Latest news with #Antoniazzi
Spectator
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Spectator
Should Chris Coghlan be denied Holy Communion?
It is not, it's fair to say, a universal view among Catholic priests that MPs who vote the wrong way on assisted dying and the decriminalisation of abortion up to birth should be punished by excluding them from communion. But so it has turned out with Chris Coghlan, the Lib Dem MP for Dorking and Horley. He voted for assisted suicide and didn't vote at all on the Antoniazzi amendment allowing women to abort up to birth. Now he's complaining that his parish priest is intent on denying him communion at mass. Or as he put it on X: My Catholic Priest publicly announced at every mass he was denying me Holy Communion following the assisted dying vote. Children who are friends of my children were there. This followed a direct threat in writing to do this four days before the vote. In a piece in the Observer, he explained: I was deeply disturbed to receive an email from my local priest four days before the vote on Kim Leadbeater's assisted dying bill saying if I voted in favour I would be 'an obstinate public sinner'. Worse, I would be complicit in a 'murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded'. Such a vote would, he wrote, be 'a clear contravention of the Church's teaching, which would leave me in the position of not being able to give you holy communion, as to do so would cause scandal in the Church. The priest is in fact entitled to deny communion to those 'obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin' under canon 915 of the Code of Canon law. And plainly, in terms of the teaching of the Church, anyone voting to pass a law for assisted suicide – giving someone poison for the specific purpose of doing away with themselves, as opposed to, say, refusing life support – runs counter to the teaching of the Church in the most public possible way. The priest was arguably correct to describe him as complicit in a murderous act, though Chris Coghlan himself maintains that assisted suicide (whereby a practitioner presents the patient with a lethal dose of barbiturates or some other cocktail of toxins) is different from direct euthanasia, whereby someone, for instance, injects the patient with toxins directly. I'm not sure that's quite the distinction he thinks it is; a murderous act pretty well covers giving someone a lethal dose of poison, even if it's actually delivered by the would-be suicide (let's see how long that provision lasts). And voting to legalise this process is as morally culpable as taking part in it. The question is, whether a public denunciation is the best way to go about changing hearts and minds, even those of self-regarding LibDems. My nice liberal priest friend thinks Coghlan's priest 'is a prat and he should be ashamed of himself. It goes against everything we stand for; we're not in the business of publicly punishing people. The man presumably was following the dictates of conscience, which is the first law. I don't think it helps the church and I don't think it helps this particular chap to change his mind.' And naturally, my liberal clerical friend quotes the late Pope Francis on the matter, to the effect that 'communion is not a reward for the perfect but medicine for the soul'. That's one way of looking at it; the other, more conventional view, is that you shouldn't take the eucharist if you're in a state of grave sin. (Me, I'd like to see that definition more widely applied.) But all this fuss tends to distract, I think, from the actual issue as to whether the Church's approach to assisted suicide is right. And there's absolutely nothing in the bishops' statements on the issue that is specifically religious. That is to say, the Catholic and, I'd say, the Christian view, is nothing else than the moral view that people who aren't remotely religious can share. You may not, like the bishops, regard life as a gift from God, but there's nothing specifically Catholic about their concerns: Can MPs guarantee that the scope of the Bill will not be extended? In almost every country where assisted suicide has been introduced the current scope is wider than was originally intended. What role, if any, will the judiciary have in the process? We were told that judicial oversight was a necessary and vital part of the process; now we are told it isn't needed at all. What will protect the vulnerable from coercion, or from feeling a burden on family? Can the National Health Service cope with assisted suicide or will it, as the Health Secretary has warned, cause cuts elsewhere in the NHS? Can MPs guarantee that no medical practitioner or care worker would be compelled to take part in assisted suicide? Would this mean the establishment of a 'national death service'? In contrast to the provisions of this Bill, what is needed is first-class, compassionate palliative care at the end of our lives. This is already provided to many in our society but, tragically, is in short supply and underfunded. No-one should be dispatched as a burden to others. Instead, a good society would prioritise care for the elderly, the vulnerable, and the weak. As Cardinal Nichols put it: Once assisted suicide is approved by the law, a key protection of human life falls away. Pressure mounts on those who are nearing death, from others or even from themselves, to end their life in order to take away a perceived burden of care from their family, for the avoidance of pain, or for the sake of an inheritance. The radical change in the law now being proposed risks bringing about for all medical professionals a slow change from a duty to care to a duty to kill. Even Chris Coghlan might concede that much. This is why it's so insanely annoying that he's trotting out the usual canards about Catholicism in public life. 