david f,

<<You have opened new horizons to me. I never thought of having sexual relations with an eagle, a dog or a shark. However, I am an incurable romantic and will remain faithful to my wife.>>

You practise avoidance again. You didn't respond to the evidence I provided that differentiates between human beings and animals.

To David f.

Why would women be the best judge of a decision if they aren't given the information, or if the information given to them isn't accurate? How many people know how an abortion is done before they commit to accepting them and supporting them. Instead what I see for abortion is blind support in spite of what is accurate information. There is a cultural push for abortion that blindly accepts and supports it. There is also clinics that only perform abortions instead of just a regular doctor who also performs abortions. Do you honestly think an abortion clinic specializing in abortion wouldn't encourage those who come there that an abortion is the best choice for them? I have no confidence that abortion clinics will tell the whole story and let the women make their own decision.

One thing that I think would really harm the chances of choosing to abort is if women knew there was a risk (however large or small) that the procedure for abortion could end in harming the woman's ability to have children later if she wanted. One other issue is that abortion is repeatedly said to be the safest medical procedure. However according to the doctor that turned pro life, there is a number of abortions that ended in killing the women. He even explains that to do it right, the doctors need to be sure they get all of the parts that were in the womb out or there will likely be an infection that can be fatal. (Which supports the conclusion of abortions can kill women if you include the medical abortions that use a combination of pills instead of a doctor's office).

If you get the chance watch the second sections of videos that are an interview with that doctor, or read the testimony that Banjo Paterson found from that doctor. You might not like the conclusions, or that these came from pro-life sponsored websites. However the information is the most detailed I've found about abortions themselves. That is at least worth something.

Dear NNS,

I think it's a great thing that women have the right to a legal abortion. You don't think it's a great thing and would apparently rather they be made to give birth whether or not they wanted an abortion. That is what your recommendation of adoption means.

Dear OzSpen,

You didn’t provide evidence. You merely repeated biblical statements supporting your anthropocentric viewpoint which you probably got from the Bible. It is circular reasoning. I have already pointed out the flaws in that viewpoint. Quoting from the Bible is not evidence.

Dear OzSpen and NNS,

I am tired of this interchange. We will continue to disagree. Perhaps we can agree or disagree on another subject or discuss something we have in common. I think further discussion would be wasting the time of all of us.

I'm tired of this interchange as well, David f. However there's one thing I want to correct. You said earlier:

<<You don't think it's a great thing and would apparently rather they be made to give birth whether or not they wanted an abortion. That is what your recommendation of adoption means.>>

I see many of the reasons why people want abortions, and it isn't that I don't think those reasons have value. It's just that I don't think those reasons are good enough to excuse killing. It's not that adoption is the answer, it's that abortion just shouldn't be on the table for an option. 9 months isn't a life sentence. And afterward they don't have to be chained to the baby like it was forced on them. There are lots of couples that want to adopt. More then there are for available adoptions (which makes for a long wait for many couples, sometimes a few years).

Abortion just shouldn't be an option, for the same reason that killing a person (of any age, even before birth) shouldn't be an option for the reasons people justify abortion.

That said, this conversation has gone on long enough and I'm tired of it as well. You think I'm forcing women against their will with my stance. Nothing I say is going to change your mind on how you see my stance.

david f,

<<You didn’t provide evidence. You merely repeated biblical statements supporting your anthropocentric viewpoint which you probably got from the Bible. It is circular reasoning. I have already pointed out the flaws in that viewpoint. Quoting from the Bible is not evidence.>>

False again. I provided links to the evidence but you are not listening. I provided links to research that demonstrated the Old Testament and New Testament are reliable historical documents (1) The Old Testament, http://books.google.com.au/books?id=Kw6U05qBiXcC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false; (2) The New Testament: http://www.bhacademic.com/product/the-historical-reliability-of-the-new-testament/.

We also should check archaeology associated with the OT and NT. There are research documents covering these topics.

Then I went to these reliable documents (the Bible) to show that human beings (made in the image of God) are on a different level to animals and other creatures (which are ruled over by human beings). It is not circular reasoning, it is proving something is historically credible and then going to those credible documents to obtain facts recorded in them.

I use the same historical criteria that would be used to determine if Captain James Cook's journals are reliable documents. See: http://www.captaincooksociety.com/home/the-journals.

When I take the content of the Bible in one hand and look at the world around me, what the Bible states about human beings, their nature and place in the world, matches reality. This is the beauty of a Christian world view where truth - aletheia - conforms to reality.

On the topic of this thread: ‘Does it matter if abortion kills babies?’ The answer is a resounding ‘yes’ because of the logical consequences that flow from such horrendous actions. Since murdering human beings in the womb is sanctioned by government, what will be further consequences? Since infant human life is considered of such low value as to be slaughtered, who is safe in Australia?

Francis A Schaeffer wrote: 'When people refuse God’s answer, they are living against the revelation of the universe and against the revelation of themselves'.

Dear NNS & OzSpen,

I have noted your comments.