I am not sure Scout wanted emotional and financial support to rear that baby. If I had been in her shoes I would want to be rid of the whole sorry relationship. I would be very concerned that the baby would inherit its father's less pleasant characteristics. After all how much of our personality is inherited and how much of it is nurture?

I would like women with an unwanted pregnancy that they don't want to continue - to have access to safe abortions in a medical environment without spending so much time making appointments for counselling, being counselled against abortion etc - that they are more than 12 weeks pregnant by the time the counselling requirements are completed.

If you want to increase the birth rate you need to improve young women's economic conditions so they can afford housing, child care and build stable relationships. The new IR legislation is the greatest deterent to the Australian birth rate. Its the same as in the 1930s when the Australian birth rate was also very low.

Thank you Billie for your understanding. I was in no state to become a mother, let alone endure a pregnancy after years of abuse. My then husband had forfeited any right to become a father as a result of his behaviour - I really didn't want to have his children. I was on the pill, but it failed. Being hit in the stomach and subsequently vomitting was the probable cause.

I was able to access a safe abortion (except for being heckled outside the clinic!). I have never regreted my decision. I believe I am alive today because of the the actions I took. If I had continued my pregnancy I never would've been free of my ex.

People like Meg1 would impose their principles on others rather than deal rationally with life's difficulties. To them a foetus is more important than the life of a child or the life of a woman.

Regards

Billie, you have given your views on what you would have wanted in Scout’s shoes and your version of why she should want the same…nature or nurture, etc. You weren’t in Scout’s shoes and it is presumptious of you to suggest what would be 'easier' for you should be her decision too.

Sadly this is often the case with anti-lifers…abortion is available, therefore use it and don’t bother me with your little ‘problem’…so much for a woman’s ‘choice’.
You ignore the fact that none of us are perfect in any relationship and if your criteria were universally accepted, there would be no children. Who is ‘perfect’ enough to pro-create?

In your eyes, it would be much easier if all those who were likely to need anything would simply go away and dispose of the reason for their need… your reference to babies as 'unwanted spawn' on another thread clearly indicates your lack of respect for both mothers and children and does you no credit.

The real solution - Find out how your reproductive system works and take responsibility for your own actions if you don’t want children, then there won’t be a baby to kill…better still, treat your body with the respect it deserves and practice abstinence until you are in a stable relationship.

Aim for the ideal and then accept that if you don’t reach that ideal, try to show tolerance for the rest of the imperfect human race too and help them out when they need a hand up rather than add to the pressures they may face to abort. Your suggestion re: counseling beggers belief – it takes too much time to make an appointment to counsel the woman? Are you serious? How compassionate, how willing to offer a choice, how considerate of the trauma she is facing. I guess not…

I am often amazed at the level of sophistication applied to justify the taking of life.

Kate may believe that the church cares little for children and more for the principle but I certainly don't. As Catholics we are called to believe that God gives life and we do not have the right to take it away. In my opinion Kate is giving way to modern philosophies that really only concern themselves with power and maintaining it. Kate should really be honest with herself stop calling herself a catholic.

You know when the debate raged about RU486 a number of politicians talked about the slippery slope and cited the fact that in the Netherlands people can be euthanased without their consent. I really believe we are at the bottom of the slippery slope when 10s of thousands of abortions are performed every year. I find it hard to believe the mother is at risk for all these abortions.

I sometimes think that our moral compass is heavily influence by a life that has must have maximum satisfaction and minimum suffering.

I wonder when Kate studied theology if she read about the lives of the saints such as Saint Maria Faustina Kowalska. She had a life of beauty and suffering, truly extraordinary. If we want eternal life these should be our role models.

Well put, Compassionate Catholic.

Like 'membership' of any group...rules apply...if Kate doesn't subscribe to the beliefs or rules of the Catholic Church...that is her choice, nonetheless the beliefs of the Catholic Church still remain valid.

It is difficult to accept Kate's version of events and assumptions about the clerics 'attitude' to her child versus his 'beliefs' - such vague generalisations and assumptions about any person's attitude smack of arrogance and a degree of narrow-mindedness on her part.

Perhaps on a day when Kate feels unwell or tired, she may understand that may have been a simple explanation for the cleric's so-called 'lack of enthusiasm' too.

It is interesting to read so many vitriolic anti-Catholic and anti-life posts on this and other sites, one would suppose Catholics were the only people who were pro-life.

I recently attended a function organised by a Christian Church (not Catholic)...

...listening to the statements made by these fellow Christians at a public function confirmed how strongly supportive of the pro-life position they also are.

It is interesting to read the life story of Dr Bernard Nathanson who was foremost in the US abortion industry. He stated that they deliberately attacked the hierarchy of the Catholic Church as they were easily isolated and therefore easy to target.

No difference here...

Step by step he outlined the anti-life propaganda and step by step the anti-lifers here follow blindly along the same track...

Most interestingly after coming face to face with a tiny baby fighting for life (ectopic pregnancy), Dr Bernard Nathanson began to question the validity of his argument. After careful research,he came to the realisation that, in his own words, 'I had presided over the killing of tens of thousands of innocent human beings.'

He became an outspoken pro-life advocate and exposed the brutal reality of the anti-life industry and the propaganda associated with it.

Hi Meg1,

Thanks for your kind words and support. We must continually pray for these people. They are passionate but mis-guided.

Your description of Dr Bernard Nathanson was very moving. Thanks for making a positive and thoughtful contribution to the debate.