Are lefties guilty of ignoring abortion rights?
Abortion, and of course the wider issue of reproductive rights, still seems to be an area that the left need to be pushed on.
Yeah they will often make the right noises, but they will make excuses for anti abortion men such as Galloway, and yet I can’t see them being quite so tolerant if someone was, ooh let’s say pro-war. But abortion is a women’s issue isn’t it, it’s not quite up there with the serious male leftie men and their real politics about war and arguing the toss over the finer obscure theoretical points of Marxism or who did what when to whom in 1983.
That’s not to say the majority of the left aren’t pro choice and I’m not going to bang on about Galloway as it’s pointless. Back to the subject, the left and pro choice, why should they get their finger out on this?
Much has been said on this, so I will try to focus on what I see as specific issues for the left, starting with the fact that working class women are those who lose out the most when abortion rights are restricted. Money has always helped procure such services from discreet private doctors.
Working class women, pre 1967, had to make do with the back street abortionists and the resultant risks to health, potentially fatal.
continue reading… »
Nadine Dorries MP and her hoax science
1) On March 19th Nadine Dorries MP published a blog-post titled The Hand of Hope, which featured this image of a small hand apparently coming out of a uterus. She said:
When the operation was over, baby Samuel, at 21 weeks gestation, put his hand through the incision in the uterus and grabbed hold of the surgeon’s finger, a gesture which was apparently met with a huge amount of emotion in the operating theatre. Dr Bruner said that it was the most emotional moment of his life and that for a moment he was just frozen, totally immobile.
Except, it was a hoax and Dr Bruner himself had said so. This was pointed out on several blogs including LC and Dorries wrote another post defending her actions with the view that the photographer, a born-again Christian, should be believed over the surgeon (who she had earlier quoted herself).
The Hand of Hope also makes an appearance on the pictures and video section of her new campaign. In other words, a member of parliament is actually perpetuating a hoax that has been debunked several times.
In many ways, this sums up her entire campaign.
continue reading… »
Who is funding Nadine Dorries MP’s campaign?
A week ago Nadine Dorries launched the 20 weeks Campaign through the Daily Mail, which wrote up this glowing story and dedicated its editorial comment strip to supporting it. The 20 Weeks website has Nadine Dorries MP’s picture on every page and she has promoted it relentlessly through her blog. So we can reasonably assume it is her campaign.
But who is behind this campaign? Is it just Ms Dorries? The website doesn’t say. On the Q&A page however it does have this question: Is this a religious campaign?. Answer: “No. There are people of all faiths and of no faith who support this campaign.”
But that’s about it. Shouldn’t we be told who is running a campaign fronted by a Conservative MP?
continue reading… »
A Protest for Science
Liberal Democrat MP Evan Harris, with parliamentary colleagues, at an event in support of the Human Fertility and Embryology Bill, which will protect and extend the right of scientists to perform crucial stem-cell research.
More about all this at the Coalition for Choice website.
The case against Nadine Dorries MP (pt 1)
Today on Liberal Conspiracy we have a treat for you. This week we officially launch our campaign: Coalition For Choice, to support the HFE Bill and develop an online advocacy group in favour of extending abortion rights over the longer term.
See the website for more about our aims.
To mark this launch we have a week of Nadine Dorries MP on Liberal Conspiracy! We will illustrate how this Conservative MP:
- has consistently misrepresented the arguments around abortion;
- is fronting campaigns by Christian groups without declaring so;
- is promoting hoaxes on her websites;
- has frequently and wrongly smeared reputable journalists and scientists;
- hides her true long-term intentions on the issue of abortion
continue reading… »
What about women’s rights, Mrs Dorries?
In the pages of the Daily Mail yesterday, anti-choice poster-girl Nadine Dorries MP was given a platform to put across her misogynist, reactionary views.
