October 11, 2011
Lord Nicholas Windsor, the first cousin of Queen Elizabeth II, is creating a stir in England today with a new opinion piece in the London Telegraph newspaper calling abortion a form of eugenics.
Windsor said his commitment to opposing abortion originated in his realization that an abortion means the destruction of a human being, saying, “the cost [of abortion] is too high because the cost is paid in innocent human life.” In a critique of the 1967 Abortion Act in The Daily Telegraph, he states, “It hit me in the stomach that terminating a pregnancy equaled none other than the destruction of a human being. It knocked the wind out of me the first time, as it does every single time I think about it.”
“Abortion is perceived as a solution to a problem called unwanted pregnancy. A real problem, then. A real “solution”, too. But it’s not a just solution for all concerned. It leaves out of the picture the consequences for “the entity”, about whose nature we’ve disagreed so passionately in the last decades,” he writes.
“Look at it this way: I was born in 1970. My dear mother would have been within her rights to find it inconvenient to have me. Bad luck, she didn’t. But my generation has had a close shave. Whether we were born depended on lots of factors: not just on a mother’s decision, but also on the fathers’ influence and that of the surrounding culture,” he continued. ” Others of my generation weren’t that fortunate, and some of those were our siblings. That’s why we take this thing seriously, if you want to know. We were the first generation that really were vulnerable in the womb. Surely, the womb should be the safest place in the world to be. Not any more.”
“So, how many don’t have those sisters and brothers whom the law, in my view, should have protected? And how many of those siblings didn’t go on to compose the symphonies they should, by rights, have composed? How many didn’t go on to give birth in their turn? This is eugenics, isn’t it? Hell, that’s another story,” he added.
Windsor is also joining Lord Alton of Liverpool to publicly oppose what they call a “subversive” campaign to establish abortion as an international human right by bullying nations like Ireland and others where unborn children are protected.
“How many don’t have those sisters and brothers whom the law, in my view, should have protected? And how many of those siblings didn’t go on to compose the symphonies they should, by rights, have composed?” the pair ask. “How many didn’t go on to give birth in their turn? This is eugenics, isn’t it?”
The pair are supporting a new effort called the San Jose Articles, drawn up to counter international campaigns to push abortion.
“I see the San Jose Articles as an attempt to draw a line and fight back against a concerted movement which seeks to read a ‘right to abortion’ into standing international law. The latter is being manipulated in the effort to craft such a right,” Windsor said. “The Articles aim to show that there is no ‘right to abortion’ to be found in international law that would oblige such countries to ‘conform, or else’. This is in spite UN and other agencies’ claims to the contrary. Frankly, officials and politicians in developing countries are being bullied into writing such a right to abortion into their domestic law. This project aims to help them to fight back.”