffered so much. Doctors would claim the women wanted abortions but then you would hear them chatting in the office and learn the truth.”

Unable to bear the trauma of forced abortions, Zumret eventually quit her job.

“I was having mental problems, seeing babies in my dreams. I still have nightmares,” she said.

All the victims were Uighur, despite many of China’s Han population moving to Urumqi, the regional capital.

“It never happened to a [Han] Chinese person once. This was just to control the Uighur population,” Zumret said.

Rahima Muhammad: Attempting to make a difference

Rahima Muhammad spent six years working in a clinic for women that had up to 100 abortion appointments each day.

Due to the large number of women suffering health problems from brutal birth control methods and the number of women attempting to give birth at home alone, Rahima opened an illegal healthcare clinic hidden behind a pharmacy to help women trying to save their babies.

“I could not make a difference at the hospital but after I opened the clinic, more and more ladies came so I could not treat them all,” she said.

One of Rahima’s patients was a woman about seven months pregnant who pleaded for her baby to be induced prematurely since she was being chased by Chinese authorities to have an abortion.

Eventually, Rahima agreed, but the baby’s lungs were under-developed and it had breathing problems.

“I tried to persuade her to go to the hospital but she refused, so in the end I took the baby to the hospital but it died. I have never forgotten the baby’s face. This is why I cannot accept that we were forced into this situation.”

Despite her efforts, Rahima said she still felt guilty she could not do more.

Like many other women, she fled the country for Turkey after giving birth to her fourth baby. This also meant closing the clinic which had offered hope to a number of Uighur women in Xinjiang.

Roshangul Tashmuhammad: Women routinely checked

Roshangul Tashmuhammad explained how Government officials in China routinely check women’s menstrual cycles to ensure they are not pregnant.

When police discovered Roshangul’s sister-in-law was expecting a baby for the second time, she was visited by police who said they must take her to the hospital for checks.

At the hospital, medical professionals claimed the baby had died in the womb so they forcibly aborted it.

Two years later, the same sister-in-law hid from the authorities during another pregnancy with the aim of giving birth.

However, this led to Roshangul’s brother being jailed for four years.

“They said his baby should not be alive,” Roshangul said.

Kalbinur Kamal: Forcibly sterilised

Kalbinur Kamal, a teacher among those forcibly sterilised said: “I had no option but to sign the [sterilisation authorisation] forms. The Chinese doctor said you must accept because if not we will do it by force anyway, so better to do it willingly.”

Huge bribes

Several people told the Mail on Sunday that their families had paid huge bribes to protect their babies, while others hid in homes or moved constantly to evade the authorities.

One doctor told me she paid about a year’s salary to register her third child. During a decade working as a paediatrician in Urumqi, she often faked papers saying infants could not hear or speak since this allowed families to have another child.

Painful legacy of one and two-child policies

Earlier this year, a Chinese mother, who was given a forced abortion after falling pregnant with her third child, was granted refugee status in New Zealand.

The family’s story offers a glimpse into how China’s former one-child policy and current two-child policy continue to leave a painful legacy.

Although China’s brutal one-child policy ended in 2015, it was replaced by a similarly draconian two-child policy and the devastating consequences of forced abortions, sterilizations, abandoned newborns, and Government abductions are still ongoing.

Chinese-born filmmakers Nanfu Wang and Jialing Zhang exposed some of the consequences of the policy by retelling some of the stories of those who lived through it. 

In their One Child Nation documentary, which can be viewed on Amazon Prime Video, an 84-year-old midwife revealed she was unsure how many babies she had delivered, but had performed a total of between 50,000 to 60,000 sterilizations and abortions.

“I counted this out of guilt, because I aborted and killed babies,” the midwife, Huaru Yuan, continues. “Many I induced alive and killed. My hands trembled doing it.”

One mother in China told the BBC that she would have liked a second child but was also forced to have an abortion.

She said: “You either go willingly or the government comes for you.”

Another mother told the BBC that before the one-child policy was relaxed, she was forced to have an abortion. Speaking of the ordeal she said: “My baby didn’t die immediately… it kept on struggling inside me.

“It broke my heart, the next day it was born still alive… it cried. The doctor said don’t look at it, you’ll have nightmares.”

New Zealand could make world’s most extreme abortion law even worse

Four-months after introducing the world’s most extreme abortion law, a New Zealand Labour MP has introduced a Bill to make it even worse.

Labour MP Louisa Wall‘s Contraception, Sterilisation, and Abortion (Safe Areas) Amendment Bill would deny women practical and emotional support outside abortion clinics.

