WHERE to begin with such a bad week? It couldn’t be grimmer. Is this Britain at its lowest? Already sickened by the abortion vote, that was the question I found myself asking on X when I heard the assisted dying bill had passed. I followed it by:
‘Welcome to a country where the state can kill babies at full term as well as the elderly.’
Is this what ‘progress’ has come to mean? The word was corrupted years ago, and it all started in the ‘60s. Niall McCrae is right. What he calls ‘deceitful paternalism’ – pretending that policies were for the benefit of the people, when they were for their own gratification – began then.
An email from one of our readers, Keith Rothwell, sent me this week pretty much summed it up:
’I was born in 1940 in Great Britain, a Christian country. Besides the law on theft, murder etc. there were certain moral standards:
1. No sex before marriage.
2. No sex outside marriage.
3. No artificial means of contraception.
4. No abortion.
5. No divorce.
6. No assisted dying or suicide.
I failed to live up to some of these, which I regret and try to atone for.
Today, the Establishment and Media glory, relish and celebrate the overthrow of all-the-above moral standards. In the recent debate about Assisted Dying, BBC News carefully avoided interviewing any clergy or anyone with a Christian viewpoint. Just as the BBC consistently lie about the conflict in Gaza. Children and young people stab and kill each other daily and someone is murdered for a watch. So much for the fantasy paradise of personal liberty. Feels more like Sodom and Gomorrah to me.’
The firm moral lessons that we once lived by have, as Daniel Jupp commented recently, ‘much deeper cultural roots’ than either liberalism or its extreme, perverse and Marxist child, modern progressivism’.
So, did the votes represent nothing new this week? Nothing to see here. Just dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s as one of the replies I got on X indicated:
‘Both of these things already happen in the UK. This week’s divisive bills stipulating how people can be killed have merely granted them an aura of legitimacy which will be exploited.’
That is true, I replied in turn, but is ‘merely’ the correct adverb? It will no longer be just an ‘aura’. The law will now sanction what before could be challenged as abuse. Such legitimacy will normalise ‘gaslighting’ the vulnerable (whether to die or abort) and make it so much harder to dispute.
Why else were Families Against Involuntary Medical Euthanasia (FAIME), founded by families devastated by end-of-life malpractice in the NHS, protesting outside Parliament on Friday? Never forget the ‘Liverpool Pathway.’ Family members or ‘professionals’ who lack empathy now have a licence to kill, dooming us to ‘catch up’ with countries that Kim Leadbeater, in her hubris and ignorance, thinks we should be in progressive step with. I cannot believe that’s what the British people really want. They wouldn’t if they read what Sally Beck found out about Canada’s euthanasia industry.
Thanks to morally bereft politicians like Leadbeater, Tonia Antoniazzi and Stella Creasy, that’s what’s coming our way.
The democratic deficit yawns; barely elected politicians deciding on such colossal moral matters without a popular mandate cannot be right. The last election had one of the two lowest turnouts since 1918, at 59 per cent. Labour got into office on the shallowest of victories. The ‘stay at home’ vote exceeded Labour’s entire vote.
Critically ill but fully conscious and aware patients have already been denied treatment, as in the tragic case of 19-year-old Sudiksha Thirumalesh. Christian Concern shared this devastating thread on X last week. She wanted to live, but the NHS decided she had to die. Expect more such cases now. Killing, for those without conscience or faith, is easier than caring.
Hubris is a word that kept coming back to me all week, haunted by memories of my own husband’s ‘terminal’ illness all those years ago: how he was told three times that he had three months to live; how three times the doctors got it wrong; how, despite their negative prognosis, he lived a precious further 15 months. Doctors are not gods. I dread to think of the pressure on others like him with less-loving families.
I have also been asking myself how it was that so few women managed to demonise and upturn our existing (too liberal already) non-punitive abortion law. The Guardian and BBC, of course, have been there to help. On Friday, I got round to checking exactly how many convictions there have been and how many led to prison sentences. It’s another lie. Next to none.
Just ten convictions for illegal abortion between 1968 and 2022. Seven since 2022 for beyond the 24-week limit (these are the cases the feminist left leapt on). Set this against the hundreds of thousands of legal terminations since then – a period in which abortion has increasingly been used as contraception.
No woman has been imprisoned under the 1968 Act. Only two women in recent years have been jailed under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 – one case where a remorseless mother self-aborted her baby at 39 weeks.
In the other case I found, the appeal judge halved an original 28-month sentence to a suspended 14 months, meaning the woman in question was released and didn’t go to jail. He concluded that it was a ‘very sad case’ that called for ‘compassion, not punishment’. Rightly so.
These are the tiny number of cases that a handful of extreme feminist ideologues in Parliament have ruthlessly weaponised to make changes that will put women’s health and welfare and their babies at far greater risk.
Par for the course this week, it was not Parliament’s morally inverted MPs but the morally upright TCW that’s been found guilty. Again. Our views are dangerously far right and phobic. First it was the British Board of Film Censors, who banned TCW from mobile phone access. Then Hope not Hate labelled me far right. Now, the latest gem relayed to us was The Conservative Woman put up on a screen as an example of ‘far right’ danger at an Essex County Council ‘Prevent’ briefing. Neil Gregory, an Essex County Councillor, was the fly on the wall. The brave man challenged it, he told me.
I wondered whether it was one of the same Government sponsored Prevent lecturers that Daniel Jupp mentioned in his article the other week, who had links with ISIS that no one questioned. The same one who then said that the word terrorism implied moral judgement and was therefore wrong, and was ready to condemn Douglas Murray, who ‘should be suppressed’.
I hope to find out. We’ve submitted an FOI to get the full set of slides. Watch this space.
Better news from the stalwart Neil was the email he subsequently received from the Council’s Equalities and Partnerships Officer, which he forwarded to me, informing him of the cancellation of another event: ‘The upcoming Conspiracy Theories and Mis/Dis/Mal Information Campaigns Training session scheduled for 16th July has unfortunately been cancelled due to extremely low registration numbers’.
No, that wasn’t a spoof; it was for real. But at least it shows we haven’t quite gone to the dogs.
