I really like what Neohuman said in the last two paragraphs of the post.

This ownership argument is VERY WRONG. Whether it refers to the whole body, or just the uterus (or even the changing mind), the argument is unsustainable. There ARE valid reasons for abortion, but these aren’t it.

Next we know, it’s extended to late-term pregnancies, and beyond - ownership of children perhaps. We’re only just now starting to recognise serial murdering mothers, and we’re not quite sure what to do about it - http://smh.com.au/news/National/Mother-charged-with-murdering-four-children/2005/02/24/1109180004348.html

By extension, I hope that in 20 or 30 years time, we’re not arguing about this particular mother’s choice.

Bossie – check the stats – the vast majority of abortions are performed in the first trimester. Beyond that the "late pregnancy abortions" are usually performed because of a risk to mothers health.

MJB – Maybe you would care to challenge my points rather than just pontificate their origins or attempt to discount them with weasel word expressions like

“fuzzy notion of self autonomy that has seaped out of the frivolous intelligensia into the expectations of an unreflective hoi polloi over the last 50 years” (What a load of selfrighteous twaddle)

Fact – We are more autonomous than at any other time – nothing frivolous about it.

Do you believe the “frivolous intelligentsia” and “hoi polloi” should be allowed to express an opinion
or
Should the holding and expressing of "opinions" be a privilege reserved to a small group of sanctimonious know-all elitists, crippled by their overwhelming neurosis founded in group control issues, fear of abandonment and an inferiority complex?

Maybe you have something credible to say but thus far you have simply used “mumbo-jumbo” to deflect from giving a proper answer.

Abortion should be avoided as it seems to produce a lot of sadness , especially with late term ones and those forced on young women who have had an 'ACCIDENT', and get pressured into it by others,..... parents , friends, clinics etc . for these girls it seems hard for them to forget the life that has been lost .even their old boyfriends , long since gone and probably happily married with their own children will not feel at ease talking about these other parts of their lives usually.
it also would be interesting to know what judith jarvis thompson would do if her father informed her that the violinist she had attached was her long lost old mother .
with women in years gone by capable of having and losing many more children i shudder to think of the grief they must have experienced in the natural passing of life and babies , when men probably thought they owned their partner's uterus and women happily or later grudgingly accepted this but at a huge cost to them .
Death is a nasty business .

Col Rouge - you do make me see red......

Peace be with you brother / sister.

Amanda, Miss Vegemite, Col Rouge and perhaps others.

It's great to participate in public debate, but first you need to listen to what people are saying.

Has anyone ever said, in the current debate, that the aim is to outlaw abortion? To "force" women to carry to term? To control women's uteri? These are figments of your imagination.

The current debate is one of concern at why so many Australian women have abortions. Anyone who has had an abortion will realise that it's not fun and games. Research shows clearly that abortion has bad outcomes for many women.

Try to look past the over-simplification sloganeering of "women's right to choose" and think about whether we really want abortion to be the most common surgical procedure performed on women. If women "choose" to abort cos they are too poor to have children, that's not good enough - give them more assistance. Nor is it good enough for women to have abortions because others tell them to, or threaten them. Nor if her boss will sack her if he finds out she's pregnant. Nor if there is no child care available at uni. Let's not stick our head in the sand and pretend these things don't happen.

As an example of a level-headed response, take Danna Vale, for instance. She's pro-choice, but she's worried and good on her. Bring on an inquiry into abortion, not to outlaw it, but to do better by women who are given the sole responsibility to "choose" abortion.

Col, I checked the stats and found this,

"There were 377 late-term (post-20 weeks) abortions performed in South Australia from 1998 to 2002. Of these 171 were for fetal abnormalities, 10 for a medical problem with the mother and 196 (52%) on "mental health"grounds. The "mental health" ground, provided for in South Australia’s abortion law which dates from 1969, is generally accepted to cover any psychosocial reason that is to allow effectively for abortion on request."
http://www.ksca.org.au/Action%20on%20Abortion.htm

Keep in mind that some of those "fetal abnormalities" mentioned could be for anything as trivial as a cleft palate.

I'm not talking about early abortion, my concern is with late term abortions.

Ruby has also raised some very interesting and valid points.