The River Of Bile - On Steroids

It's strange the journeys that can follow a single step. I must admit that when lovable rascal Fintan O'Toolbox first approached me to discuss providing a guest post I expected something a little lighthearted - even on the one occasion we met he seems disinclined to break character.

I was pleasantly disappointed to find that, instead of his usual hilarious output, he'd opted for some serious investigative journalism. I feel I've covered vaccine opposition, American influence and superstition prevalent in pro life groups in Ireland, but Fintan breaks fresh ground for this blog by exposing ties to the extreme far right.

Do enjoy, and don't forget to follow him on Twitter.

---

Hi, my name is Fintan O'Toolbox, some of you may know me as that annoyingly smug git who writes for Donegal Dollop and live-tweets the Bible most evenings. Geoff recently, very kindly, offered me the opportunity to write a guest post for his wonderful blog. Naturally, I jumped at the opportunity, however, the original idea for my post ended up taking a few bizarre twists and turns so I hope you can bear with me...

One of my favourite topics for debate (trolling) on Twitter is the concept of morality and where it comes from. In my experience, I've often found Catholics strongly opposed to the idea of moral relativism — the notion that morality evolves in accordance with the shifting sands of social progress and that it reflects the general consensus of the masses when it comes to the concept of right and wrong. Instead, they seem to favour the idea that morality is objective and immutable — remaining the same eternally, regardless of whatever we mere mortals may decide among ourselves as a society. I've always considered this to be a strange position for a Catholic to take given that the Old Testament is action-packed with rape [1-4], genocide [5-8], slavery [9-10], and even abortion [11], and given that the catechism still considers this section of the Bible to be entirely valid and inerrant [12]. Regardless of what side of the morality fence you sit on, the average Irish Catholic is, in my experience, generally quite content not to shove this core belief down your throat (it's certainly never become a bone of contention between me and my Catholic friends). However, there are certain groups on the religious right who argue (often very loudly) that moral relativism poses a grave threat to Irish society and must be opposed at every turn.

If morality is indeed objective and the most favourable path towards this morality is via a Catholic belief system, as these groups appear to claim, then surely the proof would be in the empirical pudding? Surely anyone who follows this kind of belief system (particularly someone who clings to it with zeal and wears these beliefs on their sleeve) will be a decent person who contributes positively to society? Failing that, you would at least assume that such a person couldn't possibly end up being a horrible individual who has nothing to offer but negativity. Well, with this assumption in mind, I always keep an eye out on Twitter for people who appear to be singing loudly from the same hymn sheet as the religious right, just to see what kind of people they are. Anyway, one day I came across a very interesting chap called Michael Quinn (no relation to David, as far as I know). Michael doesn't seem to like Jews or black people very much.

Of David Quinn and Demonising the Opponents of X Legislation

Media's view of the pro life lobby?

I do not particularly recommend my book reviews. In it you'll find overlong and overworked reviews of books in which you have little interest, or, worse, overlong and relentlessly critical reviews of books you quite enjoyed. They're mostly about Christian apologetics. For what it's worth, attempting to step into the world view of another gives one a unique viewpoint of one's own. Do wander to unfamiliar sections of the book shop.

This interest in opposing viewpoints may be part of what drew me to David Quinn's latest, "Those opposed to abortion law being branded fanatics". It's been my experience that people change. While I always supported legislation on X, I was two or three blog posts in to the abortion debate before I considered myself pro choice and in that time I was not once referred to as a fanatic. My daily commute found itself unmarked by low flying fruit or vegetation. Indeed, all interactions with pro choicers before I joined their number were positive and engaging. Had I instead been demonised or painted as extremist I would likely have been less inclined to give pro choice arguments fair hearing. If those who oppose X legislation are being unfairly characterised they're unlikely to change their position - misrepresentation helps none of us.

That said, what examples of media bias does Quinn offer?

A Raised Eyebrow to PledgeProLife.com

Those unduly curious as to the views of 'cool gal[s] from Oregon' who also consider themselves 'proud Roman Catholic conservative[s]' can do worse than to take to Twitter, where they will likely come across the below caps lock enthusiast who describes herself as one of many "AMERICANS FOR AN ABORTION-FREE IRELAND!"

Original tweet here, assuming not deleted. Her enthusiasm for confining Irish abortions to home abortion kits or England is expressed by her promotion of Youth Defence's PledgeProLife.com. Youth Defence describes this site as representative of "80,000 voters [sic] who will never vote Fine Gael again". Yet I could find no evidence that this Oregon based conservative has been a member of said party, nor was I able to find a townland called Oregon in any traditional Fine Gael voting county.

Guest Post: I Had An Abortion

I've made a lot of great new friends since starting this blog, and I've had the opportunity to interact with folk who I wouldn't normally expect to spend time with. It's been an interesting journey. What I've also found is that having some involvement in pro choice activism has changed my relationship with those I already knew.

I recently learnt that, years ago, a friend had had an abortion.

It's something she'd rather keep anonymous, but I felt glad that in some small way I could help give her a way to talk openly about her experience.

I take two things from this. First, I'm glad that being openly pro choice means my friends feel comfortable talking to me about their experiences. Second, I regret she worried people might judge her. If you're pro choice, please let your friends know. They might need someone to talk to. But enough of me. Here was my friend's experience:

Like a lot of young, Irish people I set off after college seeking excitement abroad. And I got it – in abundance. I lived a fantastic few years working and travelling. I met a lovely guy; we were young and really fell for each other.

Then disaster struck. I confided in a friend that I didn’t feel myself and she suggested that I might be pregnant. That and a sick day from work worried me enough to buy a test. It was positive. I was 25, and this wasn’t part of the plan for my boyfriend, or for me.

Youth Defence Blog Post Review: Discussing Disability

"I’d tell you I love[sic], but then I’d have to kill you" This mangled attempt to reproduce the title of one of the author's "favourite spy books" may have slithered past Youth Defence's editor. Or perhaps it was shown mercy - given the inexhaustible supply of errors that constitute the remainder of this blog post a mere discarding of the sixth word of the title (the word 'you') may have been allowed stay to better lower the expectations of its unfortunate readers.

I assume of course that Críostíona speaks of that well known classic, I'd Tell You I Love You, But Then I 'd Have To Kill You by Ally Carter. I'm assured it's popular with both pre teens and young adults alike. Of course, perhaps I err. It rests not outside the realms of possibility that Youth Defence members have access to works that encourage lethal responses to admissions of eros, as suggested by the offered title. Still, the former seems the most charitable reading so I'll progress with the assumption that Críostíona intended to commence her piece with a reference to a teenager who lies to most people she meets in the protection of a secret mission. (For those unduly troubled by excess free time the plot summary is here.)

What mission does Críostíona execute in this blog post? We discover by examining the first sentence to follow a rather hamfisted link with aforementioned book title:

Youth Defence: Facts Deserve Better

I've been on holiday and am somewhat behind on current affairs. No matter, the Youth Defence blog provides a rich source of material for me to discuss.

Today I look at an entry from Eadaoin, a UK based blogger with an interest in Ireland's abortion debate. Rather than provide commentary I'll just offer my free fact checking service.

"It has become increasingly clear that, over the last ten decades the women’s liberation movement across the globe, which had noble aims in its infancy, has become an oppressor of women’s freedom."

I have a fortnight's worth of laundry to do: regrettably time does not allow me to also correct grammar or suggest how Eadaoin might express ideas clearly. Do feel free to assist her in the comments.

Statistically speaking, induced abortions increases [sic] the risk of breast, cervical, ovarian and rectal cancer.

No it doesn't. I offer as evidence a Lancet published meta analysis of 53 studies and a 12 year study of 25,000 Danish women. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the United States National Cancer Institute agree that there is no causative link. The American Cancer Society goes one further, saying that "...the public is not well-served by false alarms. At this time, the scientific evidence does not support the notion that abortion of any kind raises the risk of breast cancer". Eadaoin doesn't offer any evidence of this purported link with breast or other cancers, and with good cause - she doesn't have it. Nor does she mention that her organisation opposes the HPV vaccine, proven to reduce instances of cervical cancer.

Anti vaccination group flies Irish politicians to US on anti abortion fact finding mission

I haven't spoken of the registered charity Family and Life before. They have an interesting past, the National Catholic Register describing them as splitting from US based Human Life International while reasoning that "its work in Ireland was being interfered with by Americans". This led to some surprise when I read in the Sunday Times of their plans to fly several Fine Gael senators, including Fidelma Healy Eames and Paul Bradford, on a 'search for truth' about abortion.

