The President of the Pontifical Academy for Life said that abortion law 194 was a “pillar” of Italian society. Lawyer Giovanni Formicola clarifies the meaning of such controversial affirmations.
Newsroom (13/09/2022 4:00 PM, Gaudium Press) On Marco Tosatti’s much visited blog, an interesting reflection by lawyer Giovanni Formicola has appeared these days, in which he analyzes the recent statements of Bishop Vincenzo Paglia, President of the Pontifical Academy for Life, when he stated, on Rai 3, that abortion law 194 was a “pillar” of society. The Bishop also stated that there were good elements in that law, such as a certain support for motherhood, which had not been developed.
Analyzing these statements, Giovanni Formicola first recalls that this “perverse law” was the one that introduced “a true ‘right to abortion’ in our Italian legal system.” He goes on to state that the mentioned ‘good parts’ of Law 194 are only “fig leaves to cover the shame of the abomination itself.
It’s make-up, fig leaves to cover the shame
He maintains that the said ‘good parts’ of this law on the killing of innocents are only cosmetic, noting that after more than 40 years of its enactment, and after several governments and parliamentary majorities, these “‘good parts’ have not been implemented,” and that this is “only because there is nothing to implement: they are foreign to the sense of the norms that the law provides for, they are only a fig leaf, which allows the ‘beautiful souls’ that the good ones have become, to look at it without shame, indeed, even with a little admiration.
Formicola says that, backed by this law, abortionists consider abortion a value, a “pillar” of Italian society, and that anything that might contradict this “pillar” – such as, for example, proposals to inform with an ultrasound the mothers who wish to abort their child, or to bury these murdered children as human beings – fills them with anger and indignation.
“For abortionists, abortion is a “value”, it is one of the pillars of a society built on the antiprinciple of the total liberation of the ego and its desires, and therefore also of the separation of sexual pleasure from its natural beneficial and procreative effects: with contraceptives, with abortions, with acts against nature. And, therefore, the subject of abortion is not mentioned,” points out the lawyer.
Formicola expresses this precisely by fearing the indignation of abortionists: “those who should be in the front line to ‘touch the subject’ [abortion] fear viscous aggression and are silent, self-censoring, dialoguing and making themselves a ‘beautiful soul’ in search of a plan acceptable (they believe) to all.”
The lawyer concludes by saying that the heart of the issue in this matter “is not the bad guys,” “but the compromising nature of ‘beautiful souls'” who “seek good where there is none, and avoid asserting this good as such.”
Compiled by Angelica Vecchiato