Kont f’paniku w onestament ħsibt fl-abort

“Kont f’paniku w onestament il-ħsieb ta’ l-abort għadda min moħħi. Nixtieq ngħid grazzi lil Life Line Malta għax bis-saħħa tagħhom it-tarbija tagħna ġiet salvata!”

Din hija l-istorja vera ta’ mara li esperjenzat tqala mhux pjanata u li ġiet megħjuna minn Life Line Malta.

Nisa li jinsabu fi krizi ta’ tqala, dijanosi negattiva waqt it-tqala jew akkompanjament lin-nies li għaddejin mit-trauma tal-abort, ċemplu lill Life Line Malta fuq 20330023.

Life Line is the support and care arm of Life Network Foundation  

Bdejt naħseb fl-abort għaliex diġà kelli t-tfal

“Bdejt naħseb fl-abort għaliex diġà kelli t-tfal u peress li kelli problema tad-droga, ma stajtx inkun l-omm li xtaqt li kont.”

Din hija l-istorja vera ta’ mara li esperjenzat tqala mhux pjanata u li ġiet megħjuna minn Life Line Malta.

Nisa li jinsabu fi krizi ta’ tqala, dijanosi negattiva waqt it-tqala jew akkompanjament lin-nies li ghaddejin mit-trauma tal-abort, ċemplu lill Life Line Malta fuq 20330023.

Life Line is the support and care arm of Life Network Foundation

Life Line Malta gave me light in time of darkness

“Accidentally I got pregnant for the second time and I wanted to end my pregnancy. Life Line Malta gave me light in time of darkness.”

This is the real story of a young woman who was in a crisis pregnancy situation. She received all the help needed from Life Line Malta. Listen to her touching story!

For women in crisis pregnancy, negative pre-natal diagnoses & post-abortion healing please call Life Line Malta on 2033 0023

Life Line Malta is the support & care arm of Life Network Foundation

Bħala familja lesta biex tgħin lin-nisa li għaddejjin min kriżi ta’ tqala

“Life Network hija bħala familja lesta biex tgħin lin-nisa li għaddejjin min kriżi ta’ tqala.”

Din hija l-istorja ta’ mara li esperjenzat tqala mhux pjanata u li llum il-ġurnata tghin  nisa ohra li għaddejjin mill-listess sitwazzjoni simili taghha.

Nisa li jinsabu fi krizi ta’ tqala, dijanosi negattiva waqt it-tqala jew akkompanjament lin-nies li ghaddejin mit-trauma tal-abort, ċemplu lill Life Line Malta fuq 20330023.

Life Line Malta is the support and care arm of Life Network Foundation

Mother who adopted baby with Down’s syndrome shares her inspiring story

Mother who adopted baby with Down’s syndrome shares her inspiring story

A mother who adopted a child with Down’s syndrome has shared her inspiring story.

The anonymous mother, who adopted Harry, shared her adoption story with the Metro, as part of their ‘Adoption Month’ news coverage. 

After struggles with infertility and a miscarriage, the mum decided she wanted to adopt, and was approved to adopt a child aged three or older. 

After several months in the process, she was given Harry’s profile.

“I asked specifically for a child with Down’s syndrome and the very next day, I received Harry’s details.”

Harry was a dream from day one

When the mother received Harry’s details, he was just four months old. 

Despite being only approved to adopt a child aged three or over, her unique experience meant that the adoption agency made an exception and allowed her to adopt Harry.

The mum had grown up in a family where disability was not uncommon. 

“To me, disability isn’t something unusual – it’s just a part of life. My little sister has Down’s syndrome and is just a few years younger than me, and I also have other disabled family members.”

In July 2016, after six months of paperwork, she finally got to take him home. “Harry was a dream from day one,” she said.

“My family were overjoyed when I adopted Harry.”

There were challenges of course: “When he was young, he used to often be sick at night, all over the bed, due to reflux issues. Cleaning up the vomit for the millionth time is the only time I thought to myself ‘I can’t do this’ – but you just have to grin and bear it.

“That’s what being a parent is at times!

“He is so bright and super sociable. We both love being outdoors and often walk around the lake near our house or visit animals at the nearby farm.

“To me, Harry is just a boy. Some days, I completely forget that he has Down’s syndrome.”

I’m now looking at adopting a second child

Children born with Down’s syndrome are often hard to place. “There are so many kids out there who need a home. I would absolutely encourage people to adopt a disabled child, as they can be the hardest to place but have so much love to give.”

“I’m now looking at adopting a second child, perhaps one with Down’s syndrome – but I am keeping an open mind. Fingers crossed, Harry will have another sibling next year.”

Scale of Down’s syndrome abortions

Sadly, this inspiring story takes place against the backdrop of 3,183 disability selective abortions across England & Wales in just 2019, with 656 of those occurring following a prenatal diagnosis of Down’s syndrome.

At the same time, a recent report revealed that pregnant mothers who refuse to abort their children with Down’s syndrome are being pressured by some medical professionals to change their decision.

One mother, whose child is now four-years-old, said medical professionals told her they could leave her baby with Down’s syndrome to die if it was struggling after birth.

Another mum recounted that even at 38 weeks pregnant she was being offered an abortion.

Right to Life UK spokesperson Catherine Robinson said, “Unfortunately there is so much stigma surrounding Down’s syndrome and more inspiring stories like this one need to be heard. But there is hope. The High Court in London will soon hear a landmark case against the UK Government over the country’s discriminatory abortion legislation, which singles out babies with disabilities by allowing terminations right through to birth for conditions including Down’s syndrome, cleft lip and club foot.”

“This young mum’s story is just one example of the positive impact that the Down’s syndrome and disability communities have across the United Kingdom. In 2019, 656 babies were aborted due to a prenatal diagnosis of Down’s syndrome. Every one of those lives lost represents a failure of our society to embrace those with disabilities inside and outside the womb.”

 

This is www.righttolife.org.uk opinion piece

Ref: https://righttolife.org.uk/news/mother-who-adopted-baby-with-downs-syndrome-shares-her-inspiring-story/ 

  

Abortion, Not COVID-19, Named Leading Cause of Death in 2020 With Nearly 43 Million Killed Worldwide

Abortion, Not COVID-19, Named Leading Cause of Death in 2020 With Nearly 43 Million Killed Worldwide

More people died in 2020 from abortions than any other cause of death worldwide.

That’s right. Despite the overwhelming number of deaths that 2020 brought us through the coronavirus pandemic, abortion was once again named the leading cause of death last year, killing nearly 24 times more people than the coronavirus.

Data compiled by Worldometers — a highly accredited site that collects official data from governments, scientific journals, and other reputable groups like the World Health Organization — revealed that as of December 31, 2020, an estimated 42.7 MILLION abortions had been performed over the course of the year.

Those staggering statistics, when compared to the number of babies born in 2020, would suggest that nearly a quarter of all pregnancies worldwide (23 percent) ended in abortion. For every 33 live births last year, 10 babies were aborted.

In the U.S. alone, where nearly half of all pregnancies are unplanned and 4 in 10 of these are terminated by abortion, there are over 3,000 abortions per day.

Abortion and The Global Death Toll

According to Johns Hopkins University, worldwide deaths from the coronavirus in 2020 totaled 1.8 million.

By comparison, Worldometers revealed that 8.2 million people died from cancer, 5 million from smoking, and 1.7 million of HIV/AIDS.

With deaths from abortion exceeding those from cancer, HIV/Aids, suicide, malaria, and car accidents combined, several pro-life activist groups are calling abortion “the social justice cause of our time.”

In a year when our eyes were opened even more to the racial injustices our country and world faces, we can’t ignore the facts that our unborn black brothers and sisters are at an even higher risk of abortion.

 

Abortion and The Black Community

According to data published in the Journal of Primary Care and Community Health, black women have been experiencing induced abortions at a rate nearly 4 times that of White women for at least 3 decades, and likely much longer.

“The science community has refused to engage on the subject and the popular media has essentially ignored it,” the authors write. “In the current unfolding environment, there may be no better metric for the value of Black lives.”

In a podcast with Nick Cannon earlier this year, Kanye West called abortion “black genocide.”

“Planned Parenthood was set up and placed in minority communities to kill black people,” West said, noting that “over 1,000 black babies are aborted every day.”

Cannon, who is also a vocal pro-life advocate, pointed to the racist beliefs of Margaret Sanger—the founder of Planned Parenthood, and listened intently as West read an excerpt about her from his phone.

“Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, was an avowed racist whose goal was to reduce the black population in America and she succeeded,” West read from his phone. “Eighty percent of abortion clinics in America are in minority neighborhoods.

The organization recently disavowed Sanger over her “harmful connections” to racist movements, like eugenics.