The proposal states this will be done through the creation of so-called “safe areas” up to 150 metres from any part of an abortion facility, with a fine of up to $1,000 for anyone deemed to be breaking the rules.

‘Criminalised free speech zones’ would effectively ban volunteers from offering support to women entering abortion clinics and hospitals across New Zealand. They would also ban individuals from peacefully praying in the vicinity of clinics.

Similar proposals in the UK were rejected by the British Government following an extensive review and have seen widespread opposition beyond pro-life advocates to a large part of society, which may not agree on the pro-life position on abortion, but oppose censorship zones because they infringe on free speech.

A number of prominent human rights groups and campaigners, all of whom support abortion, have also spoken out against the introduction of censorship zones.

This includes Peter Tatchell, the Manifesto Club, Big Brother Watch, Index on Censorship and the Freedom Association.

Another attempt to deny women support

Pro-abortion MPs in New Zealand had sought to introduce criminalised free speech zones when they initially voted in an extreme abortion regime in the country earlier this year.

However, they accidentally allowed an amendment preventing the establishment of “buffer zones” to pass unchallenged and without a vote.

The Green Party failed in its attempt to reverse a mistake that resulted in criminalised free speech zones, which prevent pro-life help from being offered outside abortion clinics, being excluded from the legislation.

Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson had attempted to reverse their mistake and reintroduce the measure, but MPs voted 77 to 43 against it.

The new bill will be introduced to Parliament where it will face a First Reading before needing to pass a number of other stages before it becomes law.

Pro-abortion MPs will be hoping this process can be completed before the election on 19 September 2020.

Extreme abortion regime

On 18 March, New Zealand MPs voted to introduce the world’s most severe abortion law in the world by 68 votes to 51 – a much narrower margin than at the first and second reading.

The new law scraps the previous 20-week limit and will allow terminations on-demand, for any reason, up to birth.

Additionally, there is now no requirement doctors must be involved with an abortion ‘procedure’ and MPs – including Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern – voted against an amendment requiring medical care for babies born alive after a ‘failed’ termination.

The new law has also legalised sex-selective abortion.

New Zealanders ignored

In light of extremely low public support and falling support from MPs, Jacinda Ardern’s Government rushed the final stages of the Bill’s progress through Parliament while politicians, the media and the rest of the country were distracted dealing with the coronavirus pandemic.

This included progressing the final sitting of the committee stage and the Bill’s third and final reading through parliament on the same day.

Polling, conducted by Curia Research revealed strong opposition to the new law by the public in New Zealand, and in particular by women.

Only 2% of women said they support abortion being available on-demand right up to birth. Meanwhile, 93% of women opposed sex-selective abortion being legal and 94% of women supported the previous legal standards for abortion providers and premises.

However, despite the extremities of the new law and little public support for the regulations, MPs voted to deny the public a final say on the legislation.

Additionally, over 40,000 New Zealanders have signed a petition urging the Government to hold a referendum giving the people of New Zealand an opportunity to repeal the extreme abortion legislation which passed earlier this year.

To put this in perspective, if New Zealand had the same population as the UK, and the same proportion of the population signed the petition this would equate to well over 500,000 signatures.

The petition’s author, Pamela McIlwraith, has said: “In my view the abortion legislation was rushed through Parliament while the entire country was distracted with COVID-19.

“I think there needs to be a referendum so the people can have their say—MPs should not be able to vote against giving the people their say in such important matters, especially a law legalising full term abortion.”

Most extreme abortion law in the world 

Canada is the only country in the world that has no abortion law, as their law was struck down by a case brought to their Supreme Court in 1988.

Amongst the rest of the jurisdictions in the world that have abortion legislation, Victoria, Australia, previously had the most extreme law.

The law in Victoria allows for abortion right through to birth on physical, psychological and social grounds when approved by two doctors; this can be the abortion operating surgeon and anaesthetist.

This has, in practice, allowed for abortion on demand, for any reason, right through to birth in Victoria, Australia.

Ahead of the legislation being introduced in Victoria in 2008, abortion activists claimed that, although abortion would, in practice, be allowed for any reason, doctors would ensure that the vast majority of abortions would only occur in rare circumstances, such as when a baby had a condition where they would either die in the womb or shortly after birth (a fatal foetal abnormality or life-limiting disability) – similar claims were made about theNZ abortion legilsation by abortion campaigners and MPs in New Zealand before it became law.

Data from the 12 years of the law being in operation in Victoria shows that this has not been the case. Right To Life UK’s Public Affairs team have undertaken an extensive analysis of published abortion data on late-term abortions in Victoria from The Consultative Council on Obstetric and Paediatric Mortality.

