Abortion

[sam76]

The Vics are punching on about legalising abortion right now.

Quite frankly, I'm suprised that in this day and age it's such an issue.

IMO Abortion should be a right for every woman.

 

[freddy2]

Quite frankly, I'm suprised that in this day and age it's such an issue.

Don't underestimate the religious nutters ability to force their fairy tale beliefs onto others.

 

[springhill]

The Vics are punching on about legalising abortion right now.

Quite frankly, I'm suprised that in this day and age it's such an issue.

IMO Abortion should be a right for every woman.

Correct me if im wrong but its not abortion per se the Vics are debating, its abortion after the 24th week, which is completely different

 

[Glen48]

We need to get ALL religions of the front page and put it on the same level as Bingo or the P&C. Religion has no place in deciding what we should do.
Then we can allow birth control sex education etc. sadly Religion is the World's oldest profession and is here to stay.

 

[fimmwolf]

New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria: Judicial interpretations of what is “unlawful” under the Crimes Act permit abortion on maternal health grounds only.


Tasmania: Legislation is along the lines of Victoria’s judicial interpretation of “unlawful”.


Western Australia: Legislative changes have made abortion legal until 20 weeks’ gestation.


South Australia: Grounds for lawful abortion include a maternal health ground and a fetal disability ground.


Northern Territory: Has similar provisions to those of South Australia up to 14 weeks’ gestation.


Australian Capital Territory: Abortion has been removed from criminal statutes.


About 100 000 abortions are performed each year in Australia ”” more than one for every three livebirths. Less than 2% of these abortions are for fetal abnormality,the others being for social or economic reasons. And Australians support access to abortion ”” for two decades, opinion polls have consistently shown that the majority of Australians support women’s right to choose, and believe that forcing a woman to have an unwanted child is worse than allowing abortion. Prenatal screening is virtually universal. If a problem that is likely to lead to serious handicap is detected, most Australian women will seek an abortion, and the community overwhelmingly supports such decisions.

cited from:

http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/181_04_160804/dec10242_fm.html

I can find sound arguments both for and against abortion. So I don't know where to stand on this issue.

 

[spartn]

Hi Guyz

I am okay with Abortion in Victoria, the only thing I am unhappy about is the fact that they want women to have the ability to have an abortion up to 24 weeks (6 months) in my opinion this is just wrong to me it should be around a maximum of 12 weeks. There are so many women who give birth to children way before the 9 month period. Sometimes even 8 weeks early, and to have the ability to have an abortion at 24 weeks when you should of had it at 12 weeks. Too me it then becomes a question of 'Murder' not a right.

Cheers

Spartn

:viking:

 

[malachii]

Don't underestimate the religious nutters ability to force their fairy tale beliefs onto others.

Why is it that if you don't agree with abortion you are automatically a religious nutter??

malachii

 

[freddy2]

Why is it that if you don't agree with abortion you are automatically a religious nutter??

malachii

You're not, if you don't try and force your opinion on others who don't believe in sky fairies. Sure members of religious communities can choose not to have abortions but why tell others what to do when it doesn't affect them. As someone stated earlier in the thread - "forcing a woman to have an unwanted child is worse than allowing abortion".

 

[agro]

against abortion unless the fetus is in early stages...

how come killing an innocent baby (especially if it is almost developed) is not a crime yet killing a fully developed adult is?

also,

i thought that australia needs the population numbers..

no wonder we are changing colour, no one is having babies



babies have no say in the matter !! once more, who is to say that these babies that are killed don't turn out to be professors

 

[cuttlefish]

If only society could be ideal ... but it itsn't. Some women will find themselves unexpectedly pregnant and after a few days will know in their hearts that they want to nuture and raise this beautiful thing inside them in spite of it being unexpected. Others will feel sick with the responsibility so early in life. Others will want to have the baby but will feel pressured by their partners, parents or others in society to let it go. Whether the baby would or would not have been born into a good, nurturing environment is always difficult to know - there are many babies born into an environment of abuse and neglect - is this the better thing for them? Is it more likely that an unwanted baby will be born into this sort of environment than a stable nurturing one?

