'Your sympathy seems to be reserved for fetuses regardless of the damage it might do to a woman to go to term.'

and you David f appear very ignorant of the long term affects emotionally and otherwise that choose this barbaric practice.

btw by redefining Jews as not being people did not change their humanity. It only justified murderers in their own mind. Call them fetuses but does not change the fact they are human.

I call them fetuses because that's what they are. As long as they are in a woman's body she should have the right to say whether she wants to go to term. You are not going bring up the child if it is born. You are not going to have to care of a handicapped child. You just quote phony statistics and want to decide what somebody else should do.

When I was in Holland I knew a man who was against abortion. However, he took responsibility. For every woman his group persuaded not to have an abortion the group took responsibility for providing the funds to care for the child. I respected him. His group not only was against abortion but also took responsibility if the woman didn't have an abortion. You just talk, spout phony statistics and take no responsibility.

If a woman wants to have an abortion for any reason she thinks is valid that should be her right. She is the responsible person not you.

'If a woman wants to have an abortion for any reason she thinks is valid that should be her right. She is the responsible person not you.'

not surprising David f with no moral base to draw from but surely you are not hypocritical enough to oppose the death penalty for criminals while sanctioning the murder of the innocent.

Murder is a crime defined by the state. Abortion is not murder under Australian law. As a person who serves in the justice system you should know that. I go by Australian law not your mumbojumbo.

ok David f so you are fine with the executions in Indonesia for they were legal. It is also not legal for homosexuals to call their unions marriage here in Australia. So obviously you are fine with that.

After reading Bill Calcutt's "logic" it seems to go like this.

"If killing criminals using capitol punishment is wrong, then killing terrorists is also wrong."

What is it like dancing with the fairies down the bottom of the garden, Bill?

Three of Bill's premises need examination. His claim that Australian governments "implacably" oppose capitol punishment is true. But since that same government will not give a referendum on that important issue, then that statement is meaningless. Instead, we get stupid referendums like the present proposal to make all non aboriginals second class citizens in their own country. Nobody with any grey matter in their heads will vote for anyway.

The second, is his claim that "many" societies also prohibit the death penalty. Once again, none of those societies ever got to vote directly on that issue. It was imposed upon the electorate by elites with all the arrogance of absolute monarchs, who think that democracy is a real inconvenience to the implementation of their humanitarian policies.

The third, is that Bill draws all the wrong conclusions about ANZAC Day. Almost all of the people who attend dawn Service are white Australians who are celebrating their own history and culture now that Australia Day has been hijacked by the multiculturalists. That is why so many trendy lefties have made derogatory comments about ANZAC Day. Patriotism, white Australian identity, pride in our history and culture, are all anathema and heresy to the internationalist left wing academics.

If we wanted to celebrate "mateship and self sacrifice", a better campaign would be the Kokoda Track battle, which was much nearer to home, the stakes were higher, it was almost as bloody, it was hampered by the same military leadership stupidity as Gallipoli, but at least we won it.