This data shows that since the law changed in 2008, 1,418 late-term abortions (between 20-weeks’ gestation and birth) have been performed, allowed by doctors for ‘psychosocial’ reasons – these were terminations where the baby did not have a disability and the abortion was performed on social grounds. In 2011, one of these abortions on social grounds occurred at 37 weeks.

Under the previous New Zealand law, abortion was allowed post-20 weeks on very strict grounds (when the abortion is “necessary to save the life of the woman or girl or to prevent serious permanent injury to her physical or mental health”). 

This strict law has meant that abortions post 20-weeks have been rare – for example 72 abortions occurred after 20-weeks in New Zealand in 2017. 

Victoria has a population that is only 32% larger than New Zealand’s, but the number of abortions that occurred post 20-weeks were much higher, 324 or 348.61% higher than the number that occurred in New Zealand that same year (published data for Victoria has not been released for 2018 yet).

Another side effect of the very high late-term abortion rate in Australia is that scores of babies have been left to die after being born alive during a number of ‘botched’ terminations.

The Victorian Consultative Council on Obstetric and Paediatric Mortality and Morbidity reported that in 2012 there were 53 ‘terminations of pregnancy’ after 20 weeks ‘resulting in live birth’. 

By contrast, a 2008 report for England and Wales found that 66 infants were born alive after NHS terminations in one year. While these figures are comparable in number, Victoria’s population of 6.36 million is just a tenth of the size of the population in England and Wales.

A Channel 7 news broadcast, on April 17 2010, reported that there had been a large increase in late-term abortions being performed at the Royal Women’s Hospital since the introduction of the 2008 Abortion Law Reform. Presenter Jennifer Keyte stated how “midwives and doctors feel traumatised” by having to perform so many late-term abortions at the Royal Women’s Hospital. Journalist Louise Milligan said that there had been some ‘alarming requests’ for late-term abortions, including a request for a termination at 32 weeks because the baby had a cleft lip. 

The new abortion law in New Zealand is even more extreme than the law in Victoria, Australia – making it the most extreme abortion law in the world.

It allows abortions between 20-weeks’ gestation and birth with the go-ahead from just two health practitioners (this could include nurses and midwives) rather than the higher threshold of two doctors that are required in Victoria.While the legislation in New Zealand was progressing through parliament, the Abortion Legislation Committee widened the, already loose, criteria to include “overall well-being” – making it even easier for abortions to happen between 20 weeks and birth in New Zealand. These are undefined terms and it will be up to the healthcare practitioner involved as to how they interpret them.

Over 40,000 participate in Ireland’s Rally for Life

More than 40,000 people streamed Ireland’s Rally for Life last week, according to organisers of the event, who are now aiming to grow that audience tenfold in the coming weeks.

Due to the coronavirus pandemic, this year’s Rally for Life took place online, with 34 local and socially-distanced rallies taking place across the country before the livestream began.

Across the country hundreds of people took part in socially-distanced pro-life displays, carrying signs reading “united for life” and “abortion is a pandemic”.

The Rally for Life Committee, who are hoping to keep up that momentum despite the move online, told Gript: “Having 40,000 people tune in live to the Rally Fest shows just how alive and vibrant the pro-life community is, and how powerful the message for Life can be.

“We had lots of families watching in groups so the numbers watching are likely even bigger, but we’re thrilled to have had a minimum of 40,000 people joining in the live events.

“Now, the plan is to grow that tenfold, reaching 300,000 or 400,000 people watching the live events online. It would mean the Rally effect could continue throughout the whole summer, cutting right through lockdown with a clear compelling pro-life message.”

Before COVID-19 caused many parts of the world to go into ‘lockdown’, pro-life demonstrations were seeing record attendance numbers, including in Ireland.

In 2018, up to 100,000 people took part in Ireland’s largest pro-life rally urging people to defend the right to life ahead of a major referendum on whether or not the country should introduce abortion legislation.

Sadly, months after that rally, 66% of people voted in favour of repealing the Eighth Amendment. As a result, abortion ‘services’ commenced on 1 January 2019.

Last month, it was revealed a total of 6,666 abortions were carried out in Ireland in 2019.

Earlier this year, hundreds of thousands of people attended the US March for Life, a record-breaking 9,000 people attended the March for Life in Chicago, Illinois, and over 8,000 people gathered for the Celebrate Life rally in Denver, Colorado carrying signs that read, “Civil rights begin in the womb” and “I am the pro-life generation.”

In 2019, over 50,000 Slovakians called on the country’s leaders to protect unborn babies. Pro-life demonstrations in Northern Ireland have reached over 20,000 people, while over 11,000 marched for life in the Netherlands, and over 2,000 people attended New Zealand’s March for Life.