I don't know the answers, but until I do I'm more than happy to allow the woman, who will have the 24 hour a day, 7 day a week, 365 days a year, for the next 20 years, responsibility, to decide.

 

[peterh]

Against abortion.

Who speaks up for the unborn baby? If women are entitled to choice then why aren't the babies? Babies are not just tissue within the mothers body like an appendix for example, they are unique human beings.

 

[Julia]

If only society could be ideal ... but it itsn't. Some women will find themselves unexpectedly pregnant and after a few days will know in their hearts that they want to nuture and raise this beautiful thing inside them in spite of it being unexpected. Others will feel sick with the responsibility so early in life. Others will want to have the baby but will feel pressured by their partners, parents or others in society to let it go. Whether the baby would or would not have been born into a good, nurturing environment is always difficult to know - there are many babies born into an environment of abuse and neglect - is this the better thing for them? Is it more likely that an unwanted baby will be born into this sort of environment than a stable nurturing one?

I don't know the answers, but until I do I'm more than happy to allow the woman, who will have the 24 hour a day, 7 day a week, 365 days a year, for the next 20 years, responsibility, to decide.

Cuttlefish, I was trying to decide how to express how I felt about this issue, and then I read your post. I just don't have anything to add. Thank you.

 

[freddy2]

Who speaks up for the unborn baby? If women are entitled to choice then why aren't the babies? Babies are not just tissue within the mothers body like an appendix for example, they are unique human beings.

Meainigless semantics. If you want to impose morality on society you are going to have to come up with logical reasons why society is better off with abortion being made illegal. For example, theft should be illegal as society would not function properly because there would be no incentive to work and be productive. A society where theft is legal is far worse than a society where theft is illegal. Why is society better off forcing a woman to have an unwanted child rather than allowing abortion?

 

[refined silver]

Meainigless semantics. If you want to impose morality on society you are going to have to come up with logical reasons why society is better off with abortion being made illegal. For example, theft should be illegal as society would not function properly because there would be no incentive to work and be productive. A society where theft is legal is far worse than a society where theft is illegal. Why is society better off forcing a woman to have an unwanted child rather than allowing abortion?

On the basis of your logic, we should kill cripples, elderly who who no longer needed, and anyone else "we" don't consider benefits society. A short Austrian guy with a mo had the same ideas 70 yrs ago.

 

[freddy2]

On the basis of your logic, we should kill cripples, elderly who who no longer needed, and anyone else "we" don't consider benefits society. A short Austrian guy with a mo had the same ideas 70 yrs ago.

Wow, a straw man argument and proving Godwin's Law all in 1 short post!

You totally misunderstand my point and instead reframe into what you think I said. A valid comparison would be saying is society better if it allows the killing of cripples and elderly. I would argue today's society is better off not killing cripples and elderly, as amongst many reasons who is going to decide who benefits society or not and thus is killed. There is no valid comparison here to the situation of a pregnant woman and abortion.

So again I ask the religious nutters - Why is society better off forcing a woman to have an unwanted child rather than allowing abortion?

 

[refined silver]

Wow, a straw man argument and proving Godwin's Law all in 1 short post!

You totally misunderstand my point and instead reframe into what you think I said. A valid comparison would be saying is society better if it allows the killing of cripples and elderly. I would argue today's society is better off not killing cripples and elderly, as amongst many reasons who is going to decide who benefits society or not and thus is killed. There is no valid comparison here to the situation of a pregnant woman and abortion.

So again I ask the religious nutters - Why is society better off forcing a woman to have an unwanted child rather than allowing abortion?

No, my inference from your logic was exactly correct.

The two questions are:

1. When does life begin?
and
2. Is human life intrinsically valuable in itself, or does society, carers, guardians, parents etc, have the right to choose whether to terminate a life of someone weak and unable to speak for themselves, and considered unnecessary by society.

As to the "religious nutters", thats about your 4th slag off on it. Not sure how you get from valuing life and protecting the innocent, to religious nutter.

 

[freddy2]

No, my inference from your logic was exactly correct.

