Sheffield

Last week I had a day and a bit off and made one of my occasional trips up to Sheffield on the train from Kettering. The City of Steel is a place that gets overlooked. Many only know it for Meadowhall, a massive shopping complex on the outskirts. People I've spoken to who went there years ago used to pull faces when I told them I was at the University of Sheffield (which, incidentally, always scores highly in the university tables). It may have been run down after the demise of the steel industry but its now such an up and coming place and a great city to visit.

This is the City Hall where I went to see Status Quo with my dad (yes I am a sad man) and Michael Vaughan when he returned home with the Ashes and was given the freedom of the city, giving him authority to drive a herd of sheep through Sheffield! When I was studying, the exterior of the building was a darker colour than this and it looked dull. But, a couple of years ago, it received a facelift and splendid water features were added outside.

Sleeping at my friend Matt's house, who currently has a flat in the centre of Sheffield, is a difficult business. At about 8am/8.30am, if already not awake, you are disturbed by the sound of drilling, cranes and builders shouting. The place is a construction site in many ways. Improving roads as well as building new office blocks, colourful-looking apartments and restoring existing buildings are all going on around you. For instance, this is the front of the world famous Crucible theatre, the home of snooker:

And here is a rather interesting looking building going up here (I think it's a multi-storey car park and offices):

For an example of a newish feature of the city, look no further than the Winter Gardens. It is one of the largest temperate glasshouses to be built in the UK during the last hundred years. It sits alongside the Peace Gardens and the Millennium Galleries and provides visitors with a unique pedestrian link through to the city centre. Among its features are more than 2,500 plants from around the world:
Because of the famous (and steep, especially when cycling up them) hills, there are some stunning (and not so stunning) views across Sheffield. In my second and third years at university, I jumped at the chance of an attic room in the house I shared so I could admire the view. This is the backdrop from Sheffield Hallam University (boo, hiss!):

The place also has an interesting Catholic history. Pictured below is St Marie's Cathedral where I often went for Mass and confession during the week and on a Saturday if I was in town. It has only been a Cathedral since 1980 when the Diocese of Hallam was formed. It is on Norfolk Row, an appropriately named street for the Mother Catholic Church of Sheffield. The Duke of Norfolk was one of the main landowners of the city during the Reformation. Mass was celebrated in a few houses of gentry in Sheffield, including in a house on Fargate that belonged to the Duke of Norfolk, which had a hidden chapel in its roof. After Catholic Emancipation, Catholics in the city took over a nearby house to where the cathedral now stands. Then, in the 1840s, work started on St Marie's after young priest Fr Pratt was keen to build a bigger church as the chapel in the back yard of the house was too small. The priest died before his church was completed. The Duke of Norfolk donated large sums of money to it. Also, the first Lord Mayor of Sheffield was the then Duke of Norfolk in 1897.

Above the altar you can vaguely see names inscribed. One of them is Blessed Nicholas Garlick, one of the Padley martyrs. Padley House is in the nearby Peak District. It was owned by a staunchly recusant family and became a missionary haven for priests for almost thirty years during the Reformation. In 1588, Padley was raided by the Lord Lieutenant of Sheffield, the Earl of Shrewsbury. On the 12th July, two priests were found. They were Nicholas Garlick and Robert Ludlam and were immediately sent to Derby Gaol. At their trial, the two priests were found guilty of high treason and were sentenced to death. They were hanged, drawn and quartered along with Fr Richard Simpson on St. Mary's Bridge, Derby. The Blesseds are three of the 85 Martyrs of England and Wales.

Finally, I thought I would mention my almer mater. Here is the original red-brick university building where I graduated - Firth Hall. If you look very closely at my rather small blog profile picture, you can see me within the courtyard in the middle of Firth Hall with my hat and gown on. That was, dare I say it, more than two years ago now. I would recommend Univ of Sheff to anyone currently filling in their UCAS form.

I hope this post has been a decent attempt at acting like someone from the South Yorkshire Tourist Board. Seriously, though, it's an intrguing place...

HFE Bill Briefing

At the SPUC Hull and East Riding branch meeting last weekend, Father William Massie, parish priest of the West Hull parishes, asked me to write a short briefing explaining the proposed amendments to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill that, if passed, would result in more unborn children being killed through abortion. He is going to hold an MP letter writing session in his parishes during the teas and coffees after Mass giving people, many of whom may have never written to their MP, an opportunity to do just that. It's a great idea and I hope more priests will organise this kind of event. He and a group of parishioners travelled down to Westminster earlier this summer to lobby their MP, health secretary Alan Johnson.