The shock was precipitated by their choice of location - they're off to the United States. For an organisation born from opposition to American intervention in Irish affairs this seems an odd choice.

With this thought in mind I reviewed a previous post touching on their most recent ancestor. Their split from Human Life International did not seem to include condemnation of their opposition to vaccines and I wondered if this was an area of disagreement.

It is not.

Take their Ethical Vaccine for Children Project:

The “Ethical Vaccine for Children Project” is aimed at applying pressure on the Irish health authorities and pharmaceutical companies to oppose the use of vaccines based on cell lines derived from aborted babies' tissue. In Ireland the MMR (Measeles, Mumps & Rubella) vaccine is produced using cell lines that originated in the abortion of unborn babies, despite the fact that ethical safe alternatives exist.

and continues with the comment:

The text of their leaflet is not provided, and if this is the reaction it inspires I can see a rather plausible reason why they would choose to keep it concealed.

Under the (American) Influence

It's always a pleasure to be offered a guest post. Often in the past I've taken the opportunity to give voice to someone who holds a different viewpoint to mine, and I've had fine articles from Christian and Muslim bloggers. In this instance, however, Kath O'Meara and I have little on which to disagree.

She writes from the perspective of an American expatriate living in Ireland and has dug up some fascinating information on our friends across the water. It's great to have such a succinct overview of the situation on file and it makes me realise that much of my output assumes prior knowledge of the Irish situation. My thanks to Kath for this. Do tweet her your appreciation on @KathOMeara. If you enjoy her writing you should check out her blog.

Do enjoy.

---

As an American and long-term resident in Ireland (gratefully and by choice), I would like to state for the record:  

I am sorry.   

I am sorry a bunch of arrogant Yanks think they know better than the people of Ireland and have the right to influence Irish society.   

I am sorry that these religious fundamentalists are sticking their noses (and wallets) into the Irish question on abortion and sending money to be used on questionable publicity including billboards ,leaflets and posters.

I am sorry about the illegal robocalls, which originated in the US. 

When I first heard that far-right anti-choice groups in Ireland were being shored up with American dollars the first thought in my mind was "Oh man, I thought I got away from you people!" You see for me, one of the perks about living in Ireland is that I am thousands of miles away from the bible thumping I-know-better-than-you hell and brimstone fundies who can’t seem to stop themselves from trying to control a woman’s right to bodily integrity. A strategy which has not stopped although safe and legal abortions are now available in the US via the landmark Supreme Court case ofRoe v. Wade.

Who's Using Home Abortion Pills?

In 2009, the Irish Medicines Board seized 1,216 abortion pills destined for Irish addresses. This is a significant increase on the 2008 total of 48, though this may well be a result of improved detection rates rather than an increase in demand. No customs office is infallible and no prohibition is complete; it would be farcical to state that these represent the sum total of all abortifacients posted to our shores.

It is now 2013, and groups such as Women on Web no longer ship home abortion kits to addresses in the Republic of Ireland. Instead they suggest identifying a suitable address in Northern Ireland for delivery, requiring that their customer make a trip to collect. Customs interceptions have decreased as a result: they seized 671 in in 2010 and 635 in 2011. Does this mean that women are no longer performing abortions alone, isolated, and with a threat of prison sentence should they dare seek medical help?

I used Google trends to chart the popularity of searches for 'abortion pill' in England, Scotland, the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland:


As a nation we're consistently more likely to be searching for information on abortion pills than are the citizens of Scotland and England. Northern Ireland spikes from highs to lows, a function of its lower population more so than rapid cultural change. And the point that must be emphasized is that increased customs seizures have not reduced this desire for knowledge. If anything it has grown.

The Pro Life Atheist Guest Post

I'd like to thank David for writing the below. Like many of my past guest posts it's fair to say we disagree but  there's little point in blogging if you're not going to listen to those of differing opinions and as an atheist opposed to abortion his voice is one not often heard in the debate.

I requested this guest post through a rather unusual method. I'd examined the Twitter account of @ProLifeAtheists and found that most of their followers were Catholic. While I still consider @ProLifeAtheists a poor example for those seeking to demonstrate diversity among those opposed to abortion, it was never my intention to imply that being an atheist and not being pro choice were mutually exclusive. I'm glad that David has been willing to give of his time to share his thinking.