She and a claimed ‘coalition of 200′ MPs are calling for a reduction in the time limit on legal abortion from 24 to 20 weeks, despite a lack of evidence that fetuses can survive outside the womb before that point and despite the fact that most women are against further reductions in the time limit.
continue reading… »
Home Office wants to save face
Ministers have paved the way for further concessions on plans to hold terrorist suspects for up to 42 days without charge in an attempt to avert another rebellion by Labour MPs, reports The Times.
Brown presses on with 42 days
Gordon Brown today vowed to press ahead with plans to extend detention without trial beyond 28 days.
Shami Chakrabarti on 42 days
The liberty director has written a comment piece for the Times newspaper on why Gordon Brown needs to do a U-turn on terror
Goldsmith savages 42 days bill
The government’s controversial anti-terror plans were last night roundly attacked by former attorney general Lord Goldsmith QC. “The case has not been made out for that extension and I can’t personally support it,” he said.
Now we need a defeat on 42 days
Now that it has backed down over the 10p tax band, we need the government to lose over the 42 days legislation too. Labour loyalists might balk at this but not only would it be good for our democracy, but its an incredibly bad piece of legislation.
On Monday Jackie Ashley faithfully asked loyalists to hold their nose:
For after the 10p vote will be plenty more possible crises, not least the vote over the 42-day detention proposal. On both, I am 100% against the official government view and, with every instinct, on the side of the Labour rebels. But disaster is looming and the real parliamentarians have carefully to weigh in the balance what they now do, and ask how much likelier it will make a Tory landslide a year hence.
This sort of thinking is appalling. It is the road of good intentions to hell.
continue reading… »
DPP chief also against 42 days
Britain’s most senior prosecutor last night questioned whether the government’s controversial proposal to detain terror suspects for up to 42 days without charge was even directed at “a real problem”.
28 days: Smith won’t “cave in”
Though defeat looms for the home secretary, Jacqui Smith says she won’t “cave in” to pressure on the 42 days extension.
28 days: Police already the power
Ministers don’t need to extend pre-charge detention to 42 days because they already have the power to almost indefinitely hold suspects, a rebel Labour MP told the Guardian today.
28 days: A game of bluff
It should come as no surprise that, in an effort to push its plans to extend pre-charge detention to 42 days, the home office has started citing the number of terrorist plots in Britain. Playing to the gallery in the News of the World this Sunday, Jacqui Smith said: “There are 2,000 individuals [the intelligence services] are monitoring. There are 200 networks. There are 30 active plots. We can’t wait for an attack to succeed and then rush in new powers. We’ve got to stay ahead.”
The first problem with this approach is the way successive home secretaries have cynically exploited such figures to push through controversial legislation on terrorism. After all, this is at least the fourth anti-terrorism bill since 2001, and each has been controversial in the way our government has tried to extend its powers. Shadow home secretary David Davis articulated it best when he responded yesterday by saying: “It is a sign of desperation that the home secretary is citing as ‘new’ evidence details given in a speech by the head of MI5 five months ago.”
continue reading… »
Cabinet split on 42 days
The Guardian reports today that the cabinet is split on whether pushing for extending pre-charge detention to 42 days is a good idea or not.
28 days: government offers “concessions”
Via Anthony Barnett, I find that the home secretary is preparing to offer “concessions” in an attempt to avoid a rebellion against its plans to extend pre-detention charge for up to 42 days.
Under the proposal, MPs would be allowed to debate a decision to invoke the emergency powers within 10 days of a government decision. At the moment MPs would only be given a say within 30 days, a proposal seen as largely meaningless by critics – suspects could have been charged or released by the time MPs had a chance to scrutinise the need for an extension beyond the current limit of 28 days.
This is so meaningless as to be an insult to our intelligence. Martin Salter, Labour MP for Reading West, who Anthony rightly says is preparing to be a sellout, says we have: “got stuck in a sterile debate on the number of days”. So why not remove any delay of time in which MPs can debate the decision? It is cosmetic surgery and it is being thrown as crumbs to Labour MPs who still have control of their conscience. Feel free to write to Salter . As Anthony rightly adds: “There are few things more insufferable than MPs telling us how they are the guardians of our liberty and all the great things about Britain while the executive laughs up its sleeve and voters snort with derision.”