Fr Massie wanted me to explain the Bill and the dangerous amendments (along with reasons they should be opposed) in layman's terms, so that "Joe and Josephine Parishioner" can write a simple letter to their MP. I thought it would be useful to publish this on my blog for the benefit of those who don't know much about the Bill:

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology (HFE) Bill is a government bill that will receive its third reading in the House of Commons as early as the end of this monthOCT. It seeks to extend licensing of more procedures that will harm or kill embryos created in the laboratory. The proposals include:

- allow scientists to create various types of human/animal hybrid embryos for research
- remove the need for a father so lesbian couples can have children through IVF
- gender selection of embryos after IVF if a sex-linked hereditary condition is suspected
- creation of "saviour siblings" in the hope of producing a baby who can be used as a tissue donor to treat the older sibling - but most "saviour sibling" embryos are discarded or destroyed


These points have already been debated and voted on by MPs. The only way they will not become law is if the Bill as a whole is defeated in the Commons at third reading, which is very unlikely, or that Gordon Brown resigns and calls an election immediately. This is also highly unlikely.


The key battleground now is over very dangerous amendments to the Abortion Act that, if passed, will open the floodgates for abortion to be even more "on demand" than it already is. Several new clauses to the Bill have been tabled by extreme pro-abortion MPs. The Speaker of the House, Michael Martin, will select the amendments that will form part of the Bill.
This briefing is to summarise these amendments are and give comments on why they are so dangerous to help you write to your MP with good arguments, urging him or her to oppose ANY of the amendments to abortion law, regardless of which ones are picked.


The New Clauses


1) Change the requirement of two doctors’ signatures needed to refer women for an abortion to one. It will also abolish the need for any legal ground for abortion before 24 weeks. This would leave women even more under pressure to have an abortion and would make it more widely available.


2) Allow nurses and midwives to carry out abortions. Nurses and midwives have not been consulted on the possible change. Abortion work is unpopular among doctors and other healthcare professionals will do doctors’ "dirty work". This may also be a cost cutting exercise for abortion providers.


3) Lower limit for social abortions to 20 weeks. This is unlikely to be selected as time-limit amendments were comprehensively defeated at second reading. It could end up as a "trade off" with another, more radical proposal to make abortions easier.


4) One doctor’s signature before 13 weeks, two for between 13 and 24, three doctors after 24 weeks. More than 90 per cent of all abortions happen before 13 weeks. This could lead to more early abortions and reinforce the misleading and incorrect idea that the moral status of the unborn child grows as age increases. The opposition to abortion should be based on an argument about when life begins (conception) rather than how well developed unborn children are.


5) Three doctors required after 24 weeks. See above.


6) Attempt to ban abortions for "non-serious" handicap, such as cleft lip and palate or club foot. Defining what is not a "serious" handicap could be a mistake. It would be seen to underline the "worthlessness" in society of those with more serious disabilities.


7) Wider range of abortion locations to include GPs’ surgeries, health centres and even school sick rooms. This would potentially turn every clinic into a killing factory. It will lead to greater pressure for women to opt for abortions immediately without any time to consult, reflect and seek advice. Who is responsible for disposal of foetal remains? Will they be found in the dustbin?


9) Allow abortions by drug to be administered anywhere (even in prisons, schools and refugee centres) within nine weeks of pregnancy. This would widen the use of the RU486 abortion pill which is much cheaper to administer than a surgical abortion. It could also apply to the morning after pill, which can also cause an early abortion. There would be a risk to the woman’s physical and psychological health by being sent home to have an abortion by themselves.


10) Wider range of abortion places for both drug and surgical abortions. Similar to new clause 7.

11) Outlaw misleading advertising by counsellors. A complicated amendment based on subjective measures. It needs further analysis but could result in pro-life (and pro-abortion) counsellors being sent to prison if they give what is deemed to be false information which causes or is likely to cause a woman to make a decision about an abortion she would not have otherwise taken.


12) No conscientious objection to birth control. This could mean that all doctors, nurses and pharmacists would be forced to provide and administer "emergency contraception" including the morning after pill, which can cause an early abortion. There would be no right for medics and pharmacists to opt out of doing this on ethical and moral grounds. This is contrary to basic ethical principles. The right to freedom of conscience is widely recognised in codes of ethics and international law.