He's indicated that he'll be happy to respond to comments below as time allows. I know that he's a busy chap and appreciate any time he can give.

---

I was asked to put some of my thoughts on paper because I happen to be an atheist who happens to be ‘pro-life’. I was asked to explain ‘why I'm an atheist’ and to also outline my feelings on abortion.

Well, I was born to Catholic parents. I was educated in a Catholic environment, and I would say that my present ‘values’ would be Christian influenced. But who was Christ? Well at this stage, to me, he was a man who lived a few thousand years ago who had some pretty enlightened ideas on how people should live with each other, ideas which, I think, have much in common with most other religions/social philosophies of the world. To me, Jesus was a man with ideas, and he wasn't the first or last person in history to have been persecuted for proclaiming unconventional or unfashionable ideas. From around the age of 16 I finally decided to defy my parents by no longer routinely going to mass with with them on Sundays, cos I simply did not believe in the whole thing. As for me, ‘agnostic’ may have been what I was as I started thinking for myself as a teenager. But at this stage of my life, when I think on it, I realise that I have been an atheist for quite some time. It actually feels odd to me to realise, that if I were to be pigeon-holed, it would be into that little box marked ‘ atheist’. It’s not something I dwell on too much, and its not like I remind myself every Sunday that I'm an atheist by attending some atheist church!! And I don’t belong to any kind of atheist club or anything like that. I'm a bit surprised at the notion some people seem to have, that being an atheist can’t be compatible with being anti-abortion, and that folks might think I'm just pretending not to be some kind of praying church-going bible-bashing ultra-Catholic, disguising myself as an atheist just to try to be cool.

Alive! Gay Pro Life And The Minority Report

It's been some time since we discussed the suspicious @ProLifeAtheists. Unusually for an atheist group, the most common adjective their followers used to describe themselves was 'Catholic', with only two profiles containing the word 'atheist'. Cardinal Dolan and David Quinn featured high on the list of accounts the group felt worthy of following. In short it seemed rather a poor choice for those who posit significant numbers of atheists who oppose abortion. You're welcome to read the post for background.

This post has been rather popular. In fact it's my most popular post of all time, and I was touched by the genuine interest and excitement around the investigation. A recent spike in visits to the post (over 2,000 in one day last week, my thanks to @glinner) caused me to wonder if the masterminds between this cunning deception might have targeted other groups unpopular with American Republicans to create the impression of diverse support.

So I checked.

Pro Life Atheist Guest Post

Some time ago, after exposing @ProLifeAtheists as an AstroTurf account, I decided to offer any Irish atheist who wished to write about their opposition to legislating on X a guest post to express their views.

I'm pleased to announce I've had a volunteer. He's sent me a draft, I hope to publish either tomorrow or Friday.

For those who have eagerly enquired to the status of the post I offer this debate on abortion between Matt Dillahunty and Kristine Kruszelnicki. Both are atheists. Hopefully this will tide you over till I publish!

Also, as flyingteacosy and I are exposing another AstroTurf account on Thursday, you may wish to brace yourself for another call for guest posts.

Pro Life Campaign and Preferences for Political Parties

Photo by Andrew Flood
 Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike
Creative Commons

Much noise is made of a vast, anti abortion groundswell against Fine Gael from former ardent supporters. These thronging masses, we're told, are best characterised by their support of the ostensibly Irish group @ProLifeCampaign.

If only there were some way to gauge the following of a specific Twitter account. Perhaps through some sort of programming or scripting language. In a manner that might, say, output the relevant information in human readable format, and suggest which politicians were favoured.

My first check was to pull details of the followers of @FineGaelToday and compare with that of @ProLifeCampaign. There was a 2.2% crossover. Is this an adequate counter to @ProLifeCampaign's claims? Perhaps not. Some Fine Gael tweeps may only follow their local TDs. It's conceivable that some of them would follow no Fine Gael accounts, though over @ProLifeCampaign's 5,721 followers I would not expect that condition to be exclusively expressed.

So I checked every account followed by more than five of @ProLifeCampaign's followers.

When I did I found that the twelfth most popular account followed by @ProLifeCampaign's followers is, indeed, a politician. A man who celebrates his Catholic faith, is considered right wing, represents a major party and is proud of his Irish heritage. I speak of course of failed Republican candidate for vice president Paul Ryan.

