Last Saturday, the writer Ana Iris Simón, from La Mancha, published a article in the media in which he collaborates, ‘El País’, entitled ‘A pain that does not fit the slogan’. He said that he had never heard a testimony like that of Leire Navaridas, “much less in a major media outlet”. Leire, who had voluntarily aborted in 2008, happily attended the 8M demonstration in 2018. But the posters claiming abortion as a feminist right stirred something in her, and she decided to make her testimony public, writes Ana Iris.
“According to her, she spent several years undergoing psychological treatment for the after-effects of that voluntary abortion, which was followed by another spontaneous one”. And “Leire became certain that to abort is to end a life. With the life of a child. According to what she told me off camera,” the columnist continued, “for her the sacredness of life has nothing to do with theological arguments but with human ones.
Eugenic society
Ana Iris Simón has been thinking about this issue for some time. For example, in June 2024 she told in the same media the story of a three-year-old girl with Down syndrome. Her parents decided to go ahead with the pregnancy, and left a letter in the school locker, where they explained that for them it was a gift to have brought her into the world, and so they told it. In her opinion, the fact that most children with Down syndrome are aborted reflects the fact that we live in “a eugenic society”.
Progressivism, according to Delibes
These days I have rummaged in my computer a little tweet from Simon, dated April 24 of this year, three days after the death of Pope Francis. Ana Iris said: “These days, those who want to sell Pope Francis as a progressive and not as what he was (a Catholic) put a but: abortion. But, is abortion progressive? In ABC, in the 80s, the great Miguel Delibes wrote this”.
And it refers to a photograph of Miguel Delibes (Valladolid, 1920 - Valladolid, 2010), where, when clicked, some paragraphs of an article by the Castilian writer appear, but not all of them. The full text was published by Delibes in ABC, under the title ‘Aborto libre y progresismo”’, on December 14, 1986. The same newspaper republished on December 20, 2007.
“Progressive anti-abortionist, almost inconceivable?”
In the paragraphs selected by the writer from La Mancha, the central theme is progressivism, what is progressive. The author of ‘Cinco horas con Mario’, or ‘Los santos inocentes’ says:
“And the fact is that abortionism has come to be included among the postulates of modern ‘progressivism’. In our time it is almost inconceivable to have an anti-abortionist progressive. For them, anyone who opposes free abortion is a retrograde, a position that, as they say, leaves many people, socially advanced, with their asses in the air”.
“In the past, progressivism responded to a very simple scheme: support for the weak, pacifism and non-violence,” the writer continued. “Years later, progressivism added to this creed the defense of Nature. But the problem of abortion arose and, faced with it, progressivism hesitated. For the progressive, the weak were the worker against the employer, the child against the adult, the black against the white. It was necessary to take sides with them. For the progressive, war, nuclear energy, the death penalty, any form of violence, were recusable”. (...).
The embryo, helpless, defenseless, defenseless life
“But the problem of abortion arose, of chain abortion, free abortion... (...) The embryo, a helpless and defenseless life, could be attacked with impunity. Its weakness mattered nothing if its elimination was carried out by means of painless, scientific and sterilized violence”, denounced Delibes. Because, following his line of argument, the logical thing for progressivism would have been to support the weak, in this case the embryo.
Miguel Delibes concluded: “Because if progressivism is not defending life, the smallest and most needy, against social aggression... what am I doing here? Because for these progressives who still defend the defenseless and reject any form of violence, that is, they still abide by the old principles, nausea is equally produced before an atomic explosion, a gas chamber or a sterilized operating room”.
The arguments can be multiplied. Here we have limited ourselves to follow the thread, the ball pass from Simon to Delibes, with the testimony of Navaridas. And to reflect in part arguments, which seem honest and give food for thought, along the lines that I suggested a couple of years ago Javier García Herrería.
Español 
English 
Italiano