30) Extending 1967 Abortion Act to Northern Ireland. This would virtually mean abortion on demand in the province, where abortion is still illegal in most cases. This amendment has been tabled by a group of extreme pro-abortion MPs, none of whom represents a Northern Ireland constituency. Opposition to abortion is something that unites people, politicians and churches across the province. To impose the Act would be a slap in the face of democracy, given that most, if not all, Northern Ireland MPs are opposed to such a move.

Seminarians

Last Wednesday, Phil Cunnah (pictured above with his niece) and brother Tom set off for the Royal English College in Vallidolid to start seminary in the college's Propaedeutic Year.

I had the pleasure of being invited to a leaving party at their family home in Newland Park, Hull, the other Sunday. There were people I'd not seen for years there - schoolfriends, teachers, priests and other friends. It was a great occasion.

Among those who I saw was my GCSE English teacher at school, Mrs Pipkin. I made a joke that, although I'm now a journalist, I still can't spell. She said: "Well thanks very much Richard!" She was interested in what I was doing now and I offered to go into St Mary's in Hull when I have a spare weekday free and talk about journalism.

The Cunnahs put on a marvellous spread and there was plenty of drink on offer. Like most parties in houses, a lot of people gathered in the kitchen.

Please pray for Phil and Tom as they start their seminary journey.

Lawyer warns medics may have to give up their profession

Sorry about the lack of blogging in the last week, particularly with SPUC conference reports. Here we continue with Jakob Cornides' talk:

Freedom of conscience to opt out of performing abortions is not a right but a responsibility.

That’s the view of Austrian lawyer Jakob Cornides, who gave the third talk at the conference.
"On a day not far away from now, doctors will be forced to perform abortions against their will," Mr Cornides said.

"This is a situation in which many gynaecologists and obstetricians may face the choice of either performing abortions or giving up their profession."

He exposed the pro-abortion lobby’s moves to get rid of the right for doctors to conscientiously object - to turn abortion into a right for women, and an obligation for medical practitioners.

Dr Cornides said: "This is what motivates the campaigning of lobby groups like Planned Parenthood, Center for Reproductive Rights, and Catholics for a Free Choice. It is ironic that the pro‐abortion movement portrays itself as ‘pro‐choice’. Their campaigning against conscience clauses evidences the contrary: they are antichoice.

"They want to prevent medical practitioners, just as they want to prevent women, from choosing not to perform abortions."

Dr Cornides added there was no so right as a "right to abortion". Every abortion takes the life of an innocent human being. It is a violation of the most fundamental of all rights, the right to life."
He mentioned famous people in history that had courageously objected to unjust laws, such as Franz Jägerstätter, an Austrian who refused to serve in the German Wehrmacht during World War II.

"Without doubt this freedom, which can also be described as a duty, is the greatest and most valuable of freedoms ‐ but whoever uses it, must be ready to pay the price."

Abortion in Russia

At this year’s SPUC conference, a new feature was added to the programme – the Paul Danon show.

Paul is SPUC’s communications manager. On the Saturday night, he did a kind of talk show with one of the society’s summer interns, Julia Amakova. Julia is 20 and was born in Uzbekistan. As well as studying, she currently works for a pro-life organisation in Russia that is linked to the Orthodox Church. Julia came over to England earlier this summer and struggled with her English. But now, the SPUC staff are so impressed by how she’s picked it up in the last few weeks. Despite mostly reading from prepared speeches, Julia even managed to answer some questions towards the end of the session.

She began by making an opening statement about herself and about the history of abortion laws in Britain. The Bolshevik government legalised abortion on November 19 1920. It was the first country in the world to legalise it. She described the government of that time as “one of the most liberal in the world”. It was allowed on demand up to 12 weeks and, after this, it was permitted for various medical and social reasons. Between 1960 and 1980, the victims to abortion were 200 per cent greater than the numbers of people who were killed during the First World War. There was a staggering 90 million abortions over 20 years.

The pro-life movement has been countering this culture of death, particularly in the last 15 years. Most of the organisations are linked with the Orthodox Church. The organisation Julia works for provides support in crisis pregnancies and Orthodox orphanages in an attempt to save babies from abortion and provide a home for them after birth. Julia was very optimistic about a culture change in her country, starting with a revival of the Orthodox church and being shown by pro-life organisations being set up and different conferences and festivals taking place. The movement is also trying to develop courses on bioethics. Strikingly, it is also keen on large, hard-hitting advertisements that Julia showed us some of:
Because of Russia’s demographics - a low birth rate and high number of elderly people due to millions of abortions - the Russian government now actively encourages people to have large families. There are financial incentives for those prepared to have two, three, four, five and more babies and significant help to rent accommodation in Moscow, for instance. “We have a lot of support from the government,” she said.