Perhaps this is an unfair cheap shot - Paul Ryan is not the most popular politician on this list. For that we must move up the rankings to examine the man who occupies fourth slot, a Mr Mitt Romney. Despite an exhaustive search of the Fine Gael website I was unable to ascertain which constituency he represented. Perhaps he is new? Do let me know in the comments.

Why Am I Pro Choice?

I promised in an earlier post to provide some positive arguments for the pro choice position. It won't be possible to cover all cases and scenarios in one sitting, but allow me to make a start. This change of material may be spectacularly ill-judged. I have something of a niche in Twitter analysis and (dare I say it) investigative research, undoubtedly the primary draw to this corner of the internet, and switching to an area in which I hold no special skill may lose me a follower or two.

Do stick around though. I have something special planned for the end of the week involving a considerable number of pie charts.

What Is Pro Choice?

To my mind the population is divided into those who feel a woman's reproductive cycle should be governed by society, and those who feel that individuals of the female persuasion are best placed to make decisions involving their own bodies. I consider the latter pro choice, and the former anti choice. It is only fair to remark that the anti choice grouping contains subgroups that would likely violently oppose each other. Supporters of China's one child policy with its attendant forced abortions clearly favour state control of wombs. Closer to home but further back in time, those who wished to restrict child benefit payments for third and subsequent children of Northern Irish parents mixed an urge to influence women's reproductive wishes with their anti-Catholic bias. Societies that pressure women to have abortions or commit infanticide until they are pregnant with a male are similarly an anathema to the pro choice position. They belong rightly on the side of those who judge reproduction unsuitable for a woman to govern without outside intervention.

In Defence of Catholics and Choice

Yesterday's Pro Choice Planning day afforded me the honour of meeting many speakers and activists. I was able to put faces to Twitter handles and meet in person people I already considered friends. Geraldine Kennedy was kind enough to say she enjoys my blog. I remain starstruck. Still, of all the people I spoke to that day the one who's been most in my thoughts is Brigid.

It's not her real name. I recall our longest conversation: she took me aside and with near painful shyness said she'd rather not have her picture taken, "in case people back home found out". Before that I'd offered her a newspaper. She seemed to have arrived alone and made quickly for the rear row of seats. I read her as nervous; a woman of my parent's generation in a room that at the time leaned heavily towards those in their twenties. She seemed determined to do something but worried of ramifications. We'd been briefed of potential anti abortion disruptions.

She sat quietly through the initial presentation. Then came questions and answers, with her hesitantly raising her hand and then thinking the better of it. A few questions from others saw her resolve returned and she asked for the microphone. Finding her voice she told us she is a mass-going Catholic, how she is pro choice, and how hard it can be for her believing abortion to be a matter of personal conscience in a setting so hostile to the expression of such views. The Irish Pro Choice movement does not do free buses;  Brigid had travelled considerable distance at her own expense to be able to freely state her position.

Who Is More Reasonable?

It's often hard to have a dispassionate conversation about legislating on X, and one could be forgiven for thinking that those against abortion rights in Ireland have chosen to capitalise on this. The language used is selected for its ability to elicit an emotional response - for fetus they say unborn child, for blastocyst they say person with potential, and to describe the debate we're currently almost having they use the term literal tsunami of death. Their choice of images also falls foul of this criticism - be it faked pictures of late-term abortions or smiling, cherub-like babies the appeal to emotion is obvious.

True, facts are used, but more often than not they're flat out wrong. Pro Life Campaign's most recent video culminates in an impassioned speech saying that Ireland is the world leader in maternal healthcare. Now I see no need to rest on such laurels and avoid providing doctors with the legal clarity needed to perform lifesaving operations, but a more significant counterargument is that their statement is untrue. We are not the world leader in maternal healthcare, a fact that can hardly have escaped those behind Pro Life Campaign, and it's hard to take them seriously when such gross inaccuracies are present. It would be like their chairperson forgetting they were in a video with a group that promotes gay conversion 'therapy' while falsely associating vaccinations and autism.

These groups tend to say they represent the majority opinion in Ireland despite 64% of Irish people favouring legislation on X. It's also instructive to note that their supporters on Twitter seem overwhelmingly to be American Republicans, not to my mind a group that should have significant representation in Irish affairs.