The two questions are:

1. When does life begin?
and
2. Is human life intrinsically valuable in itself, or does society, carers, guardians, parents etc, have the right to choose whether to terminate a life of someone weak and unable to speak for themselves, and considered unnecessary by society.

As to the "religious nutters", thats about your 4th slag off on it. Not sure how you get from valuing life and protecting the innocent, to religious nutter.

I disagree, your inference was totally wrong. My basic points are solely to do with abortion and its affect on society. It is not to do with any other situations which you try and bring into the discussion. Yes, those circimstances share some similarity but are not equivalent.

1) Meaningless and arbitrary. What is your definition of "life". I could say life begins at the "big bang" formation of the universe, or at conception, or when the sperm and eggs are formed. Is a child born without a brain defined as "life"? And once I make a definition what purpose does that serve - it adds nothing to the discussion unless you want to make statements backed up with no logic like "God tells me all life is sacred".

2) Women should have the right to terminate an unborn baby. In other case you mention, no. Most people are able to differentiate circumstances rather than lumping them together as you have done.

I get "religious nutter" because almost all people opposed to abortion and trying to force this on other people get their moraility from a god rather than logic/philosophy - ie god tells me what is moral/right/good rather than something is moral/right/good for logical reasons.

 

[peterh]

Wow, a straw man argument and proving Godwin's Law all in 1 short post!

You totally misunderstand my point and instead reframe into what you think I said. A valid comparison would be saying is society better if it allows the killing of cripples and elderly. I would argue today's society is better off not killing cripples and elderly, as amongst many reasons who is going to decide who benefits society or not and thus is killed. There is no valid comparison here to the situation of a pregnant woman and abortion.

So again I ask the religious nutters - Why is society better off forcing a woman to have an unwanted child rather than allowing abortion?

Any society that cannot or will not defend its most vulnerable and innocent members is a society in terminal decay.

Why is there no valid comparison between killing unborn babies and killing the elderly and crippled? Killing the elderly and crippled is a logical progression from killing unwanted babies. Babies are being aborted because they are unwanted, inconvenient, unplanned, etc. It could be argued that the elderly and crippled in some cases are unwanted, inconvenient, and a burden and expense to society so we should get rid of them too.

Even so this misses the main point about abortion. Is abortion murder and thus illegal, that is the main point. If it is true that the foetus which is terminated is not really human, but is just a blob of protoplasm, or at best a potential life, then abortion is not much different than removing a tonsil. But if the foetus is a living human being, then the whole story changes.

Biology and science are pretty clear on this. At conception a wholly unique individual is formed, complete with its own genetic makeup. It is not just one more cell of the mother, but a distinct and different life. As one philosopher explains, the zygote "is completely individual, it's completely different. It's got its own genetic code. If you cloned any cell in the mother's body, you'd get a replica of Mommy. But if you cloned the zygote, you'd get a totally different person."

 

[Green08]

Any society that cannot or will not defend its most vulnerable and innocent members is a society in terminal decay.
QUOTE]

I am speaking from Personal experience. I have an autistic son, he is 19 years old I have been by his side fitting for his rights at local and state governemnt level to access assistance which is taken for granted. If I knew I was pregnant again with a child suffering any disability I would terminate it immediately. I have watched his suffering and struggle through life and it has been heart wrenching at times. That is not fair to bring a child into this world where in reality they do not receive the same assistance as others and living on the disability pension is a pure joke. The waiting lists in some regions for speech therapy is 2 years! Private is expensive when done on a regular basis.

Those of you who do not agree with abortion need to expand you thoughts. How much will a child suffer. Do you have adequate support to raise the child. Do you know how much time a single parent needs a day to support a child like this with very little assistance. I support those who make a well thought out decision to not have children if they believe they can't raise the child or cope with the challenges it will present.

 

[gav]

I am neither for or against, it is a far too complex issue for me to have a black and white answer. For those of you who appose abortion, I ask you this:

If you (if you are female), or your partner (if you are male), or a friend/relative of yours was raped (and fell pregnant because of the rape), do you still believe that person should be forced to have the baby?