Dear Banjo,

Thank you for the good poem!

Allow me to throw into the ring two Jewish answers to the question:

Q. When is a human organism considered to have a life of its own?

The Rabbinical Answer: On the 40th day since conception - until then it is "mere water", http://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2582082

The Jewish Mother's Answer: When it receives its doctorate, preferably in law or medicine.

.

Thanks, Yuyutsu. I first published that poem in “The Bulletin” in 1893.

Thank you, also, for that article on “The beginning of human life”. I note with interest that :

“The consensus about the time when human life really begins is still not reached among scientists, philosophers, ethicists, sociologists and theologizes. The scientific data suggested that a single developmental moment marking the beginning of human life does not exist … ”.

.

To all and sundry,

.

As for abortion, there is no standardised national data collection on unplanned pregnancy and abortion in Australia.

Studies of Australian and New Zealand women seeking abortion have shown that over half of women presenting for abortion had been using contraception prior to becoming pregnant.

No contraception is 100% effective and contraception can fail even when used correctly and consistently. The World Health Organisation estimates that even if all contraceptive users used contraception perfectly in every sexual encounter, there would still be six million unintended pregnancies every year.

It is estimated that half of all pregnancies in Australia are unplanned and that half of those are terminated. Also, that between one quarter and one third of Australian women will experience an abortion in their lifetime. Despite this relatively high (estimated) abortion rate, the birth rate of Australia is not bad at all compared with that of much of the Western world.

Australia’s birth rate is 12.1 births/1000 population, the same as that of the UK and Sweden; New Zealand’s is well above ours at 13.2, followed by the US’s at 12.5, then France’s and Norway’s (both at 12.2).

It is interesting to note that, by comparison, China’s birth rate is 12.3 and that of Russia is 11. Saudi Arabia’s is 18.3 and Iran’s is 17.9.

The country with the highest birth rate is Angola’s at 44.2. The lowest is that of Monaco at 6.6. Of the total 225 birth rates recorded, Australia’s arrives in the 167th position.

Here is the list :

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?c=as&v=25
.

Here is the latest fact sheet on abortion, published by the World Health Organisation (WHO) :

http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/unsafe_abortion/induced_abortion_2012.pdf

.

To Banjo Peterson.

The links in your post give some discerning numbers. One saying a ratio of 1 in 3 women will have an abortion in their lifetime is bad enough. But the birth rate in one of those sites shows the Australia and the US birth rates to be 12.1 and 12.5 births per 1000 population. But the abortion rate as indicated by the latest WHO report in the other link has the US at a higher rate of abortions. (As you've said no data yet on Australian abortion rates). If the US and Australia are similar in culture enough to be similar in abortion rates then this is a disconcerting ratio of higher number of abortions then there are of births.

I hope there are differences in how the numbers are crunched, as one says the birth rate is per 1000 population, and the other abortion ratio says it's a rate on a specific age range of women. Though that is still a disconcerting number reference. Wish they were able to be calculated in the same manner to see how much of the population is being born and how many are being aborted, based on the same standards of population sampled from.

Your points on abortion and contraception use is worth being said. Not to remove the practice of contraception to control risk, but if your numbers are right, 6 million abortions from those using contraceptives is a sickening number of deaths by abortion.

Thank you for the data in the links and the points you made.

To Toni Lavis. I think we're differing on our use of casual sex. You seem to be sporting it mean one night stands only. While that is included in my meaning of casual sex, what I am talking about is a culture of sex early in relationships. From one night stands to the expected number of dates before sex is expected. If a relationship lasts less then a month and already has sex in the equation then I count that as casual sex. Adultery also fits into this sitution because often those who are having one night stands or in a sexual relationship that was pursued for longer, often they are unaware that the other person is already married until later in the relationship. Then they leave the cheater, or hold on to the idea that the married cheater will leave their spouse for the other person. Adultery kills marriages, and adultery is fueled by the larger issue of casual sex being accepted in our cultural norms and values.

To David F. It's true, I'm Christian and you are atheist. That is not the point of this discussion, nor are there any reason to make my faith the focus of dismissing my points.

A few points in light of your assessment of Christians wanting to ruin other people's happiness, and based on a protest you were near at an atheist meeting.

1). The criticism of ruining people's happiness could be applied to causes that sought to stop drunk driving and driving under the influence. Some of those groups go further then just to not drink and drive, but also to not drink at all because of all the harm and deaths that are related to alcohol. Those that pushed for just not driving after drinking are not trying to ruin anyone's happiness, but are trying to reduce the auto accidents due to drinking. Most of those organizations aren't saying not to drink either just to drink responsibly. Like wise my views on sex and dating are not, "don't do it;" but to wait until there's a commitment to each other before having sex. The death rate due to abortions is large enough to compare to the death rate due to drunks on the road. It's a problem worth fighting against.

2) Regarding the protest. Was I in those protests? Then don't hold it against me that you were around a protest. Personally I don't see any point to protests now a days. They are ignored and not listened to, except to bring out fights between those who are protesting and those they are protesting against. They are useless except to fuel conditions for violence. As for atheists in general? What does that have to do with this conversation? Are atheists the only people having abortions? Are they the only ones who are having casual sex. This issue of sex and abortion goes beyond the borders of religions and beliefs. Therefore your worry that your an atheist and I'm against you having sex is meaningless. The issue is the death rate to unborn babies because we choose to kill them.

Dear NNS aka undead human,

You wrote: "The issue is the death rate to unborn babies because we choose to kill them."

That is rubbish. That is your use of an emotional nonsense phrase so as not to discuss the issue in a rational manner.

There is no such thing as an unborn baby. A baby is not a baby until it is born. An entity unborn is not a baby. 'Unborn baby' is an oxymoron. That is an issue in your mind because you apparently can't see clearly enough to recognize that you repeat a nonsense phrase. It is a measure of your callousness and narrowness that there is no concern shown for the woman involved - only the fetus. That is the only thing that apparently matters to you. All hail the fetus.