Inaccuracies and misstatements aside, is there a downside to leaning on emotional argument? I think there is.

David Quinn, Politeness and the One-Sided Conversation

David Quinn has written recently on the need to move away from insults in online discourse. It's one of those likely rare topics on which we agree - I find insults lazy, tawdry and generally counterproductive. If your strongest argument is your belief that your opponent is a 'toerag' you have little in the ways of convincing material and your efforts will most likely weaken the cause you support.

He's published a Twitter 'code of conduct' which I read with interest:

"Twitter Code of Conduct needed. 1; no abusive language. 2; address arguments 3; assume the good faith of the other person"

I'm not in a position to promulgate how Twitter is best used, but I was heartened a little to see that these three rules match neatly how I tend to interact online. I slip from time to time; I'm human after all, but I find my most popular posts and most interesting conversations flow from a beginning of engaging with someone of different views using evidence, reason and polite language.

I've written about David Quinn's work with vaccine denial groups before, and the fact that his message is unpopular with women. I've also wondered aloud why the Iona Institute benefits from charitable tax status but I've neither insulted him personally nor used foul language. It came as some surprise to me to find out I was blocked:

Tax Breaks, Vaccine Denial and Irish Pro Lifers

It's a time of hardship for a lot of us. Tax is up, the carer's allowance has been decreased and most of us are making do with less. Still, it comes as small consolation to remember that as a nation we provide tax breaks for many worthy charities who do important, vital work. However, amongst the dedicated, effective and admirable groups there are a few interlopers perhaps undeserving of tax payers' assistance.

I've mentioned before that the Iona Institute is freed from the shackles of many tax obligations. You can see their company, Lolek Limited, is listed on the Revenue's list of authorised charities. (Compare the charity number there to that listed on Iona's website.) I pop back to this Revenue list from time to time when investigating various groups and have found many names gratifyingly absent. I should also add that I bear the Revenue no ill will in this matter; they merely enforce the rules and are not the body who decided the criteria for charitable status. (Late addendum: this means donors can either write off some of their tax bill against the donation, or get the Revenue to add to their donation, depending on their tax status.)

Recently a video made by the American group EWTN has been excitedly shared through Facebook and Twitter. (Bebo was not checked.) It was designed to solicit prayers and donations for Irish anti abortion groups. Perhaps surprisingly, it has been promoted most heavily by those of us on the pro choice side, largely due to one ridiculous hat:

Live Action, Youth Defence, and the Return to the Magdalene Laundries

"... back in the olden days of yore, when there was a standard – and when if you got caught having sex before marriage, you would get your butt beat and get sent off to Ye Olde Forbidding Nunnery & School For Wayward Girls – there were a lot fewer teenagers having sex." -Kristen Walker Hatten, liveactionnews.org

I greeted news that Youth Defence is now open about their US-based financing with mixed delight. True, the myth that they are the voice of the silent Irish majority can only be damaged by this approach. But I worry that their true colours may show more clearly when they drop the pretense of being strangers to the worst excesses of anti abortion activism in the USA.

Take the opening quote. It hankers back to a simpler time, where Magdalene laundries prevented abortions by incarcerating those women who dared be raped, judged lascivious by village elders, or - horror of horrors - choose their sex partners without church approval.

@ProLifeAtheists and the Damascene Conversion

"By sticking steadfastly to religious arguments, the prochoice advocates who organised this march have shown they are out of touch with the modern debate – a debate which includes people of all faiths and no faith. Just look at @secularprolife, @prolifeatheists and many others for examples." - Cora Sherlock, Deputy Chair of ProLifeCampaign.ie, via thejournal.ie 

"The Church is entitled to contribute just like any other group in society but the fact remains that abortion concerns human rights, not religion. The Journal readers can see this from groups like @secularprolife, @ProLifeAtheists, PLAGAL and of course the writings of secularists Nat Hentoff and the late Christopher Hitchens." - Cora Sherlock, Deputy Chair of ProLifeCampaign.ie, via thejournal.ie

Atheism is the absence of belief in gods, nothing more, nothing less. Being both an atheist and opposed to legal access to abortion is not an incoherent position, though it would be inconsistent for an atheist to advance a religious argument against abortion.

Still, I was a mite curious about this @ProLifeAtheists group. Who were they? Could they be what I was looking for - a majority Irish group?