No one regulates whether men can use Viagra.

To take the analogy further, before the introduction of Viagra men with erectile problems had penile implants, now they use Viagra. Surgical abortion has been available for more than a century and now women can achieve the same result earlier and more easily with RU485.

Gentlemen, if you wish to keep RU485 from Australian women then in fairness Viagra should be removed from Australia also.

Well Billie technically to get Viagra a man must go to a doctor and get a prescription and the TGA regulates Viagra so I wouldn't say "no-one" regulates it but I understand your point and it has merit. Plus it made me smile.

RU486 should be the womans progative as to whether or not she takes it, not the Government's. Yes it's political, life is politics, everything in life is political. I am personally against abortion of any kind, but being male, it is a subject I will never have to deal with. GW your arguement re divorce is flawed mate, when divorce became easier to escape vionent marriages, of course people did, of both sexes. I believe if we want anything to change we must campaign for change. Personally I know that there are many couples unable to have children, who would dearly love to adopt a child, the children are not there to adopt because of abortion. The woman however is put in an intolerable situation, she aborts, she lives with the guilt untill the day she dies, she adopts, she lives with the guilt untill the day she dies. Perhaps it's time for us {men} to become more responsible in the prevention of unwanted pregnancy, either abstain, or use protection.

QUOTE SHONGA: RU486 should be the womans progative as to whether or not she takes it, not the Government's.

QUOTE SHONGA: I am personally against abortion of any kind

RESPONSE: Have you given any thought to why a woman might take RU486? It seems odd to be against aborting "of any kind" and in favour of women taking RU486 if they wish.

My own view is that abortion is a terrible course of action to take but its a women choice. In the same way that I think having children which you can't afford to raise is a terrible course of action to take but its a parents choice.

If we lived in an ideal world (and people were wise and capable) then they would avoid getting/making pregnant if they didn't want kids or they lacked the resources to nuture the kids effectively.

If you want to create babies but then refuse to nuture them (ie expell them from your body before they are ready, fail to feed or cloth them etc) then that is a tradgedy. However ultimately this is a moral burden that has to be carried primarily by the individual.

Terje, I will try to simplify my view for you, I am against abortion, personally, however it not being my choice to make, support the womens right to make her choice. Pardon me for saying so, but you seem to have a blinkered view of life in general, {not an insult, just an observation} people shouldn't have children, if they can't afford them ! I have personal experience in this situation, my wife was pregnant, we could afford to have a child, that is untill I was diagnosed with a chronic illness, which I have battled for the past 8 years. When concieved our child could be afforded, but surprise, surprise, life has a way of changing, sometimes for the worse mate, that's life. What would you have me do now that I cannot afford her, kill her, I think not. All I am saying mate, is that life is not up and down, black and white, there are always areas of grey.

This thread could be sub-titled "Religion does not belong in medicine".

Surveys have repeatedly shown that a large majority of Australians agree that women have the right to an abortion [within a number of reasonable guidelines]. We have not been misled by the survey questions, we can read, look, listen, reason and understand.

Most of us resent having "morality", as perceived by various religious minorities, forced down our throats by so-called political representatives who obviously don't know the meaning of the word "representative".