“We are inside genocide as we speak,” West says.

When we count each and every one of these babies — the same way God sees and knows and loves every single one of them — as humans who died, the actual number of deaths worldwide in 2020 was approximately 101 million.

Pro-Life Advocacy

Although pro-life advocates are working tirelessly to put an end to abortion, their efforts continue to be met with social and political reform. And with complications posed by the coronavirus pandemic, it remains an uphill battle.

Although abortion rates in the U.S. are reportedly on the decline, it is still one of the leading causes of death, robbing the lives of an estimated 1 million U.S, babies annually. And a report from the UK Department of Health earlier this year revealed that in 2019 — the most recent year on record for which the Department has revised abortion statistics — the number of abortions in the UK hit an all-time high. Official figures show it was the highest number of abortions in a year since the historic vote in 1967 to legalize abortion in Britain through the Abortion Act.

Later this month, thousands will gather in Washington D.C. for the 48th annual March for Life rally on January 29th. This year’s theme is “Together Strong: Life Unites.”

The annual march commemorates the January 22, 1973 Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade, which invalidated 50 state laws and made abortion legal and available on demand throughout the United States.

This is a www.ForEveryMom.com opinion piece

Ref: https://foreverymom.com/society/abortion-not-covid-19-named-leading-cause-death-2020/

Abortion – Womb or Tomb? – Giovanni Bonello

Abortion – womb or tomb? – Giovanni Bonello

The University Għaqda Studenti tal-Liġi has come out strongly in favour of decriminalisation of abortion in Malta. No one disputes their fundamental right to hold and spread opinions, all the more so when the opinions are necessarily subjective and often more emotionally than rationally based. Perhaps they could have been more cautious where angels fear to tread.

I propose to deal briefly with some current legal misconceptions, avoiding as much as possible the equally relevant minefields of science, ethics, cultural traditions and religious belief.

So, exclusively law, and starting with fundamental law. It is often repeated that a woman’s right to abortion is her fundamental human right. Is it? Who says so?

In Europe there is an empirical but universally accepted standard as to what is a fundamental human right and what is not. In brief, fundamental human rights are only those which the European Court of Human Rights says are fundamental human rights (though domestic law is entitled to add to the list).

Now, in its 61 years existence and its tens of thousands of judgments, a number of which dealt specifically with abortion-related issues, not once, repeat, not once has the supreme court of Europe qualified abortion as a human right.

The closest it came was to rule that, if domestic legislation allowed abortion, then it would be a violation of a women’s rights to deny her, directly or indirectly, that option. Never has the supreme court of Europe ruled that a state must legalise abortion. Every sovereign state remains free to legalise abortion, to decriminalise it in given circumstances or to criminalise it.

A second legal misconception: rights only begin at birth. Not quite so. Our law deems a woman, whether one week or nine months pregnant, as a “woman with child”.

A look at current Maltese law dismisses the fable that a foetus is merely “a clump of cells”, the same way a beauty-spot, a bunion or a blister is. Not at all. The very words of the Criminal Code negate this.

Abortion, according to the code (Article 241), occurs when anyone causes the miscarriage of “a woman with child”. Not the miscarriage of “a woman with a clump of cells”. A foetus, however early, is by Maltese law considered to be a child, with some of the rights and the expectations of a child – among them, the right not to be quashed before birth.

This the Criminal Code repeats in the notion of grievous bodily harm. The law qualifies a harm as grievous when, if “committed on a woman with child, it causes miscarriage” (Article 218). A harm is not grievous if committed on a woman with “a clump of cells”. It escalates in gravity when a woman is “with child”.

Maltese law dismisses the fable that a foetus is merely “a clump of cells”. Above is an illustration of an early-stage embryo. Photo: Sciepro/Shutterstock.comWhen protecting the right to life, for the purposes of establishing criminal guilt, Maltese law does not differentiate between a foetus and a born child. It safeguards them equally, however early the pregnancy. There is only a difference in the punishment, not in the criminal guilt.

Though not specified in the written law of procedure, in practice our traditional system of protection under the law has adopted the institute of ‘curator of the womb’ known by its old-style name of curatore al ventre. When a pregnant married woman is widowed, the court may, at the request of any interested person, appoint a curator to safeguard the interests of the unborn child.

The court does not appoint a curator to defend the expectations of a clump of cells but to protect an unborn being deemed to be holder of potential or actual rights.

And, before capital punishment was abolished in Malta in 2000, it was official government policy to commute the death penalty of any woman who was pregnant at the time of sentencing or of execution. Did the state care about not sending to death a woman with a clump of cells, or was it concerned with not terminating the autonomous life of a separate being who had not been convicted of any crime?

On the horns of a dilemma, the state preferred that a guilty pregnant woman should escape just retribution, rather than that an innocent foetus should have his or her life terminated. I am now being told that the state was not choosing between justice, on one hand, and an unborn child on the other. Oh no, the state was officially opting for injustice to society in order to save… a clump of cells.

In prohibiting the execution of pregnant women, Malta was following the principle now enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: “Sentence of death shall not be carried out on pregnant women” (Article 6). The life of a criminal mother is spared, obviously not to upset a clump of cells.

I understand that a purely ‘legal’ configuration of the abortion narrative informs only a part of the debate and that powerful arguments militate on either side of the fence. But it is simplistic to reduce complex and contentious issues to black or white.

There is excellent material in this Position Paper, though it is massively one-sided in problems so seeped in controversy. I wished the Għaqda Studenti tal-Liġi, whose function it is to promote the study of law, had been more balanced and nuanced.

Giovanni Bonello, ex-judge at the European Court of Human Rights

 

This is www.timesofmalta.com opinion piece

Ref: https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/abortion-womb-or-tomb-giovanni-bonello.841637

An ominous resolution – Tonio Borg

An ominous resolution – Tonio Borg

The EU cannot interfere on matters such as abortion

Poland was recently at loggerheads with the European Union. It was objecting to a new mechanism which permitted the withdrawal of EU funds to countries that do not abide by the rule of law.

Thankfully, Poland finally yielded and now the mechanism, with certain safeguards, will be launched. A country cannot abuse of its sovereignty in rule of law matters while belonging to the Union, benefitting from its membership but ignoring its values.

This mechanism could be a lifesaver for any country whose government tries to cross the red lines of what it is allowed to do.

What is, however, perturbing is that in the midst of this crisis, the European Parliament passed a controversial, even though non-binding, resolution which condemned Poland because its Constitutional Court has ruled that the right to life protects even unborn children who are physically or mentally deformed or disabled.

The charge against Poland was that “many pregnant women who have been informed that there is a high probability of the foetus having a severe and irreversible abnormality or an incurable disease have had their access to legal abortion restricted”.

It then “strongly condemned the Constitutional Tribunal’s ruling and the setback to women’s sexual and reproductive rights in Poland”. It also affirmed that “the ruling puts women’s health and lives at risk”. It even assumed that wilful termination of a pregnancy is a fundamental right although no European instrument of law recognises such right.

This resolution, even though not binding, is astounding. Since when is the apex court of an EU member state subject to criticism for its judgments on matters which are outside the powers and jurisdiction of the EU organs such as abortion?

In fact, European commissioners have repeatedly made it clear that, according to the principle of subsidiarity, abortion and euthanasia are matters to be dealt with by the member states themselves. Some allow them. Others, like Poland and Malta, are vehemently against.

The government cannot cajole the Catholic vote on the one hand and allow its pundits and MEPs to encourage the introduction of abortion in Malta– Tonio Borg

This intrusion on the subsidiarity principle and the margin of appreciation, which each member state enjoys in such matters, was conveniently forgotten by the European Parliament. It is appropriate to recall that, during the negotiations leading to Malta’s accession to the Union, the Fenech Adami government had managed to include a protocol in the Treaty of Accession to the effect that, even though the current legal position is that the EU cannot interfere in such matters as abortion, Malta retained the right that, should the rules change, it remains the arbiter to decide whether to introduce the wilful termination of a woman’ pregnancy in Maltese law.

Now for the rules to change, one needs the unanimous decision of the member states. Yet, to be doubly sure, a Nationalist government insisted on including such a protocol.

It is sad to note that out of six Maltese MEPs, only two, namely Nationalist MEPs Roberta Metsola and David Casa, voted against the EP resolution. Even though the official position of the current Labour government, as expressed by the prime minister, is that the current administration is against the introduction of abortion, two Labour MEPs, in Pilate-like fashion, washed their hands of the issue and actually abstained on a resolution condemning a country for restricting abortion.

Another Labour MEP did not turn up for the vote. But, worse than that, one Labour MEP, Cyrus Engerer, voted in favour. In his considered opinion, the selection of healthy unborn children and the elimination of the unhealthy ones in their mother’ womb could actually be even considered as a human right, an evil that could be one day be taken as laudable and morally right.

