Deception the name of the game for pro-abortion campaigners and their motley array of ideological bedfellows

Viewpoint: by Barbara Faithfull

Bitter brickbats are regularly hurled against those who oppose abortion, the so-called “pro-lifers”. For example the histrionic rant from Chris Trotter, with his monstrous likening of them to the Taleban. (“N.Z’s Taleban on the March” Dom/Post 13th June 2008). Also  there was  his bogus and devious implication that with the 1978 abortion law reform “the women of N.Z.” finally  won the “right” to a safe legal abortion – as if all N.Z. women had sought this and fought for it – far from it!

Admittedly, I for one had signed the 1977 Repeal petition, a decision I later regretted as I became more aware of the mammoth ideologically-driven game of deception which was driving this issue, and which continues to do so to this day.

So today in 2008 the N.Z. public is still being denied the grim facts about it. People such as Chris Trotter, and other pro-abortion activists who cling to that weaselly euphemism “pro-choice”, can hardly be accused of ignorance in such matters; they are far too deeply involved for that.

Yet they avoid such facts like the plague and continue to lure women – many very, very young – into making the pro-abortion fight their fight. Such campaigners disguise the fact that it is all part of an agenda for radical social change determined by a bunch of ideologues many decades ago on the other side of the world : to serve the nefarious ends of the shadowy international Secular Humanist movement for revolutionary social and political change by peaceful means.

Ideologically-driven, then, it is atheistic by nature and Socialist to the core. Also, necessarily then, anti-capitalist, anti all traditional morality and all legitimate authority : that of God, the Church, parental (all corporal punishment etc.), male family authority, school, police – hence, among numerous Humanist front groups are found Councils for Civil Liberties, which forever seem to be critical of the Police.

In Great Britain the Humanists drew up their daring agenda, largely to attack God’s laws relating to homosexual acts, abortion, infanticide, divorce (to make it easier), pornography, prostitution, soft drugs, euthanasia, and to remove religion from schools.

Also with a major concern for global population control, so some of these issues would seem to serve that end as well, such as relaxing laws on infanticide, abortion and euthanasia. Indeed they believe that abortion should be freely available to any woman who so desires it, hence the hackneyed cry “A woman’s right to choose”.

Similarly with euthanasia : their promotional leaflet “Euthanasia” (1) :contrary to the constant reassurances from lobbyists that they only seek to have euthanasia legalized in certain extreme situations, such as for terminal illness etc., the Introduction to that leaflet crassly spells out what they really are seeking, opening thus : “This report is based on the concept held by most humanists, that every individual has the right to choose the time of his or her own death.” There again is that slogan “Right to choose”! Certainly it is a basic catch-cry and slogan of these people, at least with the abortion and euthanasia issues.

By campaigning behind various neutral and innocuous-sounding fronts, and with the common tactic of appealing to people’s emotions, as well as with a broadly compliant news media, the plan has been wildly successful around the Western World.

Some other N.Z. Humanist front groups are, or have been, the Abortion Law Reform Association of N.Z. (ALRANZ), Divorce Law Reform Association of N.Z. (now defunct), Homosexual Law Reform Association of N.Z. (now defunct) and the Voluntary Euthanasia Society (VES).Opposition to all references to God and all Christian symbols such as Easter and the Nativity in public life are also Humanist-driven, and with Civil Liberties groups frequently leading the charge, which occurs widely in the U.S.A.

Proof of the Humanist nature of such front groups is also to be found in the fundamental contribution such people have made, and still make, to the forming and running of such groups. Humanist members’ names feature in founding documents and in ongoing business and campaign records, sometimes to the point of being interchangeable.

Example : ALRANZ. Names such as leading Humanists Wayne Facer and the later Ray Carr, and Civil Libertarian Barry Littlewood, all held offices at its first A.G.M. held on 17^th March 1971. (By 1980 Littlewood was also revealed to be legal adviser and a director of the (then) closing Marxist Book Shop in Auckland) (2)

Another example : Voluntary Euthanasia Society : The name of Leo Stack was one of many Humanists named in its founding document dated 16^th May 1979, and by 2008 he is still involved, and prominently, as its spokesman. Also, by 1979 Ray Carr (an ALRANZ founder in 1971) was Secretary of the Auckland Humanist Society and by February 1981 he was President of the VES (3). Etc. These people certainly are very interchangeable.

Further proof of a Humanist basis to such issues comes with the little-publicised awards which are made occasionally to various front people in appreciation of their valued work for the cause. Until recent years these were made by the Humanist Society of N.Z., but it has now merged with the N.Z .Rationalists to become known as the N.Z. Association of Rationalists and Humanists (NZARH) and details of such awards are shown in their quarterly journal, ironically titled Open Society, which can be seen in public libraries and also on the web.

Hardly surprising, then, to see that awards have been made to people such as Dr. Zoe During, in 2000, for her championing of abortion and homosexual “rights”.(4) Also, in 2001, to Dr. Philip Nitschke, “for his courageous advocacy of the right to choose death with dignity”, to name but two.

Hardly surprising, either, to see that Dame Barbara Goodman is an Honorary Associate of NZARH and a “Humanist Secular Celebrant”, she having led the Auckland “Repeal” campaign in the late 1970’s as Mayoress of Auckland. (5) but of course with nary a hint of its true, ideologically-driven nature!

In conclusion, then, I see temerity – nay, utter confidence trickery – in Mr. Trotter craftily inveigling the “young, confident women of the 21^st century” to join the pro-abortion cause despite its underlying hotbed of duplicity and their ignorance of this.

Also in his puerile vilifying of its opponents as an “army of fanatical right-wing activists” and likening them to the Taleban. Surely the very reverse must be nearer the mark.

As for the overall duping of the general public on this issue – to say nothing of other related Humanist issues – this must also necessarily include all the sincere and well-intentioned folk who have been induced to support – and probably still support – the pro-abortion cause in ignorance of its true nature.

As I was, when signing that Repeal petition in 1977, they have been denied their fundamental right to make an informed choice. So much for the hypocritical Humanist slogan “right to choose”. Only when it suits the ideologues’ purpose, it seems.

References:-

1. “Euthanasia” produced and distributed by the New South Wales Humanist Society in 1973. Supplied to me by the late Ray Carr of the Auckland Humanist Society about 1980.
2. N.Z.Herald 7^th July 1980 : “Source of Marxist Books dries up on shop’s closure”.
3. Radio Pacific 24^th February 1981, when Ray Carr was guest in his capacity of President of the VES.
4. In a N.Z.Herald feature of 25^th/26^th November 2000, Dr. During was said to have been honoured by NZARH for her “career of tireless and outspoken (sic) support for liberal causes : abortion, homosexual law reform” etc.
5. According to the Open Society, summer 2007, Vol. 80, No. 4