RE: Limbo dancing Col…it’s been a while, oh oracle of self-restraint. If you don’t want to be corrected, then don’t post statements that disprove themselves.

‘However, your suggestion can be answered

Your suggestion is stupidly nonsensical.’

Oops, watch out Col…that answer will cost you your ‘oracle’ status – as answers go, that one really stinks!

’No woman would seek to endure 9 months of pregnancy only to abort on a murderous whim at the last moment. No one, in control of their senses (ie without diminished capacity or a howling loony), would seek to do it. Therefore, it is a complete and utter red herring, lacking in any credibility and devoid of all reason. No woman and her doctor would undertake such a course of action unless the circumstances were considered “extremely prejudicial” to her ongoing safety and as the only option.’

Col, you are sadly mistaken…there are women who will because of: 1. Sex of the child. 2. A discovered disability, etc...Yes, some doctors will kill full-term babies…

The child is partly delivered, given a lethal injection through the ‘soft spot’ in the head and delivered normally…theory debunked, Col.

Other viable babies are dropped into buckets of water on delivery, removing ‘risk’ of survival.

Full-term babies delivered by at-risk mothers are normally viable - aborted or live, baby is still delivered. Therefore procuring baby's death is irrelevant to saving mother. I’ve been there more than once and many times in a support role. Debunked again, Col.

RE: ‘A SPECIFIC ENTITY’ All of these people are totally dependent on a specific entity at any one time…that entity may change personhood, but they are TOTALLY DEPENDENT ON A SPECIFIC ENTITY at any one time.

…‘PLENTY’ of Australian women DON”T die in childbirth Col, that's fallacy and killing viable babies of at-risk mothers is counter-productive.

‘I have been gentle and restrained with you thus far, keep it up and I might forget that you might possibly be almost a woman.’

Does that mean you’ve more to say Col? Avoid threats, stick to FACTS, I don’t bully easily.

Meg1, I’ll try to address each of your comments. You may want to look back to match them up…

* I do not believe I flipped and pass judgement. If you read my post, I stated that the individual should be allowed to judge for themselves in relation to matter pertaining to themselves. That is all. I at no time passed any judgement on another’s actions and did not state that one should judge for another. How is it you come by this interpretation?

* As to truth, it is not universal. Simply look at the myriad of religions on the planet. You claim to know truth? So how is it you and your particular denomination are right and roughly 4 billion are wrong? Please, this is probably the problem with your perspective. Claiming universal truth and right smacks of pride and hubris. I never claimed to be right or know truth. IN fact I made that clear. Please, again, how did you come by this interpretation.

* On the point for applauding Col and Yabby, I concede I was siding more with them. I apologise and will keep an eye on myself in this regard. As to waiting on Col and Yabby, perhaps, again, you could review your own language and tone. I recall a parable regarding splinters and logs…
(Cont)...

(Cont)…
* Regarding the beginning of life, yes I totally agree that you may give them the benefit of the doubt – as is your right and belief. My point was that it was for each individual to decide this as we all have totally different points of view and the decision only impacts upon the mother and potential being – no one else.

* Again with the insults – I know a slight when I see one. Please try not to be condescending. I don’t believe it does discussion/debate any good. And they are not corrections. That is facile and only exposing you to be evasive and hiding behind a word to cover your error of moral judgement. It is truly not un-Christian to point out errors but it is to use denigration and cheap insults.

* As to the definitions, I do know them and again, poor form on your behalf.

If you call what I wrote, spitting the dummy, I can see that you are beyond having a civilised discussion. Good luck with your life. I have no need to be nasty or unkind. I moved beyond that many years ago.

Col,
The fact is a boyfriend jumped on the stomach of his pregnant girlfriend during her last weeks of the pregnancy to deliberately kill the baby in 2004. Which he did. But he could not be charged with murder in NSW because the laws hold your position.
_____________________

Many members of Parliament do not understand how RU486 works. It involves two drugs: mifepristone, which kills the unborn child, no matter how old it is up to nine weeks, and misoprostol, which is taken a few days later and causes the uterus to contract and expel the dead baby.

It is amazing that even the chairman of the company that developed and manufactured RU486, Mr Edouard Sakiz, admitted: The RU486 is not easy to use — a woman who wants to end her pregnancy has to live with the dead baby in her womb for at least a week after using this technique. It's an appalling psychological ordeal.

We should not underestimate the threat to the health of pregnant women. The concern I have is that referring this drug to the Therapeutic Goods Administration is inconsistent. Therapeutic treatment is based on the concept of healing and no-one pretends that RU486 has anything to do with healing. When a pregnant woman takes RU486 for the purpose of inducing an abortion, the drug is not being used to cure or to treat an illness; it is being used to terminate a healthy child.

Philo, you continue to use melodramatic language, to promote your cause. A 12 week old organsim, does not have a human brain. It does not think or feel. So its not a child. A child is a person, ie. it has a human brain that thinks and feels.

Women can create around 400 human organisms in their lifetime. The fact remains, not all can survive, those are natures laws.

You are free to use melodramatic language if you wish. Just be aware that we know that you do, so it does not enhance your argument.

Well said Philo, informative TRUTH!

Reason:

1. ‘First you argue the WHOLE OF SOCIETY or body of experts should agree what’s right…NOT A MINORITY – then you flip and pass YOUR judgment that the INDIVIDUAL should make the judgment…isn’t ONE a MINORITY?’ That’s a flip Reason.

2. CLAIMING truth or right does not MAKE it so…whoever claims it. Truth is universal – without depending on you or I to say so.

Truth isn’t dependent on any one winning debates. If there are 100 Billion people arguing dogs only walk on two legs, it won’t make them do so…the TRUTH is dogs walk on four legs, no matter whether you or I accept that truth.

3. Yes, expect correction when you make baseless accusations.

4. ‘it was for each individual to decide this… the decision only impacts upon the mother and potential being – no one else’

SEE No 1 above…flip, flop, you’ve done it again. Which is it, minority makes the judgment or majority rules?

Where’s the baby’s (2ndindividual's) decision?

5. ‘I know a slight when I see one. Please try not to be condescending.’

My Quote: ‘Otherwise refrain from making accusations you can’t back up, then check your dictionary’s definition of ‘truth’ and ‘reason’…add ‘insult’ and ‘judgment’ so that you can follow the same definitions for everyone.’

You made accusations, it is reasonable to ask you to use the same definitions for all…when passing judgment.

6.‘I have no need to be nasty or unkind. I moved beyond that many years ago.’

You allege ‘insults’, condescension, nastiness, unkindness, etc. to perceived opponents – untruthfully - then admit supporting those of like ilk, who exemplify the lot…add bigotry.

I read pro-life posters being treated contemptuously, then with outrage when any dares to defend against the crude bullying.

I regard bullying as very poor form, Reason…if you don’t like that, don’t support the perpetrators and then falsely accuse to reinforce the bullying.

Playing the ‘victim’ doesn’t convince me you’ve any grounds for complaint.