He stated that “the ruling of October 22 by Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal to make abortion illegal in cases involving severe and irreversible foetal defects “puts women’s health and lives at risk”, 

Besides, the inertia, and, in one case, the outright approval, regarding the resolution by Labour MEPs has created a dangerous precedent for Malta whose laws are in line with the ruling of the Polish Constitutional Court.

We inevitably shudder when we read about the extermination of disabled, deformed or abnormal human beings during the last World War by totalitarian regimes in pursuit of the superior race doctrine.  Still, it seems that some of us find nothing objectionable if such human beings are exterminated before they are born. They style themselves pro-choice but the only persons who have no choice at all are the unborn.

This is similar to a recent boast by one member state that practically there were no longer any children born with Down Syndrome in its territory, not because a cure was found for such condition but because all unborn children showing signs of such condition were eliminated before having the chance of being born!

It is useless paying only lip service to the right to life. The right to life needs to be defended every day. The government cannot cajole the Catholic vote on the one hand and allow its pundits and MEPs to encourage the introduction of abortion in Malta.

Tonio Borg is former European Commissioner.

 

Ref: This is a timesofmalta.com opinion piece

https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/an-ominous-resolution-tonio-borg.839705#.X977ob14ooQ.whatsapp

2020 a year of Significant Pro-Life Victories for Right To Life UK

2020 a year of Significant Pro-Life Victories for Right To Life UK

Right To Life UK has had a challenging and busy year, with the abortion lobby attempting to exploit the COVID-19 crisis at every step to seek changes to abortion legislation and policy.

Right To Life UK have been able to put up a strong fight every time they have attempted to advance their campaign in Parliament, the media and amongst the wider public.

Alongside this, we have been able to secure a number of key victories and achievements, here are the main achievements:

1. Defeat of major attempt to introduce extreme abortion law to England and Wales

In July the abortion lobby staged a major attempt to introduce an extreme abortion law to England and Wales by hijacking the Domestic Abuse Bill.

The attempt to hijack the UK Government’s flagship Domestic Abuse Bill with two extreme abortion proposals failed, in a major pro-life victory.

To put in perspective how embarrassing a defeat on this amendment would have been for the abortion lobby, if they had taken the amendment through to a vote and lost, this would have been the first time that a pro-abortion amendment or Bill had been defeated in a vote in UK history.

Thank you to the thousands of people that rallied friends and family to email their MPs. MPs received more emails ahead of this vote than they have ever received ahead of an abortion vote.

Thank you also to our supporters who gave so generously to enable us to have the resources in place to run a very large campaign against these amendments.

We spent 18 months preparing for this battle. This project has included building a large network of relationships with active pro-life MPs in Parliament. This helped to ensure that there was a very strong case made to the Speaker from this network of pro-life MPs to identify the most extreme abortion amendment as out of scope, and to help mobilise MPs across Parliament against the remaining abortion amendment.

Alongside this, we worked to place a large number of positive pro-life articles in the mainstream media to provide the right momentum in the public eye for our side over this period.

The final key component has been building a very large base of grassroots supporters in every constituency in the country. This meant that when we asked people like you to email their MPs, it became crystal clear that a large number of people in their constituencies did not want these extreme changes.

None of this would have been in place in order to help achieve this amazing victory without your generous financial support. Thank you.

2. Continued strong opposition to assisted suicide

We have taken the strategic, media and digital expertise that we built up from working with a large group of allies to defeat the Marris Assisted Suicide Bill, to continue to ensure assisted suicide is not legalised.

The decisive win has meant that it has been difficult for the assisted suicide lobby to bring forward legislation on this issue. They have therefore been working quietly behind the scenes to try and grow their numbers ahead of another attempt to change the law. During 2020 we have focused on defensive work in Westminster to help limit their advance.

We have also faced an onslaught of activity from the assisted suicide lobby targeting the Royal Colleges, British Medical Association etc. to attempt to get them to drop their opposition to assisted suicide. This tactic is being used as it will make it easier for the assisted suicide lobby to pass legislation introducing assisted suicide if it does not face opposition from the medical establishment. We have been working with allied organisations to block these attempts.

In 2021, we expect the assisted suicide lobby to make a new attempt to introduce assisted suicide and continue their work to move the Royal Colleges from their current stance of opposing assisted suicide. We will be working hard to oppose them at every step along the way and will need your help with contacting MPs and other activities.

