The abortion legislation is an effort to ensure that women who make a decision concerning their own right to decide a personal issue gets proper medical care.

Backyard abortions have been a fact of life for centuries and too many women lost their lives, and too many older children lost a caring parent because, in past eras women, decided that a particular pregnancy was not in her interest or in the interests of an already existing family.

I am near the statistical life expectancy for an Australian man. I want the right to to say enough is enough or to have someone, that I have authorised to say so, to say, " Enough is enough, end it!"

As a contented atheist who had a cameo interview role in the new Richard Dawkins/ Lawrence Krauss film, I do not want religious moralists to have any sway over my life or the lives of my friends and family.

I rate my own ethical behaviour well ahead of any member of any church. For example, I would never indoctrinate a child.
In colloquial terms, this author can "Go to hell!"

Dear LEGO and Foyle,

While I completely agree with you about the arrogance and inappropriateness of this article, I protest the fact that you attribute the folly of this article to religion.

Mind you, the author himself did not mention a word about God or religion or any similar term in his article.

The so-called "sanctity of life", at least in Australia, has become a secular idea, held by many atheists, agnostics and humanists. It has been exaggerated over the top by both major parties and even by the Greens, so there is nothing specifically religious about it.
(it was likely developed as a secular endeavour in support the financial/power interests of the AMA Mafia, but this goes beyond the scope of this topic)

Religion puts more emphasis on one's spirit or soul, rather than insisting on the persistence of one's physical/biological body. God has not ordained such crazy ideas in the first place and over history, churches too did not emphasise this "sanctity of life" or acted accordingly either - it rather is a modern fashion.

So please give credit to the deserving and no discredit to the innocent.
Thank you.

Ms Bullock
'The Voluntary Euthanasia Bill raises the question of whether our election to parliament gives us the right to sanction the killing of other human beings in circumstances other than self-defence or the defence of the nation. This is not a difficult question. The answer is simple. No. We do not have such a right. We do not have the right to sanction the killing of our fellow human beings. For that reason alone I oppose the bill'.

Ms Bullock,
your election to parliament doesn't give you the
right to stand in front of the cupboard with the humane, end-of
life-drugs in it, for people dying in agony, who in self-defence wish
to end their suffering. I and my fellow humans are quite capable
of administering those drugs or injections to ourselves, if we so
decide when our time comes, you don't have any right to stand in
our way as though you had some divine right to the medicine cabinet.

Who do you think you are? really! Are you more worried about
making sure you get to heaven than you are about the suffering
of dying people. I suggest it is all about you.

How many times have I said this. If those who are against abortion put up your hand to support women who can't handle any more children. Sit outside abortion clinics & offer to take on the responsibility for every foetus in line for abortion. I'm sure the anti abortion crowd would dwindle in a blink.