RITE AND REASON: The new abortion amendment makes it clear that the "unborn" referred to in the 1983 amendment includes more than just those embryos which have already been implanted in the womb, says Father Kevin Doran.
Next week we will be asked to vote on the Government's proposal for a new constitutional amendment to protect human life in pregnancy.
I believe that this proposal is very appropriately named, because it is all about the protection of human life, not just the life of the unborn, but also the life of the mother.
Archdeacon Gordon Linney suggested in this column (on February 12th) that the amendment, if passed, would put women at a disadvantage by undermining the constitutional protection afforded by the 1983 amendment.
A careful reading of the text of the amendment, and the legislative proposal which accompanies it, shows clearly that this is not the case.
In the first place, the new amendment will not replace the existing one, and the "equal right to life of the mother" will remain in article 40.3.3.
Secondly, the new proposal specifically provides that necessary medical treatment may be given to a woman who is pregnant, even if it does result in the death of her child.
I believe that women can support this amendment with confidence.
Archdeacon Linney reminds readers of the outpouring of emotion that surrounded the X case, and asks if this has been forgotten.
Of course it is important that compassion should play a part in the decisions we make, but not to the exclusion of logic and truth.
It is possible for us to support mothers without aborting their babies.
This kind of support is readily available from a number of voluntary agencies at the present time.
The problem with the X case judgment was that four of the judges, swept along on the tide of popular emotion, presented judgments which interpreted the "equal right to life" of the mother as if it were an overriding right.
On the evidence of one psychologist, the Supreme Court decided that there was a risk that the young woman in the X case might commit suicide.
No account was taken of the abundant evidence that many women are placed at risk of suicide because of the depression which they experience after having abortions.
The suggestion made by Archdeacon Linney that the right to life of the woman should be extended to include her mental health is exactly the kind of proposal which led to the existing abortion regime in the UK.
This regime results in the killing of many thousands of unborn children every year.
The present referendum is necessary precisely because of the defective judgment of the Supreme Court in the X case.
The amendment which the Government is proposing to the Irish people is designed to respond specifically to the problem caused by the Supreme Court.
The present proposal does not stand alone, but rather builds on the 1983 amendment.
It presents the protection of "human life implanted in the womb" as a particular expression of the more general protection for the unborn which has been enshrined in the Constitution since 1983.
In so doing it actually strengthens the 1983 amendment, rather than weakening it.
IT MAKES it clear, in a way that was never clear before, that the "unborn" referred to in the 1983 amendment includes more than just those embryos which have already been implanted in the womb.
This should serve to reassure those who might be worried that this amendment doesn't go far enough.
We stand, not so much at a crossroads as at a T-junction.
We have only two options. One is to accept the present proposal, which I believe is an honest attempt by the Government to restore the guarantee originally intended by the Irish people.
The other is to place the Government in a position in which it has no option but to legislate in accordance with the judgment of the Supreme Court in the X case.
I have no hesitation in encouraging people to vote in favour of the Government's proposal.
Kevin Doran is a Roman Catholic priest of Dublin Diocese. He teaches the ethics of healthcare at the Milltown Institute