The entertaining guest show was a first for the conference but the national officers are already talking about continuing the same feature at each conference. I for one think it’s a good idea.

SPUC Conference: This morning's talk

Both American presidential candidates have been attacked for their “vacation of reason” on abortion and embryo research by a leading US bioethicist.

Boston Biomedical Research Institute’s senior scientist James Sherley exposed the positions of the Democrat’s Barack Obama and John McCain, the Republican candidate in the election, during this morning's (Sunday) address at the SPUC conference.

Dr Sherley said: “He [Barack Obama] was recently asked the question ‘When does life begin’? He answered: That’s above my pay grade’.

“That’s equivalent to saying ‘I’m not going to answer that question’. This is the man that is supposed to be the unity and inclusion candidate. He isn’t that. He has stated earlier that he plans on promoting abortion and wants to make it more.

“He’s saying that although, in America, one in five babies are aborted and 50 per cent of them are under 25.”

Dr Sherley said the rate from which African Americans are aborted is equivalent to the rate from which they die from all other causes.

He pointed out Republican Party candidate John McCain was in favour of embryo stem cell research. He also attacked Democrat Senator Hillary Clinton who says she hopes abortion is “safe, legal and rare”.

“In the US there are safe, legal and more than one million a year,” Dr Sherley said. “They say safe abortions are abortions that happen in abortion clinics. That doesn’t make it safe.”

Around 10 per cent of women who go onto the operating table in the US are injured at the moment of abortion.

When there is a vacation of reason, that’s “when we are most immoral”. There is no biological basis to make a moral distinction between an embryo, a baby, a child and an adult, he added.

1st talk: Dr Jeronima Teixeira

Foetuses of animals are protected more than unborn children in British law, an expert has said.

Giving the opening session at the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children’s (SPUC) 2008 national conference, professor and consultant in Obstetrics and Gynaecology Dr Jeronima Teixeira said animals were not conscious beings but still enjoyed protection than unborn children.

She said conscience was a self awareness of the past, present and future and animals do not have these objective responses.

Yet, animals are safeguarded from pain in British law whereas human foetuses have no such guarantees.

Dr Teixeiria, originally from Portugal, gave her talk on "foetal sentience" on Friday evening, detailing her research on stress responses of unborn children when they needed treatment in the womb.

She said that 20 years ago, many in the medical and scientific community thought babies in the womb did not feel pain.


"Very little scientific data was available," Dr Teixeiria said.

"Pain is very difficult to study. There’s no objective way of measuring it. It’s even more difficult on unborn children. Young children and unborn babies do not have the capacity to express their pain in words."


Despite her own instincts when practising in Portugal that they did experience pain, Dr Teixeiria and a team of colleagues set to work in London on a study into foetal responses to invasive procedures.

They looked at whether pain relief prevented or diminished responses to invasive procedures.
Dr Teixeiria concluded the "human foetus is capable of mounting a stress response to painful stimulus".


"Analgesia was able to block that stress response," she added. "In case of doubt, the foetus should be given the benefit of doubt and good medical practice should mean to protect the child from potential painful procedures at early stages in pregnancy."

Hello from Swanwick, Derbyshire

The SPUC conference is half way through and we've already had some fantastic talks.

I've constructed a press bench in the main conference hall. It's a good observation point and has a firm table on which to take notes and type copy. I'm currently sitting to the side of one of this afternoon's fridge meetings by SPUC Communications manager Paul Danon on the "Pro Life message on the internet". It's technical stuff and a lot of people look baffled by web jargon. Paul's just said that there are 1.4 billion internet users worldwide.

The Saturday of the conference is traditionally a full programme. I only had 40 minutes to pop to the nearest town, Alfreton, to buy a new camera. The battery is currently loading up and I hope to bring you some pictures later.

In between times, I'm attempting to put together copy on each talk that will form part of a conference. The first of them will follow in the next few minutes.

This weekend: SPUC Conference

Tomorrow after work I will set off from Northamptonshire to the Hayes Conference Centre, Swanwick, Derbyshire, for the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children's (SPUC) annual national conference.

This year I've been honoured with appearing on the staff duties list, even though I'm not a SPUC member of staff. After volunteering to help out, I've been given the rather appropriate title of "roving reporter". It's my job to take notes during the talks and sessions and prepare press releases to go out to the media after the conference. In this role, I've even been lucky enough to have a sneak preview of some of the talks. I hope to have internet access whilst I'm there so I can keep you updated throughout the weekend.