3. Abortion (Cleft Lip, Cleft Palate and Clubfoot) Bill launched

Currently abortion is allowed up to birth for babies with disabilities including cleft lip, cleft palate and club foot.

This year a cross-party group of MPs from the three largest parties in the UK Parliament have brought forward the Abortion (Cleft Lip, Cleft Palate and Clubfoot) Bill to raise the profile of this issue in Parliament. This Bill would change the law to clarify that cleft palate, cleft lip and club foot are not grounds for abortion in the UK.

This Bill seeks to address the disability discrimination inherent in our abortion law: currently abortion is permitted beyond the 24-week standard limit (which is already far beyond the time limit in most European countries of 12 weeks) to birth if a baby is diagnosed with a cleft lip, cleft palate, or club foot – all of which can be treated with surgery and therapy following birth.

Alongside the launch of the Bill, we worked with people with these conditions and their families to launch the Stand Up and Smile campaign to raise the profile of this issue outside Parliament.

As a result of the campaign, thousands of people have written to their MP asking them to support the Bill and a large number of MPs have signed an Early Day Motion supporting the Bill. The Bill has also been covered extensively by the mainstream media including articles in The Guardian, The Times and the Mail on Sunday.

The Bill is due for a second reading on 21 March 2021. We will be in contact ahead of then with details on how you can help build further support for a law change in this important area.

4. New digital news platform launched and now the most visited pro-life website in Europe

We have just launched our Right To Life News digital news platform. This has been launched so that we can reach a far wider audience of people with pro-life news that will keep people informed and help change even more hearts and minds on life issues.

Our website is already the most viewed pro-life website in Europe and the fourth most viewed pro-life website in the world – and this digital news platform has been built to enable us to reach even more people. 

Our digital team has spent a number of months building the platform from the ground up so that it provides visitors with the world-class user-driven design experience that they would expect from a platform run by a major global media outlet. We have also designed the platform so that it is easily viewable across desktop, mobile and tablet, as increasing numbers of people are accessing content on their mobile phones and tablet devices. 

We are concerned that some media outlets are moving to position themselves as journalists ‘campaigning’ for abortion access; the most recent example being the changes to the Guardian’s guidelines on how they report on abortion, a move which follows long-term bias from the BBC in their language guidelines. If this trend continues, it will become increasingly difficult for the mainstream public to be informed on the pro-life side of debates on issues such as abortion.

Right To Life News ensures that we have a platform where reliable pro-life news is accessible to everyone in the UK and beyond – and that we are not limited by what editors in major newspapers choose to publish. 

Thank you to the many supporters who have regularly used the news service and shared the articles: you have played a big part in making this news service a success. 

This is only the beginning. In 2021 we will be rolling out further plans to increase the number of people we are reaching through the news service. This includes the further roll-out of our syndication programme, where we form relationships with media outlets and allow them to republish our articles free of charge. This has already enabled our articles to be republished by a number of major media outlets with very large audiences – this all helps to ensure we reach many more people and change many more hearts and minds on life issues.

5. Growing network of MPs and peers to further our proactive political strategy

In the run up to the General Election at the end of last year, we ran the Vote for Both Lives campaign, a major initiative that we rolled out throughout the country in the lead up to election day.  The campaign resulted in hundreds of thousands of emails being sent to MP candidates along with people visiting their candidates in person to encourage them to sign the Both Lives Pledge.

Over 200 MP candidates signed the Both Lives Pledge making a commitment to support pro-life legislation in this parliament.

This election campaign has meant that there are a number of new MPs who have committed to support pro-life legislation in this parliament. The campaign was also part of a wider shift in the make-up of parliament, which saw a large number of pro-abortion MPs either step down or lose their seats.

This left us with a new parliament with considerably better numbers in place to fight the push from the abortion lobby to introduce extreme abortion legislation along with a larger team of pro-life MPs to support positive pro-life legislation that is brought forward during this new parliament.

In 2020, our Public Affairs team has worked to offer support to the large number of new pro-life MPs who entered Parliament after the General Election, and grow their network further.

This has built on the already large number of MPs and Peers we have a direct relationship with, and has enabled us to work with them to defeat the introduction of an extreme abortion law to England and Wales along with a number of other initiatives.

