Finally, Niall O’Dowd might have taken a different tack in criticizing Cardinal O’Malley. Did he protest to fellow cardinals in relation to church failings to protect children from suffering? It would be a valid response. Sadly even it is spoiled by the double standards of American “progressives” for whom church failings render it morally compromised when abortion is at stake but when the church supports “progressive” positions on poverty, the death penalty or US foreign policy the church is suddenly rendered miraculously fit to comment.
The church deserves a beating. But not from those who are exploiting the suffering of born children just to legalize suffering for the unborn. One moral failure doesn’t justify another. And untruths are a poor basis for opinion.
Niall O’Dowd responds. It is a matter of opinion whether the lack of abortion of her 19-week old non-viable fetus caused Savita’s death. As Paul Cullen in The Irish Times noted the opinion of an expert witness at the inquest contrasted sharply with the one Marc Coleman holds.
Cullen wrote “There is no other way to summarize yesterday’s main testimony to the Savita Halappanavar inquest other than that, in the view of an expert witness, restrictive Irish abortion laws cost Ms Halappanavar her life.
Dr Peter Boylan’s statement that Ms Halappanavar would most likely be with us today if she’d been given a termination earlier may be just an opinion, but it is the opinion of one of the most eminent obstetricians in the State.
As the former master and current clinical director of the National Maternity Hospital, with extensive professional experience in the UK and US as well as Ireland, Dr Boylan clearly has vast experience.”