The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Pro-choice and no-choice > Comments

Pro-choice and no-choice : Comments

By Kathy Woolf, published 20/7/2005

Kathy Woolf argues Natasha Stott-Despoja is out of step with public opinion on abortion.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 28
  10. 29
  11. 30
  12. All
Melinda, Melinda, Melinda.

Senator Stott Despoja's Bill would in fact have made it easier for you to decide which counsellor to go to. It would mean that if you are offended by abortion, you would know which places would not raise it as an option. And if you are considering abortion, you would know which places would not make you feel in any way ashamed for making that choice. How exactly is this not a good thing?

And frankly, I don't want laws that assume that women cannot cope with the pressure of information, and so must have some options hidden from them lest it make them uncomfortable. I refuse to have my options limited because you have are weak-willed.

Why do we keep hearing about young women who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant, and are faced with public opinion that is always fiercly pro-abortion. Yet, we are also supposed to believe that public opinion is anti-abortion. Which is it?

And lastly, if I claimed that the "pro-life industry" was actively promoting unwanted pregnancies in order to increase their profits (Pregnancy = repeat business, and a much healthier bottom line) I would be considered highly offensive. So why is it OK for you to make such appalling claims about abortion providers
Posted by Amanda, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 3:46:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
“Stott Despoja’s bill is an attack on the counselling groups that offer support to women throughout their pregnancy, but don’t refer for abortion. Will her bill call on pro-abortion counselling agencies to declare their bias?”

If this is true, then Senator Stott Despoja is showing hypocrisy, and her attitudes must be that abortion should always be the first choice. However this would be within feminist philosophies that encourage abortion, as an act of female empowerment.

The abortion industry would not attempt to discourage abortion, as there is so much money to be made from it, and there are quite a few abortion clinics that do not require a referral from a doctor, or carry out any counselling either before or after the abortion, (and from a viewpoint of making money, why should they). I have heard of no surveys being carried out by the abortion industry into whether or not people want options other than abortion.

I am somewhat sceptical when government or other organisations refer to abortion as a type of “family planning” when most abortions are carried out on unmarried or single women. The government knows that abortion is much cheaper than the cost of supporting a single parent family, but the costs of abortion must be having a significant impact upon the costs of Medicare as well (as abortion is one of the most commonly carried out surgical procedures).

As an act of bureaucratic incompetence, the government has not had any real programs to encourage the use of more reliable forms of contraception, (such as Implanon), when so many Australians still rely on the condom, which is one of the least reliable forms of contraception.

So there is a mixture of hypocrisy, feminist philosophy, abortion as a money making enterprise, and bureaucratic incompetence.

Add all that together, and no wonder 2 out of 5 pregnancies are being aborted.
Posted by Timkins, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 3:48:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We must remember that abortion is an industry, with profit motives and bottom line considerations. Can you imagine McDonald's opening a so called 'food information line', where they continually refer callers to one of their restaurants. I consider that to be a reservation line, not an 'information source'.

Most 'family planning hotlines' are just that, specialist booking agents for abortuaries. In any other business we'd call a spade a spade when there is a conflict of interest. But abortion is different, where feminists intimidate any counterpoint contibuters. Pro aborts have a sense of irony calling themselves 'pro choice', because the only choice and information they ever support is one leading to abortion. Once again remember the profit motive.

Natasha Stott Despoja's desperate attempts to dismantle support services offering alternatives for abortion is reprehensible. All these groups want to do is help women in a dark moment. Their altruistic aim is to prevent women from making the ultimate mistake in turning against their own child, seen as a threat, and removing them in a moment of profound tragedy.
Posted by mcrwhite, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 3:53:56 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Timkins, re Implanon, there are many reasons not to go down that path. I was recently encouraged to go with Implanon, but it is not all roses. 1 out of five women have no periods on it (how can you be sure you're not pregnant? tests every month do not sound fun), one out of five women have almost constant heavy periods (no thanks!), although three out of five have no trouble, and have a fairly regular cycle.

I'm all for better contraception, but methods where you have a 40% chance of unpleasant outcomes does not sound like a viable alternative to me! :)
Posted by Laurie, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 3:58:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A number of posters have suggested that public opinion has nothing to do with abortion and family planning. This is incorrect on a number of points:
1. Abortions are tax payer funded. Counselling agencies are tax payer funded. Therefore, the tax payer has every right to scrutinise where/how their money is being spent.
2. Abortions result in major health and psychological problems for women which makes it a public health issue. See:
http://www.abortionfacts.com/effects/effects.asp
http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/start/
3. Australia's is facing a demographic/population crisis. We are aging and we need more births to create a sustainable society. Societies that causally slaughter their unborn are committing suicide.
4. The argument from privacy implies that not only should the public keep out of abortion and counselling matters, but also that the government should keep their nose out as well. So why is Stott-Despoja introducing a bill to force counselling agencies to refer women to abortion clinics? In any case, if women can look up a counselling service in the white pages then surely they can look up an abortion clinic as well!

Isn't it interesting that all the people in favour of abortion have already been born...
Posted by Aslan, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 8:57:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Enaj, thank you so much for sharing your story, to me, it is it in a gorgeous nutshell. Abortion is an alternative to being a mother and going through a whole thing that often men do not have a window into. I made a choice years ago that I didn't want children and had one abortion, and at the ripe old age of 43, I would choose so again. However, any woman i know, if she was pregnant and wanted that baby, I would support it as I would as much as to whether she wanted to abort it. She would have my whole hearted support either way she chose. And it should be safe and supported either way. One could argue the morals and the religious stuff but at the end of the day, who ends up carrying it? Us women. That is why pro has two ends of the candle. For all the anti-abortion lobbyists saying what they do, they're not exactly lobbying for the single mother safety net welfare as well!
Posted by Di, Wednesday, 20 July 2005 10:24:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 28
  10. 29
  11. 30
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy