Marriage Opponents and the Mexican Standoff

I've often wondered what sort of folks oppose childhood vaccination. It's hard to find empathy with those who would sacrifice children's health - indeed children's very lives - on the altar of their sincerely held beliefs. You might recall a previous blog post discussed Family and Life's ventures in this area. They use their charitable tax status to spread misinformation about the HSE's MMR programme.

Today I learned that their access to high quality printing has borne fruit outside the field of encouraging childhood illnesses and restricting healthcare for Irish women and trans men. As they spread, they have mutated and focus now on restricting access to civil marriage.

Paul Bowler made the well intentioned decision to share the pamphlet on Twitter. Do follow him, even though he appears to tweet pictures while in control of a moving vehicle. You can also use the opportunity to read the text of Family and Life's efforts, assuming turgid dreariness is your thing. I compliment them on their spelling. And the choice of colours is inoffensive enough. Beyond that it's an uninspired remix of the stock scaremongering re polygamy, some misrepresentation of research, and parenting scaremongering.

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?

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.