The keynote speakers include Dr Jerónima Teixeira, a professor and consultant in obstetrics and gynaecology, will speak on foetal sentience. Dr James Sherley, senior scientist, and leader of human adult stem cell research laboratory in the Programs in Cancer and Regenerative Biology, at the Boston Biomedical Research Institute, will give a talk entitled: "From abortion to human embryonic stem cell research: a vacation of reason."

Another talk is: "After the Human Fertilisation and Embryology bill – building resistance to abortion and other anti-life practices at local level and in Parliament" - by John Smeaton, National Director, SPUC, Paul Tully, General Secretary, SPUC, and Antonia Tully, the Safe at School Campaign Organiser.

Jakob Cornides, an independent human rights expert, will ask whether conscientious objection - is a right or a duty. SPUC Scotland's Lucy McCully will, I'm sure, inspire us with an address on youth activism in the pro-life movement.

Workshops are also an integral part of the weekend. The SPUC Safe at School campaign, women, abortion and the battle for life, opposing euthanasia by neglect, branch activist outreach to clergy and fighting the killing of disabled babies are all options for conference delegates. On the Saturday afternoon, there is also a chance to go to optional fringe meetings which this time are on the United Nations, the pro-life message and the internet and SPUC Evangelicals.

As well as the intense programme of talks and sessions, the conference is a fantastic social event. It gives opportunity for friends from different parts of the country to have a few pints in the evenings and even have a go at the Ceilidh. In the last few years, there's also been an increase in number of youngsters who make it along.

Most of all though, the event revitalises the society and spurs people on to do everything they can to provide a voice for those who don't have one - the weakest in our midst.

Trash TV

Apart from coverage of the Olympics and sport in general, TV in the last two or three months has probably been the worst I've ever known it. There's been such a lot of trash on that, most evenings, I've just got fed up and switched it off. Not a sight of a decent drama or comedy (there's not even been any decent repeats on). The documentaries and current affairs programmes are all about the "credit crunch" - something which I'm getting sick to the back teeth of hearing about probably because we're writing endless stories on it each day. For some decent entertainment, I've turned to UK Gold to watch some classic comedy.

Now that you have read my short rant, you won't be surprised to know I came across the word "Jesus" in the title of a Channel Five programme when flicking through the Sky box on Tuesday evening. I don't think I've ever seen or heard Our Blessed Lord mentioned on C5 let alone a whole hour speculating about where and with whom he was buried. As some of you may know, C5 has a reputation for its particularly bog-standard and iffy content especially, dare I say it, late at night. So, naturally, I had to look twice at the screen to realise yes, this was C5 and it was a programme about Jesus.

Of course, it was a load of rubbish. I only caught the second half hour of it - but this was enough to come to an accurate conclusion. The documentary "Secrets of the Jesus tomb" was all about exploring which tomb Jesus was buried in. Archaeological experts claim to have found the exact tomb where Jesus was laid to rest because the inscriptions on the wall show read "Jesus Son of Joseph". It explored the possibility of whether it was a family tomb.

The concept talked about is known as the "Talpiot Theory" or the "Talpiot Tomb". It was discovered in Jerusalem on March 28 1980 construction workers laying the foundations for an apartment complex. It is situated in the East Talpiot Israeli settlement five kilometers south of the Old City of Jerusalem and many scholars have not ruled out the possibility of it being where Christ was buried. There were numerous human remains in the tomb. Many archaeologists, theologians, biblical scholars and generally people with common sense reject the claim. One expert on the programme said that if you had a stadium full of people in those days, a significant minority of people would stand up if they were asked if they were "Jesus son of Joseph".

The programme also looked into that heretical old chestnut: "Was Jesus married to Mary Magdalen or to anyone else?" They also said that Christ may have had a son. I thought he did, several million in fact! Obviously they are talking about something else...

Throughout the programme, the concept of Jesus was as a famous man, possibly a prophet. There was no exploration or mention, from what I saw, about Christ being the Son of God, the Saviour of the World etc. Viewers are just left with the vague idea of Jesus of Nazareth as a radical man and no understanding of the belief that he was God made Man.

The closing remarks left an open question about the Resurrection, saying it has at least "ignited the human imagination of life after death and provided a movement that has survived for 2000 years - Christianity".

When will we get any decent, challenging religious programming on our screens. Ever...?