I thought you might like to know what the Catholic Catechism (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm) says about abortion:

2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:

"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."

"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights."

Abortion is not "just" a religious issue. The Catholic Church has moral prohibitions against stealing too but no-one then claims that stealing is a "religious" issue.

As regards "debate", one doesn't debate abortion/muder as one doesn't debate slavery or genocide. One seeks to end it. And I will no longer pay to have my brothers and sisters killed.

It is clear there is no possibility of getting to any kind of consensus in this debate. Too few participants with too much time to spend churning out dozens of posts on the subject, and who conspicuously and repeatedly ignore the fact that the impact of unwanted pregnancy falls on women in a way and to an extent that it does not fall on men. Men are entitled to many things on this planet, but merely having sex does not entitle them to control the destiny of women who experience the real consequences over their lifetimes, if unplanned pregnancy results. In this there is no gender equality; there is absolute difference and always has been. Get used to it.

Pericles

Yes, it maybe just mere Timkins who can’t understand much, and I did have difficulty undersanding the first two lines of the article:-

“It is unclear exactly what is driving the current controversy over abortion in Australia. The major proponents of the controversy, almost to a man,”

So it is “unclear” and “man” at the same time, like “dumb” and “male like”

I also had trouble understanding how a violinist was related to abortion in a previous article, and I have some trouble understanding how Billy McMahon (remember him) who said something in 1979 (remember then) is all that relevant to the subject of unwanted pregnancy in 2005.

For someone actually about to undertake a sexual relationship, then I tend to think that a 1970’s politician would be rather irrelevant to him or her, but it is much more probable that contraception would, particularly reliable contraception.

If after the sexual relationship, the woman discovers herself unintendedly pregnant, then again I don’t think a 1970’s politician would be too relevant also, but access to information and counselling would, for both the mother and the father.

However my thoughts that the author only wants to create confusion about abortion, politicse it, and divert away from more important issues (eg. “I thought you said you were on the pill”?), are of course my opinions only.

Same old same old.
Ps Catholic Church has moral prohibitions against has issues with comdoms to does that means condoms for catholic is not a religous issue? As one person has already pointed out timmy can't have a abortion even if he wanted to.

Ringtail:What is a GB is it good or bad to be one and how do you know I am one - been reading my mail? Steel yourself Ringtail but embryos ARE human babies, children and eventually adults. Embryos at an early age suck their thumbs,their little hearts are pumping, move their fingers and toes. All this to prepare them for their birth - hopefully!. Embryos are ALIVE HUMAN BEINGS!! I was conceived 'out of wedlock' (as it was quaintly put in those far off days)My parents, and this was during the depression did the right thing , married and kept me. Yes I was a little afflicted yes I managed to pick up almost every disease and sickness around. And it was during the 2nd/World War as well. Diptheria [spelled wrong?],mumps, measles, celebral meningitus[spelled incorrectly?] twice, ear abcesses. We were a very poor family perhaps why I was so sick. After all that boy! I am glad my Mum didn't flush me down the toilet as I have had a ball. Now 70+ and still glad to be able to breathe, cuddle my wonderful wife.Regards, numbat

"Was the abortion used as a form of contraception (and some ethnic groups use abortion this way)?"
Timkins, I'm fairly certain that the answer to this question will always be "no".

Likewise, the common substitute "Was the abortion performed as a means of birth control?" will always end up with the answer "yes".

"Had a decision been made to abort in the future rather than use contraceptives?" is what I think you want to ask.

I agree that statistics should be compiled but only in so far as is necessary to assist in improving women's health. Which means that the questions should be optional and that those particular questions about the father are not needed. No questions should be asked just to give ammunition to any side of the debate. I think the research brief link in Helen's article answers your first question well enough and I also doubt any new data will tell us anything we don't already know.