From a puppy of hell
If Ms Dorries (’Hounds of Hell‘) has had unpleasant things sent through the post, threatening calls and messages smeared on her window, I urge her to call the police, for her own protection and for that of her family and staff, but also to protect the debate. I would firmly disassociate myself from anyone who would use such methods to advance their aims, but I hope that no-one would use these reprehensible actions to poison the debate or smear people who oppose the amendment put forward by Ms Dorries to reduce the legal limit for abortions from twenty-four to twenty weeks.
Therefore, I wish to reply to Ms Dorries’ post, Antediluvian.
Antediluvian does, indeed, mean ‘from before a flood’ and more particularly the Great Flood as recounted in the book of Genesis. I have mentioned before that Ms Dorries’ appeal to the popular genius are at best short-sighted and at worst a dereliction of duty. The epithet ‘antidiluvian’ is appropriate precisely because there are problems with the existing law. However, Ms Dorries and her fellow-travellers make the debate impossible because, for one thing, they resort to emotion and distortion and, for another, because their opposition to abortion is so implacable that they will not permit any movement towards liberalisation – say, abortions on request up until the fourteenth week – even if offset by a reduction in the upper normal limit.
“All faiths, including Muslims, Jews, Sikhs, Hindus and Christians are all antediluvian. “
Er, no. Please see my earlier post on religion and abortion, but I would point out that there is no one definition of a faith and that there are plenty of people of those and other faiths how do accept abortion and, as I mentioned, some religions make specific provisions allowing abortion.
I want to link back to this post from Unity debunking the ‘Hand of Hope’ myth that Ms Dorries is peddling, this post from Tim and this post on the Liberal Conspiracy; they’re all worth reading.
xD.
