When a woman who is pregnant sees no alternative to abortion, because of economic or social pressure, that is not free choice.

That is never the case. What she sees is no alternative THAT IS ACCEPTABLE TO HER. She has the choice to leave her partner if he insists on her carrying to term and she doesn't want to. She has the choice to break contacts with her family, friends or church if they insist on her carrying to term and she doesn't want to. If she wants a baby, she (and her partner, if relevant) has the choice to live on relatively little money. These may not be pleasant choices to have to live with, but they're choices. The choice to have an abortion isn't a pleasant choice either.

Whatever though, the key point is recognition that the woman involved should HAVE the right to make a choice. The authors of BB's quoted article miss this vital concept - they're looking for a party which will selectively deny rights to others based on their own beliefs. Thank heavens they haven't found one.

Lest we forget why we should be thankful that they haven't found a party for themselves, remember that this is *Catholics* we're talking about here. Under Catholic rules, *any* contraception is banned. It's not just the fertilised egg that's sacred - no form of contraception whatsoever is acceptable to the Catholic church. Nor is there any tolerance of homosexuality.

Sure, plenty of Catholics use contraception, and plenty also are tolerant to homosexuality. In other words, we've established the principle that what parts of your religion you follow are your personal choice, not an absolute "I follow this religion and I will apply all its rules" situation. Which leads to the inevitable conclusion that opinions on abortion are similarly a personal choice, doesn't it?

Graham.