This work ensures that life issues stay on the agenda in Parliament and that we are building a better political situation for the unborn child and pregnant women.

6. Shining a light on the millions spent from the UK’s international aid budget on abortion

Over the year, we have been working to expose the enormous amount of international aid funding that is going from the UK to provide abortion services in developing countries.

This work has focused on putting pressure from within Parliament on the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office on this issue. We have also helped raise the issue in the mainstream media so that the wider public is aware of the negative impact that this spending is having in developing countries.

The biggest single donor to international abortion giant Marie Stopes International (now rebranded as MSI Reproductive Choices) is the UK taxpayer, through the UK international aid funding that is given to the organisation each year. UK international aid funding is also given to a number of other organisations that provide abortions in developing countries and lobby Governments to introduce extreme abortion legislation to these countries.

Attempts backed by international abortion organisations to introduce extreme abortion legislation to Kenya and Malawi have thankfully both been stalled in 2020 due to strong opposition.

In 2021, we expect there to be many more challenges on this front. MSI Reproductive Choices has set a goal of vastly increasing the number of abortions that it is performing in developing countries over the next ten years – and the new US adminstration is likely to reverse the previous administration’s restrictions on funding abortions overseas. 

This will mean that international abortion providers will likely see a large increase in the amount of funding they receive to spend on abortion along with lobbying teams dedicated to attempting to change legislation on abortion in developing countries.

7. Our digital strategy is changing even more hearts and minds of a new generation online

In 2020 we have worked on growing our digital strategy to reach an even larger audience online with smart, relevant and viral-focused content.

Our social media channels across Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, Pinterest, LinkedIn and TikTok have reached a new generation of people on a massive scale allowing us to reach tens of millions of people across these platforms during the year.

We have further built our in-house capability to produce world-class digital content – all of this has been produced in-house for a fraction of the cost of hiring leading agencies.

Alongside our social media strategy, we have further developed our website with a focus on making it the go-to tool that any member of the public can use to easily contact their MPs and access the latest information on life issues.

This year, within hours of a key development in Parliament, thousands of emails have been able to be sent directly to MPs. This ensures that MPs are aware that there is a very large and active grassroots movement in their constituencies who are pro-life and care about how their MPs vote on these issues.

The feedback we have had from MPs has been overwhelmingly positive as they have felt that there is real momentum for positive pro-life change from within their constituencies.

8. Our media strategy continues to help shape the mainstream media narrative on life issues

Concrete policy change on life issues can only happen in conjunction with wider cultural change outside parliament.

A key part of our work to change the wider culture on these issues is ensuring that pro-life messaging is heard in the mainstream media on a regular basis, and is supporting positive changes that are being brought forward in parliament.

In 2020 we have further grown our media reach with a big focus on getting positive pro-life messaging regularly featured in the mainstream media.

Our focus on mainstream media has been so important because this allows us to reach a large middle ground of people on this issue, with a focus on areas where research shows the majority of people are very open to seeing a positive political and cultural change to our abortion laws.

Wherever possible, we have ensured that the spokespeople we use as the voice on these issues in the media are most likely to connect with mainstream audiences. This has included women who have been personally affected by abortion, people with disabilities and medical experts.

9. Our education & training programmes are developing a new generation of pro-lifers

We have continued our work to develop a new generation of pro-lifers who are equipped to effectively communicate an evidence-based case for positive change on life issues.

This includes our Media and Communications Training Programme which provides young pro-lifers with an understanding of key pro-life issues and the ability to communicate these issues in the media. The programme equips participants with the necessary skills and techniques to deliver strong interviews, control difficult and hostile questions and to deliver an authentic perspective on life issues. 

Our Internship Programme has been designed to introduce student right-to-lifers and new graduates to the world of the right-to-life movement and its work across the media, politics, education and grassroots engagement. In 2020 we have seen more of our graduates go on to a number of important roles in a variety of sectors. 

Together with our wider digital outreach, these programmes work to enable us to educate and develop a new movement of young people who are passionate about achieving positive change on life issues. In 2021 we will be expanding our education and training programmes further.

Ref: www.rightolife.co.uk 

Leaving the sex field blank – Tonio Fenech

Leaving the sex field blank – Tonio Fenech

I am caught between two minds pondering on a proposal announced by the government in Bill 170, clause 22, which allows parents to leave the sex field blank on the birth registration when the gender of the child is unclear.