Later this week I’ll be speaking alongside Liberty at an event organised by the Muslim debating group City Circle about how this campaign can be taken forward strategically. All are welcome to attend.
Iraqi Employees: fine words, shabby deeds
Do you like reading fine words? Here is the Prime Minister on the subject of Iraqi ex-employees of the British Government, speaking in the House of Commons on October 9th, 2007:
I would also like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the work of our civilian and locally employed staff in Iraq, many of whom have worked in extremely difficult circumstances, exposing themselves and their families to danger. I am pleased therefore to announce today a new policy which more fully recognises the contribution made by our local Iraqi staff, who work for our armed forces and civilian missions in what we know are uniquely difficult circumstances.
Fine words. What about deeds?
continue reading… »
Will these MPs vote with their conscience?
I’ve put together a full list of Labour MPs who abstained or voted against the government’s last vote to extend pre-charge detention to 90 days. This time round, as I’ve said recently, they’re trying to extend this to 42 days. Thanks to Amnesty International and OurKingdom for providing me the information. We feel these are most likely to be persuaded that voting with the government this time around is also a bad idea.
Each MP’s name is linked with their email address. Please feel free to email them saying something along the lines of: ‘Don’t be convinced by the home secretary if you have a conscience.‘
To paraphrase Tesco, every email counts. We need to let them know that we’re watching.
Democracy: driving and drinking
Some people in this country, me included, believe there’s something pretty wrong with ‘democracy’ in the UK. It’s blown a gasket. It’s belching stinking pollution. It rattles and it bangs and threatens to seize up altogether at any moment.
Most people just stand around it, kicking the tyres and exclaiming, ‘nah, it’s alright, it’ll go round the clock another couple of times no bother.’ Jack Straw thinks it just needs another coat of paint and it’ll be sorted.
You get the impression that he knows what’s going on under the bonnet but doesn’t want to admit it to himself let alone those of us risking our lives by riding along in the death trap. It needs rebuilding or trading in, if we’re honest.
continue reading… »
You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or rss feeds.
» How bad is the feline obesity crisis?
» Why don’t MPs pay back tuition fees instead of increasing ours?
» Obama is right to slam BP – and why capitalists should too
» Why does Phillip Blond see civic cohesion as a security issue?
» So what if the Labour candidates went to Oxbridge?
» Last night’s Labour hustings: will it get interesting or turn to torture?
» It’s now down to Ken to win London for Labour
» The Labour people need
» Blog Nation: what would you like to see discussed?
» The Labour leadership’s token contender.. and it’s not Diane Abbott
» In defence of these fraternal nominations
|
66 Comments 20 Comments 13 Comments 10 Comments 18 Comments 4 Comments 25 Comments 49 Comments 31 Comments 16 Comments |
|
LATEST COMMENTS » Blackberries posted on Complete tits » Shatterface posted on How bad is the feline obesity crisis? » Shatterface posted on Complete tits » McDuff posted on Why I'm defending Ed Balls over immigration » damon posted on Complete tits » Sunny Hundal posted on Complete tits » sunny hundal posted on Why don't MPs pay back tuition fees instead of increasing ours? » Lee Griffin posted on The Labour leadership's token contender.. and it's not Diane Abbott » dan posted on Defend the urban fox! » Richard W posted on Boris rise for Living Wage left of Labour » Julian Swainson posted on How many cabinet MPs went to private schools? » sally posted on Complete tits » Joanne Dunn posted on How many cabinet MPs went to private schools? » Lovely Lynnette Peck posted on How many cabinet MPs went to private schools? » Nick posted on Why don't MPs pay back tuition fees instead of increasing ours? |
