BOAZ_David,

"Show me a secular non Christian person who has NEVER gone against their own set of values for selfish opportunistic reasons and I definitely will join those flying pigs."

NEVER is a pretty big call, maybe it is relevant to differentiate between heat of the moment stuff and things done with time to reflect and change. The kind of comments in the article are about long term actions and views.

If you might be surprised how many people outside the christian church both secular and of other faiths have a pretty good go at living by their values. The problem for the christian church is that it claims that christians are indwelt by the Holy Spirit (eg you are getting a helping hand) and yet there appears to be no evidence that christians as a group are more likely to live consistently than others who place an emphasis on living by some kind of value centered structure (that last bit is not well phrased but hopefully gets it's meaning across). Christians get jumped on because as a group you continue to claim to have a better handle on this stuff than the rest of us so you should consistently get it better.

One member who appears to be a self righteous prig slams others for saying that tony sinned. We got the bit about casting the first stone.
Tony was contemplating joining the priesthood,that's the Holy priesthood in catholic eyes, tony by having sex was sinning. (NO! I am not saying that I have never sinned we are talking about tony here)Tony was also obeying the catholic 'law' by not using a condom. I did not condemn tony for his sins but for his blatant and total dribbling hypocrisy. Regards, numbat

I have responded to this exemplary example of bad logic on my blog
http://alangrey.blogspot.com/2005/04/life-leslie-cannolds-irrational-bias.html

A sample
"Yep. Leslie starts off brilliantly, Tony Abbott will not publicly condemn a women he loved for something she did nearly 3 decades ago. Obviously, we need to highlight this great defect in his character."
and
"The logic is staggering. Tony Abbott was sexually active before he was married, and he refusing to publicly condemn someone he cared for deeply for an act she did nearly 30 years ago, so obviously, this failure to condemn implies Tony Abbott has changed his mind about the evil of abortion."

This article is typical of Cannold's aggressive and bitter activist approach to the abortion issue. More rhetoric than logic; more pop than academic.

Abbott's comments do not indicate that he has changed his mind on the abortion issue or that there is some inconsistency in his views. First, Abbott's comments re Donnelly relate to sex, not abortion. Secondly, it is possible for Abbott to consider abortion to be wrong and yet to refuse to judge those who engage in pre-marital sex or those who have had abortions. There is, in other words, a difference between objectively judging the right or wrong of a particular kind of act and subjectively judging the culpability or moral standing of a person who, within a particular context, commits that act.

Cannold unfairly misrepresents the views and reasons of those who oppose abortion. Not all agree with the likes of Alan Cadman. Many have a problem with abortion, not because they want to suppress the rights of women or have "rigid views about nice girls and sluts", but because they genuinely and sincerely consider it to involve the taking of a small yet valuable life.

Cannold's lack of understanding and sympathy for conservative women who find themselves pregnant under difficult circumstances and end up having abortions despite their reservations is appalling. If one is looking for hypocrisy, then go no further. Cannold wants greater sympathy for and less judgment about women who have abortions - but in this case is herself unwilling to give it. This is an example of the very worst kind of feminism and the very worst kind of illiberal liberalism.

If Cannold wants to change minds, rather than simply preaching to the already converted, it would be better for her to first understand the internal viewpoint of the conservative approach. She would be well advised to consider that conservatives are capable of having well-meaning and sincere concerns for both the mother and the unborn child. Her distrust and dislike of the "other side" seems to prevent her from engaging in any form of constructive debate.

I wonder what poor old Bill thinks about female sexuality. His son was relinquished without him having a say.

According to Kathy he was a non-event – a regrettable one-night stand of protected sex with a housemate.

All this focus on Tony Abbott would not have happened if he kept his big mouth shut and not invited media publicity when he thought he could make mileage out of the issue. What should have been a personal issue was converted into a political issue. And Abbott is now suffering the consequences.

I'm happy to do a deal with Abbott and his supporters. I'll shutup about his personal issues as long as they shutup about other people's reproductive choices.