'I am not the Catholic MP for Dorking and Horley. I am the Liberal Democrat MP for Dorking and Horley,' he writes, a la John F. Kennedy. But there is nothing specifically religious about the Church's position – if you exclude that bit about life being God's gift. It is one which any conscientious individual might take on prudent and rational grounds, without any spiritual motivation whatever, unless we are to assume that concern for vulnerable people is a Christian prerogative. Coghlan doesn't need to swank about not being bossed about by priests – a position highly gratifying to any English parliamentarian, invoking all sorts of latent prejudice – but instead he should ask himself whether the Church itself has a point. Its argument isn't arcanely religious unless it's arcanely religious to say that human life is sacred. By turning this into a Martin Luther moment – Coghlan stands up to bossy cleric – he is distracting attention from the fact that he voted for a measure which will diminish the value of human life at its most vulnerable. I don't in fact think the priest is being helpful here, though he was perfectly within his rights to warn Chris Coghlan that his vote was at odds with his faith. Publicly condemning him risks turning this rather tiresome Lib Dem into some sort of poster boy for the rights of conscience. But conscience can be a tricky organ; influenced by fashion and opinion as well as by an innate moral sense. Right now, the real problem isn't whether Coghlan will be turned away from the altar rail; it's whether institutions such as Catholic hospices will be required to participate in assisted suicide or whether they will in fact receive specific protection by law to prevent that happening. If they are required to participate in helping people kill themselves, they'll have to close. Over to you, Chris 'Compassion' Coghlan.
Daily Mirror
20-06-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mirror
Calls for crackdown on online 'megabrothels' and sex trafficking
MP Tonia Antoniazzi has called for a crackdown on 'online megabrothels' as she urged legislators to 'confront the adult sexual exploitation being perpetrated on an industrial scale' Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi has argued that buying a cappuccino is not the same as "ordering a woman online" for sex, as she called for a crackdown on "online megabrothels". She urged lawmakers to "confront the adult sexual exploitation being perpetrated on an industrial scale by pimping websites and men who pay for sex, both of whom currently enjoy near-total legal impunity". Antoniazzi proposed a new clause two to the Government's Crime and Policing Bill, which would prohibit a third party from assisting someone in engaging in sexual activity with another person in exchange for payment. She also advocated for a ban on individuals paying for sex, either for themselves or others, through a proposed new clause three. A new clause four would repeal parts of the 66-year-old Street Offences Act, so that "loitering or soliciting for the purposes of prostitution" would no longer be considered a crime. "Pimping websites which function as massive online brothels operate openly and freely, supercharging the sex trafficking trade by making it easier and quicker for exploiters to advertise their victims," Ms Antoniazzi informed the Commons. The Gower MP continued: "These online megabrothels make millions of pounds every year by advertising thousands of vulnerable women across the world for prostitution in the UK, and sadly, our legislation allows this. 'Let's pass laws to put pimps and traffickers out of business' "The notion that paying someone for sex acts is a normal consumer activity, akin to ordering a coffee, is a damaging and misguided myth. Prostitution is a form of violence against women. Let's pass laws to put pimps and traffickers out of business." Ms Antoniazzi debunked another "myth", that a ban would drive "pimping" onto the dark web, telling MPs that accessing such platforms would "require significant technical expertise to post as well as locate and access prostitution adverts". Regarding her bid to decriminalise soliciting, the backbencher warned that the existing offence was "counter-productive and a barrier to seeking help and exiting this ruthless trade". She said: "For most of these women, their record of convictions is a record of their exploitation and abuse, and they live in fear of having to disclose this history when applying for jobs or volunteering." Ms Antoniazzi has already amended the Bill after she pressed new clause one to a vote on Tuesday. MPs backed her proposal by 379 votes to 137, majority 242, to decriminalise abortion for women acting in relation to their own pregnancies. Commons Home Affairs Committee chairwoman Dame Karen Bradley said she backed a plan to ban images and videos depicting non-fatal strangulation, by expanding the definition of "extreme pornographic images" which are illegal to possess. The former culture secretary and Conservative MP, Dame Karen, weighed in on the proposed new clause 121, stating: "This is not impacting on what people may wish to do in their private lives, but it does mean that those images would not then be available to be seen in pornographic films." She further highlighted the importance of protecting children, saying, "And it means that there's protection for children who may be looking at this pornography. We don't want them to look at it, but we're realists, we recognise this happens, and it would mean that this doesn't normalise something which is a really dangerous act and really should not be being promoted in any way." Dame Caroline Dinenage, chairwoman of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee and the one who proposed the ban on certain images, expressed her concerns, saying: "We need to send a signal that strangling your partner in bed is not safe. It can be a precursor to coercive, abusive behaviour." 'UK is a large porn consumer - one in 10 children have seen it by the age of nine' She added context to the issue by mentioning the UK's consumption of adult content: "The UK, as we know, is a large porn consumer. In any given month, over 10 million adults in the UK will access online porn, and the vast majority of them will be chaps." Dame Caroline continued without judgement but with concern: "That's up to them. We don't judge. But we also know from research that online porn is so widespread that one in 10 children have seen it by the age of nine." Highlighting the potential influence of such content, she said, "Unfortunately, it is the guide that many young people use to learn about sex, and that is why I'm extremely worried that non-fatal strangulation has been found to be rife on porn sites. "Evidence has shown that it's directly influencing the sexual behaviour of young men, who are non-consensually strangling young women during consensual sex. Recent polling has suggested that 17% of 16 to 34-year-olds have been strangled without giving consent during consensual sex. We aren't being prudes in calling for this misogynistic act to be banned in online porn." Help us improve our content by completing the survey below. We'd love to hear from you!
