From a progressive perspective it makes good sense to kill 80,000 babies a year.
This provides the opportunity to increase Australia's immigration intake by 80,000 per year.
Furthermore, these immigrants are already diverse and don't need to be indoctrinated into
diversity in our schools like the 80,000 babies would if their mothers didn't choose to kill them.
Accelerated multiculturalism can only be good for Australia.

Agree Celivia!

Proxy- and here comes the mention of immigration and multiculturalism- the WORST argument against abortion yet (the race to branch-stack against immigrant numbers).

That's right, King Hazza.

Proxy it looks so uneducated if you talk about the killing of babies.
Why don't you and Rhys not use the proper terms? When talking about abortion, talk about the embryo or foetus.
Not about "unborn children" or babies!
Oh I know why you prefer to talk about babies: for emotive reasons.

I'm sure that someone has edified you about this already- which means you are constantly lying if you keep repeating the same old emotive, incorrect terminology

Face it: there are no children or babies killed when abortions are performed.
Killing babies would be called infanticide, would it not?

And the term "unborn children", is such an obvious and emotive anti-choice term to use!

I'm sure that this has been explained to you before in your lifetime, but I'm going to hammer it in till you, anti-choicers, get it: do you call a ball of yarn an unknitted jumper? An acorn an ungrown oak? A grass seed an ungrown blade of grass?
And, one of my own: do you call an adult or elderly person an undead body?

You and Rhys should start to at least debate abortion by using the correct terminology and by being honest.

Oops, I wasn't going to debate abortion! But the euthanasia debate is a bit stale now that the opponents have no arguments left, and I couldn't stand these lies from the anti-abortion brigade any longer!

Dear Celivia you said:

//Proxy it looks so uneducated if you talk about the killing of babies.//

and your trivializing of such a mini holocaust is &^%$#@ SCARY!

Dear AGIR,

Abortion is neither a mini-holocaust or any kind of Holocaust. You are doing what you accuse others of doing. You are trivialising the Holocaust. Your use of emotive language and inappropriate comparisons does not add to understanding.

A foetus or embryo is not a baby.

There should be no abortions. Men and women should use proper contraceptive measures if they are going to have sex and do not want the woman to get pregnant. It is reasonable to campaign for proper education in the use of contraceptives. I think that should be part of sex education in the schools.

Since people do not always take precautions or sometimes precautions fail abortion is sometimes necessary. It is not for you with your primitive superstition to decide whether it is necessary. It can be done by a coathanger or unqualified abortionist. It is better that it be done by a competent doctor.

Do you understand?

It is more than convenient that unborn children can be classified as non-human.
This facilitates the practice of partial birth abortion.
By partially birthing the non-human, its skull can be accessed for puncture and cranial vacuum.
Ensuring the process is completed before birth helps to reassure us that the subject is a non-human,
and not a human as it demonstrably would be if it were allowed to be born and then had its brains sucked out.
I believe this practice has been banned by those fundamentalist reactionaries in the USA,
who can't quite grasp the nuances of human versus non-human.
Progressives can celebrate that there has been no such ban in Australia,
and can therefore rest easy that non-humans are being terminated in humane style.