Presented as an important change, what is unclear to me is whether the “undeclared” classification will be applied when, biologically, the sex of the child is in doubt, as in the case of intersex, or whether parents will be allowed to leave it empty even when the sex of the child is clear.

The intersex case

I am not professionally competent to say if this will help intersex people but I tried to understand the challenges faced by these people before forming an opinion.

Intersex is a biological reality that affects between 0.05 per cent and 0.7 per cent of children, according to the UN Human Rights office. It is when a child is born with variations in sex characteristics, including chromosomes, gonads, sex hormones or genitals that do not fit the typical definitions for male or female bodies. 

Mauro Cabral, for Global Action for Trans Equality (GATE), an intersex person himself, during the Intersex Awareness Day of 2016 stated that “intersex people are not a natural third sex, we don’t have a third gender by definition, and leaving a blank sex assignment at birth is not the way to ‘create justice’ for us. We need to stop approaching intersex issues as if they were trans issues.

“Some trans people use intersex as a way of explaining who they are or to make sense of their bodies or identities. By doing this, intersex becomes just another way of saying trans. However, intersex is not about being trans, queer or non-binary: it’s about bodies and what happens to people who are born with them. We need to stop instrumentalising intersex to speak our truth as trans people”. 

What Cabral proposed was to dismantle binary ideas about bodies and body shaming.  

While I would join an initiative to fight body shaming, I cannot agree that in order to solve the challenges of intersex people we need to also deny human nature and the remaining 99.3 per cent labelled ‘binary’. Male and female are not an offence to intersex people, as people with eyesight are not offensive to the visually impaired.  We are simply born different; solutions should focus on inclusion, not elimination of who the rest are.

(Trans) gender ideology

A recent article in Times of Malta, ‘Will children choose their gender now?’ (November 30), defended this amendment as it fosters “a wider acceptance of gender fluidity and/or non-heteronormative sexuality in local culture”, assuring readers that this amendment is harmless since “if a child is assigned a gender at birth they may later choose to change when they become an adult”; consequently, we should not find it difficult to allow parents to leave the sex identification blank.  

Frankly, I find this argument twisted because an adult changing his or her gender classification is no justification for leaving a child genderless until adult age.

I do not think anyone’s children should become a social experiment called ‘gender fluidity’

The gender fluidity theory suggests that gender is not fixed and, basically, today I may feel a man, tomorrow a woman and the week after a man again and so we should use neutral pronouns and classifications to allow for this fluidity.

The Times of Malta article tries to support the theory by quoting the American Psychological Association that defines sex as “assigned at birth, one’s biological status as either male or female” while gender as “socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for boys and men or girls and women”.

However, this definition is not about gender fluidity but the distinction between sex and our gender roles within society, for example, the rightful claim of women that sex should not impose some stereotype gender roles, like women are housewives while men are the breadwinners.

So-called research quoted from a Jung Journal article defining gender fluidity as “an alternative to binary (male and female) gender identities” is becoming more common. Seriously?  The Jung Journal is not a scientific journal but a website in its own words of “a beautiful international quarterly publication offering feature articles, reviews, interviews, poetry and art”.    Not much of science or research.

I wrote this article because I do not think anyone’s children should become a social experiment called ‘gender fluidity’ that can damage those children that society should protect.

The study ‘Sexuality and Gender, Findings from the Biological, Psychological,and Social Sciences’ by Lawrence S. Mayer and Paul R. McHugh, both senior scholars in the Department of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, which reviewed over 500 scientific articles, concluded that while gender dysphoria can start at the age of two to four, of those that pass through it, 80 to 90 per cent return to their original gender by the time they reach adolescence.   

They further claim that the hypothesis that a person might be “a man trapped in a woman’s body” or “a woman trapped in a man’s body” is not supported by scientific evidence. 

Transgender people today have the right to change their sex classification with significant ease. Confusing children before they even learn how to walk is wrong. Leaving sex blank for sexually-defined children will only impose confusion where there was none, with possible serious psychological and physical irreparable damage.

While questioning children should be assisted professionally and with sensitivity, too early affirmation is harmful to a child when research shows that 90 per cent of these children return to their original gender by adolescence.   

Tonio Fenech is a former Minister

This is a www.timesofmalta.com opinion piece

Ref: https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/leaving-the-sex-field-blank-tonio-fenech.839198?fbclid=IwAR3cSgTMndz82dZlRGtEv-07HRkjGrrPL3kD7tzZI3Emo7XPfeYUekskGGc