Rhyl Journal
18-06-2025
- Politics
- Rhyl Journal
Legislation to decriminalise abortion for women clears the Commons
MPs voted 312 to 95, majority 217 to approve the Crime and Policing Bill at third reading on Wednesday. This comes after the Commons backed Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi's amendment, which will remove the threat of 'investigation, arrest, prosecution or imprisonment' of any woman who acts in relation to her own pregnancy. The issue was treated as a matter of conscience, with MPs given a free vote and the Government remaining neutral. Downing Street said the change to abortion laws must be 'workable and safe', following Tuesday's verdict. MPs voted 379 to 137, majority 242, to back Ms Antoniazzi's amendment. A No 10 spokesman said: 'We'll look at this in detail, considering whether any changes are necessary to make it workable and safe. But, of course, this would not change the intent of the amendment passed.' The spokesman added: 'As with all laws, the Government has a responsibility to ensure it is safe and workable.' The Bill will now undergo further scrutiny in the House of Lords. It will also introduce a two-step verification process for the sale of knives and crossbows purchased online, and greater protections for emergency workers from racial and religious abuse during house calls are also included in the Bill. Speaking during report stage on Tuesday, Ms Antoniazzi said she pushed for the change in the law after cases of women being investigated by police over suspected illegal abortions. The Gower MP said: 'This is the right change at the right time. I implore colleagues who want to protect women and girls and abortion services to vote for new clause one. 'Let's ensure that not a single desperate woman ever again is subject to traumatic, criminal investigation at the worst moments in their lives.' Medics or others who facilitate an abortion after the 24-week time limit could still face prosecution if the change becomes law. Though the Government took a neutral stance on the vote, several Cabinet ministers were among the MPs who backed the amendment. They included Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Pat McFadden, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, Defence Secretary John Healey, Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander, Environment Secretary Steve Reed, Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn, Scotland Secretary Ian Murray, Wales Secretary Jo Stevens and Commons Leader Lucy Powell. Kemi Badenoch and many members of the Conservative front bench voted against it but shadow education secretary Laura Trott voted in favour. Abortion in England and Wales currently remains a criminal offence unless with an authorised provider up to 24 weeks into a pregnancy, with very limited circumstances allowing one after this time, such as when the mother's life is at risk or the child would be born with a severe disability. It is also legal to take prescribed medication at home if a woman is under 10 weeks pregnant. Efforts to change the law to protect women from prosecution follow repeated calls to repeal sections of the 19th century law, the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act, after abortion was decriminalised in Northern Ireland in 2019.
