Sir, - Bill Looby (March 13th) is mistaken in accepting the pro-abortion/"choice" view of the referendum results and its implications.
For a start, supporters of abortion have no basis for claiming that the No vote is a demand for abortion, either on demand, or "for compassion's sake". As the most perfunctory analysis of the figures will show, a significant majority of voters (combining both pro-life Yes and No) were opposed to abortion.
Mr Looby is also incorrect in suggesting that "we are now left with a little abortion". While the position is less than satisfactory, and cannot be left unaddressed, the Taoiseach has conceded that the basis of the "X" case (in relation to suicide) no longer exists (because of the travel amendment) and he has also asserted that "there is no significant body of opinion that abortion is effective to avert risk of suicide" in any other context or case.
Apart from having doubts about the value of the ban on suicide as a ground for abortion, pro-life No supporters were particularly concerned that, in the words of Mr Justice Rory O'Hanlon, the proposals would "greatly worsen the legal protection for unborn human beings". This would apply both pre-implantation and post-implantation. In addition, we were being asked to give endorsement to a right to travel for the specific purpose of killing an unborn Irish child.
I agree with Mr Looby that concessions on hard cases is the beginning of the slippery slope, and additionally, will not bring any benefit to mothers or their babies in the long term (or the short term either).
Encouraged by the failure of the best efforts of those supporting abortion to achieve an electoral majority, it is necessary now for all those concerned about defending life to redouble our efforts to work together to eliminate the weaknesses in the present law. - Yours, etc.,
PAT BUCKLEY,
Chairman,
NEART,
Killiney,
Co Dublin.