Bren – you say that you don’t want to abandon moral argument but when you rely on a simple majority to determine what should be lawful that is precisely what you are doing.

I note that you conveniently ignored my question about whether you would have gone along with majority votes that support slavery or genocide. I am sure that you would say that you would not, but why not if a majority of people wanted to allow such things? Of course it would be because you would regard such things as being immoral, right? - even if most people wanted them.

We have to determine what is the right thing do and not just go along with the crowd. This applies as much to abortion as anything else.

(Of course, for you as a non-religious agnostic, all you have to determine what is right and wrong are your own personal preferences anyway.)

little difference between the death cult (Isis) and the abortion industry.

Oh I don't know about that silly comment Runner, when abortion is legal and ISIS is not.

Bren, the issue is really about some people (mainly religious men, or controlling men) wanting to force women to go through with a pregnancy against their will.

Are you ok with that?

If so, how exactly would you force them to not go ahead and abort their own baby if they were not legally allowed to have access to legal, safe abortion?
You know, like back in the good Ol' days when women tried anything to get rid of unwanted pregnancies?
Would you tie them down and jail them until the labour is over?

If a woman needs to abort, it's her choice, no one else's. Get it done and ignore those who dismiss Your wishes,

Pretty simple.

JP commented that "you say that you don’t want to abandon moral argument but when you rely on a simple majority to determine what should be lawful that is precisely what you are doing".

JP's other point was " I note that you conveniently ignored my question about whether you would have gone along with majority votes that support slavery or genocide. I am sure that you would say that you would not, but why not if a majority of people wanted to allow such things?"

I think the focus of my piece is being misunderstood. I was not attempting to discuss the morality of abortion per se or suggesting that everyone should go along with the majority opinion without dissent. Instead I was looking to see what Australian public opinion had to say on the subject of abortion law and contrast this with what the law has delivered (namely very inconsistent abortion laws across states and territories that in many respects don't reflect public opinion and are not properly enforced).

The reality in a democracy is that majority opinion will generally determine what is lawful, though organised minorities can be unduly influential. Moral argument has a continuing place but in my judgement there is little prospect of legislators being convinced to recriminalise first trimester abortions.

Moral argument did help change public opinion in favour of abolishing slavery, assisted by things like the slave rebellion in Jamaica and the American Civil War.

moral arguements only work when you have a moral generation. Ours is immoral otherwise you would not have baby murder legal or even encouraged by emily's listers and emasculated men.