South Wales Argus
18-06-2025
- Politics
- South Wales Argus
Legislation to decriminalise abortion for women clears the Commons
MPs voted 312 to 95, majority 217 to approve the Crime and Policing Bill at third reading on Wednesday. This comes after the Commons backed Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi's amendment, which will remove the threat of 'investigation, arrest, prosecution or imprisonment' of any woman who acts in relation to her own pregnancy. The issue was treated as a matter of conscience, with MPs given a free vote and the Government remaining neutral. Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi (Chris McAndrew/PA) Downing Street said the change to abortion laws must be 'workable and safe', following Tuesday's verdict. MPs voted 379 to 137, majority 242, to back Ms Antoniazzi's amendment. A No 10 spokesman said: 'We'll look at this in detail, considering whether any changes are necessary to make it workable and safe. But, of course, this would not change the intent of the amendment passed.' The spokesman added: 'As with all laws, the Government has a responsibility to ensure it is safe and workable.' The Bill will now undergo further scrutiny in the House of Lords. It will also introduce a two-step verification process for the sale of knives and crossbows purchased online, and greater protections for emergency workers from racial and religious abuse during house calls are also included in the Bill. Speaking during report stage on Tuesday, Ms Antoniazzi said she pushed for the change in the law after cases of women being investigated by police over suspected illegal abortions. The Gower MP said: 'This is the right change at the right time. I implore colleagues who want to protect women and girls and abortion services to vote for new clause one. 'Let's ensure that not a single desperate woman ever again is subject to traumatic, criminal investigation at the worst moments in their lives.' Medics or others who facilitate an abortion after the 24-week time limit could still face prosecution if the change becomes law. Though the Government took a neutral stance on the vote, several Cabinet ministers were among the MPs who backed the amendment. They included Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Pat McFadden, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, Defence Secretary John Healey, Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander, Environment Secretary Steve Reed, Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn, Scotland Secretary Ian Murray, Wales Secretary Jo Stevens and Commons Leader Lucy Powell. Kemi Badenoch and many members of the Conservative front bench voted against it but shadow education secretary Laura Trott voted in favour. Abortion in England and Wales currently remains a criminal offence unless with an authorised provider up to 24 weeks into a pregnancy, with very limited circumstances allowing one after this time, such as when the mother's life is at risk or the child would be born with a severe disability. It is also legal to take prescribed medication at home if a woman is under 10 weeks pregnant. Efforts to change the law to protect women from prosecution follow repeated calls to repeal sections of the 19th century law, the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act, after abortion was decriminalised in Northern Ireland in 2019.
Leader Live
18-06-2025
- Politics
- Leader Live
Legislation to decriminalise abortion for women clears the Commons
MPs voted 312 to 95, majority 217 to approve the Crime and Policing Bill at third reading on Wednesday. This comes after the Commons backed Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi's amendment, which will remove the threat of 'investigation, arrest, prosecution or imprisonment' of any woman who acts in relation to her own pregnancy. The issue was treated as a matter of conscience, with MPs given a free vote and the Government remaining neutral. Downing Street said the change to abortion laws must be 'workable and safe', following Tuesday's verdict. MPs voted 379 to 137, majority 242, to back Ms Antoniazzi's amendment. A No 10 spokesman said: 'We'll look at this in detail, considering whether any changes are necessary to make it workable and safe. But, of course, this would not change the intent of the amendment passed.' The spokesman added: 'As with all laws, the Government has a responsibility to ensure it is safe and workable.' The Bill will now undergo further scrutiny in the House of Lords. It will also introduce a two-step verification process for the sale of knives and crossbows purchased online, and greater protections for emergency workers from racial and religious abuse during house calls are also included in the Bill. Speaking during report stage on Tuesday, Ms Antoniazzi said she pushed for the change in the law after cases of women being investigated by police over suspected illegal abortions. The Gower MP said: 'This is the right change at the right time. I implore colleagues who want to protect women and girls and abortion services to vote for new clause one. 'Let's ensure that not a single desperate woman ever again is subject to traumatic, criminal investigation at the worst moments in their lives.' Medics or others who facilitate an abortion after the 24-week time limit could still face prosecution if the change becomes law. Though the Government took a neutral stance on the vote, several Cabinet ministers were among the MPs who backed the amendment. They included Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Pat McFadden, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, Defence Secretary John Healey, Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander, Environment Secretary Steve Reed, Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn, Scotland Secretary Ian Murray, Wales Secretary Jo Stevens and Commons Leader Lucy Powell. Kemi Badenoch and many members of the Conservative front bench voted against it but shadow education secretary Laura Trott voted in favour. Abortion in England and Wales currently remains a criminal offence unless with an authorised provider up to 24 weeks into a pregnancy, with very limited circumstances allowing one after this time, such as when the mother's life is at risk or the child would be born with a severe disability. It is also legal to take prescribed medication at home if a woman is under 10 weeks pregnant. Efforts to change the law to protect women from prosecution follow repeated calls to repeal sections of the 19th century law, the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act, after abortion was decriminalised in Northern Ireland in 2019.
