Dear Banjo Paterson,

You wrote:

"One would expect that the families of such poor countries, so badly affected by food shortage, would refrain from having more children, but that is not the case. They continue to have more and more children, many of whom die from malnutrition within the first five years of their birth.

Giving birth to children in such conditions can hardly be considered any better, morally, than having an abortion."

Those 'immoral' people who are having children in such conditions probably do not have access to or knowledge of contraceptive measures, realise that many children die as infants and so may have children in the hopes that some of them will survive, have sex as one of the few pleasures in life available to them.

Christian missionaries are responsible for some of the consequences of the uncontrolled birth rate. Various means of preventing conceptions or inducing miscarriages were available in tribal cultures. The indigenous people were quite aware of the consequences of producing more people than the land could sustain. Some Australian Aboriginal tribes had the males actually bore a hole in the base of the penis. If the couple wanted to have children the man would hold his finger on the hole during intercourse, Lf not the sperm would simply leave via the hole. In Bougainville some of the plants can induce miscarriages. If a pregnant woman does not wish to have a child she would eat one of those plants and have a miscarriage. Christian missionaries promoted the idea that sex is immoral if engaged in solely for pleasure and not for reproduction. This idea was reinforced for government withholding handouts to tribal people who observed those aspects of their culture. Christianity in that case was opposed to common sense and promoted a social ill.

Dear NNS aka known as undead human,

One doesn’t hide behind medical terms. One uses them because they describe medical conditions. The term “All hail the fetus." expresses your callous attitude in regarding the woman as only a receptacle who should go to term regardless of the consequences to her.

//But because of abortion I can't just say two (or more) consenting adults having fun. To many babies die tragically without our choosing to add to that number willingly, by killing them before they have the chance to be born.//

Sounds like you're doing it wrong, NNS. You should have a look into becoming a Protestant:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDBjsFAyiwA

"That's what being a Protestant's all about. That's why it's the church for me. That's why it's the church for anyone who respects the individual and the individual's right to decide for him or herself. When Martin Luther nailed his protest up to the church door in fifteen-seventeen, he may not have realized the full significance of what he was doing, but four hundred years later, thanks to him, my dear, I can wear whatever I want on my John Thomas."

To Banjo Paterson. That's a good point about the birth rate and famine. According to the first link malnutrition and hunger though isn't just because of famine, but also war and man made conflict. I don't think abortion will solve any of those issues, and think that instability of each of those countries is the more pressing element. I don't think compairing one tragedy to another tragedy resolves either. The instability and war in or surrounding each of those countries doesn't make the death count by abortion any better. If your number estimates on births and abortions are correct, then that's over 1/4th of all pregnancies are aborted. That is a sickening number and should be a symptom of something being very wrong. Regardless if abortions are legal and safe or are in unsafe conditions; 1/4th of the next generation being killed by their parents is a horrible number.

To David F.

You think I don't care about women? Or is that just your latest slander to try and discredit my points. Ignoring the points I give doesn't help your case. Especially when I address your points and still show how abortion is wrong.

Let's go back to my first point. If adoption was supported by grants or funding to the same degree that abortion is funded and pushed internationally, then I think that's a good first step to ending the evil that is abortion. It's not the last thing needed, but it would be a great first step.

Dear NNS,

Yes, I think you don't give a damn about women. You're the one who said she should keep her pants on. You're the one who condemns other people for their choices in sex. You're the one who talks about the evil of abortion.

Abortion is not an evil at all. It is a medical procedure which women who do not wish to give birth undergo, nd she has a right to decide on that procedure. It has been denied women in the past and still denied women in some societies. In any invasive medical procedure there is a risk. Therefore abortion should be limited. It can be limited by contraception, sex education and oral and other non-coital sex including homosexual acts.

I don't agree that abortion is wrong. I don't agree that sex between consenting adults is wrong unless it involves betrayal of another person. If we all agreed on what is right and what is wrong we would have a more peaceful world. However, you and don't agree and will not agree on what is moral and what is immoral.

//Let's go back to my first point. If adoption was supported by grants or funding to the same degree that abortion is funded and pushed internationally, then I think that's a good first step to ending the evil that is abortion.//

You still haven't explained the point I raised four days ago:

//Sure, great idea. If parents want to adopt, I think the Government could do more to make it less onerous and more affordable.

But I don't see how that's going to address the problem of women not wanting to give their kids up for adoption in the first place. I'm not sure you've really thought this through. You seem to have concluded that if it's easier for people to adopt children, that will spontaneously cause women to want to give their children up for adoption, as if by magic.

After all, if women can have children and then anonymously drop them in a baby hatch - no cost, no responsibility - but they choose to have an abortion instead, doesn't that suggest to you that this matter is little more nuanced than your simplistic solution suggests?

Maybe some women would simply prefer to have an abortion to having a child and then relinquishing it? Maybe they're actually rational, intelligent beings who make a carefully considered decision where they weigh up the distress having an abortion will cause them vs. the distress having a child and reliquishing it will cause them, and then make a decision based on what they feel is best for them.//

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=19834#350922

Were you hoping that you could just sweep that one under the rug and nobody would notice? If you can't explain to us how your brilliant idea is going to address the problem you claim it help solve, why should we entertain it for even a second? You're going to have to do better than that, mate.

.

Dear david f, Dear Not_Now.Soon,

.

david f wrote :

« The indigenous people were quite aware of the consequences of producing more people than the land could sustain. Some Australian Aboriginal tribes had the males actually bore a hole in the base of the penis. If the couple wanted to have children the man would hold his finger on the hole during intercourse, if not the sperm would simply leave via the hole. In Bougainville some of the plants can induce miscarriages. If a pregnant woman does not wish to have a child she would eat one of those plants and have a miscarriage. »

As all human beings, including our Aboriginal compatriots, appear to have originated from various parts of Africa, I wonder if the contemporary African peoples in famine-affected countries are aware of those simple preventive measures – that have little to do with “expensive” modern, scientific, birth control measures.

Perhaps we should ask some of our Aboriginal friends to instruct them on these methods. It might even be a good idea to ask them to instruct future candidates and existing members of the priesthood as well.

It’s certainly worth considering.
.

As for famine, a food security crisis is considered a famine when, according to the United Nations :

• 20 percent of households face extreme food shortages with a limited ability to cope,

• acute malnutrition rates exceed 30 percent,

• the death rate exceeds two persons per day per 10,000 persons

The causes of famine are complex and often have several causes contributing to both its initiation and rapid spread. Aside from conflict, climate change and lack of international response, lack of response from the domestic government and rising prices of food also potentially contribute.

Clearly, the causes of famine range from local, to international, to natural or environmental.
.

On the subject of abortion, allow me to observe that all life forms are not always beneficial for mankind. Many are detrimental, even fatal. Some, such as malignant cysts, for example, usually have to be removed by surgery.

.

(Continued …)

.