The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > RU486 - something to be said for considered debate > Comments

RU486 - something to be said for considered debate : Comments

By Andrew Laming, published 16/2/2006

Where substantial ethical concerns exist, Parliament should retain the option to resume the power delegated to the Therapeutic Goods Adminsistration when required.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 31
  11. 32
  12. 33
  13. All
I think that alot of people are not thinking about the actual people here , some women and young girls will want to use RU486 because they dont have to be seen walking away from an abortion clinic.

Alot of men who are posting comments on here should also think about what they are typing before they actually post it , NO MAN can possibly understand what these women and young girls go through when they make their decision.

I have read the pros and cons regarding RU486 and I agree that there isnt a need for it when you can get an abortion if you feel you need one,but there will be still the ones that use this drug and no man has any right to debate this subject!
Posted by Rachael, Friday, 17 February 2006 11:53:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Philo writes, “Abortion and having children is a whole of society issue” and “The future emotional state of our society depends upon how mothers view and treat their children.” Last time I checked, it is a man and a woman that decide to have a child. I didn’t see anyone else in the bedroom besides those two. The man and the woman are then supposed to raise the child. Once again, I don’t see anyone else in the room, reading the child a bedtime story each night. Let the state build roads and bridges and hospitals. Let the state police the law of the land. But please, let the mother and father do the decision-making and then the raising (as much as possible). Or can’t we ‘trust’ them? Are such decisions too important to be left to the Good Folk Of The Land?

“It is a social problem that women are aborting their babies.” No, it’s a personal choice, but yes, perhaps ‘society’ isn’t happy about it. Once again, I don’t see anyone else fronting up to the abortion clinic besides the woman, and perhaps her (male) partner/husband/etc. I’m just not sure that anyone else besides the two people involved has earnt the right to then decide the matter for the couple. If you take away the couple’s right to make their own decisions, can you go on to hold them fully responsible thereafter for raising the child? Which way do you want things?
Posted by When_The_Going_Gets_Weird, Friday, 17 February 2006 12:53:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
When_The_Going_Gets_Weird,
True it is the parents role to care for children. But who provides child care, Education and community vacilities for children? These children grow up to pay tax to maintain welfare systems for parents, children and society.

We are now entering a period when the working population is below the essential level to maintain current welfare needs to children and the aged services that we expect. Over the last 30 years in Australia 5,000,000 potential children have been aborted that would now be entering the workforce to maintain our standard of living. So expect lower standards of living and higher taxes in the future.

The current population growth is 1.7% [including Muslim growth at 4.2%] and of that total the Muslim population growth is occurring above doubling itself each generation because they do not believe in abortion or their women indulging in promiscuis sex. This will chance the social mix of our future population. As in 50 years all those above current childbearing age will be dead. So anti-abortionists will make up a higher percentage of the population. How is it those anti-abortionists survive without abortion while you expect it as essential to your survival as an adult?

Quote, "Let the state build roads and bridges and hospitals. Let the state police the law of the land. But please, let the mother and father do the decision-making and then the raising (as much as possible). Or can't we trust them? Are such decisions too important to be left to the Good Folk Of The Land?"

The "Good Folk" are the Government of the land who have their representatives to speak and vote on issues on the good Folks behalf.
Posted by Philo, Friday, 17 February 2006 3:32:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Interesting how the decline in population growth has become the new catchcry for the anti-choice crowd..we need more babies, more babies - Yeah, the world is really short on people, isn't it? All that spare land, spare resources..lets just a keep on breedin!

Aborting ourselves out of existence, what a load of crap, what we are seeing is society adapting to the fact that we don't need to (and ultimately can't) just keep on increasing in numbers. Its not secular atheist types that are out of touch with reality, its those that insist on following every literal prescription in some dusty old book and breeding like crazy to increase the numbers of their tribe..Well maybe you will get what you want and you can all sit around in your squalid repressed overpopulated theocracy waiting for armageddon or whatever, but not if I can help it. Vote religous politicians out!
Posted by hellothere, Friday, 17 February 2006 9:09:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"The current population growth is 1.7% [including Muslim growth at 4.2%] and of that total the Muslim population growth is occurring above doubling itself each generation because they do not believe in abortion or their women indulging in promiscuis sex. This will chance the social mix of our future population"

Philo, I get the impression that your main concern seems to be that Muslims are outbreeding Christians, so you think Christians should have more babies to outbreed Muslims, as you want your religion
to dominate. I think thats all a bit simplistic and certainly not sustainable. In your fervour you seem quite happy to deny women their human rights, again very sad. Women are not simply breeding machines. Having kids is optional.

Fact is the world is still increasing by 80 million a year, which is not sustainable either. Australia can take in extra migrants at any time, to solve all the problems that you mention.

In Islamic countries they are more then aware of the problems of simply too many people and are trying to do something about it.
http://www.islamonline.net/English/contemporary/2005/05/article03.shtml

Every woman on this planet should have the right to family planning and abortion in the first tremester. What we are doing to this planet on a global scale is simply not sustainable. How many people do you think we need? 10 billion? 15 billion? 20 billion. Since
we can't live sustainably with 6 billion, religious competitions of trying to outbreed each other will mean doom for all, especially the one planet that we have and should live on sustainably.
Posted by Yabby, Friday, 17 February 2006 9:34:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pericles stop attacking the man. The same thing can be done to you. Alan Grey could reply "Pericles you are clearly an anti-god botherer libertine bent on spreading your base philosophy around Australia". We get no where when we do that.

If people are choosing poorly and my whole country is at risk I'd expect my elected leaders to do something about it.

Its not a good long term strategy for politicians to play to people's personal weaknesses and self-interest. In polling it may seem to be, but we lose respect for our leaders when they fail to make the hard decisions.

Abortion is mostly a wicked act. We need to do everything we can to change attitudes in society to sex and what freedom really is so that women find themselves in this position much less often.

All of us, when we are sexually self indulgent contribute to this permissive sexual morality. When we purchase and view explicit material, in our language, in our slowness to criticise creators of this stuff. We are all responsible for the deaths of these innocent lives.

Once upon a time the decadent sexual behaviour allowed today would be called shameful. It ought to be called that again. We are failing our young people, adults now see no need to restrict their sexual self expression as if it had no effects outside themselves.

There are no private sins. Everything we do has a public effect. We can darken our consciences, stain our psyches in private so that we become the kind of person who cannot do any public good.
Posted by Martin Ibn Warriq, Sunday, 19 February 2006 1:44:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 31
  11. 32
  12. 33
  13. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy