Oops, my last post went to the wrong thread, its should have gone to the semantics one sorry.

Philo, I think you might be amazed how difficult alot of people would find it to kill anyone. Its not in their make up, its not part of their tendencies. Lots that I know, would most likely experience a heart attack before they killed anyone, the experience would be so traumatic for them. So I think there are exceptions. Give somebody an axe, a knife, a sheep or a chicken and ask them to turn it into meat. Most have a huge problem with that and will find themselves unable to do it, let alot go killing people.

My point is that our evolutionary past has an influence on who we are and how we behave. Many of those tendencies have evolved in us, as being part of a social species. Call them morality if you will.

Article by Gordon Moyes former head of Wesley Welfare.

The Democrats Ugly Secret: Drug Company Payments to Legalise RU486
The financial records of the Australian Democrats disclose an ugly secret.

Despite the ailing influence and funding of the federal party, the Democrats were being increasingly bankrolled by the large drug companies and the pharmaceutical lobby leading up to their introduction of the bill to legalise RU486.

The Australian Democrats accepted this money, knowing that they were being paid in full for sponsoring the RU486 drug through the Parliament. Their little party was kept on life support by the supply of over one hundred thousand dollars by the pharmaceutical companies and their lobby.

Why did the Democrats accept this money, given that they make such a point of not selling out to big business? We all know these companies don't give money away for nothing, and that they expect something in return.

The Australian Democrats received regular payments from Pfizer, Janssen-Cilag, Bristol-Myers Spuibb, the Pharmacy Guild of Australia, and Medicines Australia. Individual payments often totalled well over $10,000, and sometimes multiple payments were made through a single financial year.

Since the 98/99 financial year the Australian Democrats received payments totalling $103,290 from drug companies and the pharmaceutical lobbyists.

While the general donations base of the Democrats collapsed a number of drug companies were lining up to join their Corporate Partnership Programme, Dr Moyes said.

Well I've been off line, but Yabby's still looking for women volunteers to kill their babies in case they develop a taste for eating chimps. Other posters debate how often or how early babies can/should be killed off.

Scout continues to proffer her private life and it seems we're supposed to either block our ears or avidly support her denial of the consequences of her actions. Scout any counsellor worth her/his salt will encourage acknowledgement of consequences and better future choices. No moving on until that point is reached...

Col's posts are still limited to self-contradictions and a heavy dose of vitriol and bile directed at anyone who deviates from his ever narrowing point of view, seemingly evolving from his own desire to justify his past actions.

Those of you who have been through a divorce would accept that you've made at least one 'poor' choice or you would not be divorced...accepting that there are two imperfect parties involved. (and NO - Catholics aren't expected to live with abusive or violent partners - at least retain some semblance of the truth)

Positive life choices don't begin with ignoring bad past choices, or covering them up - or killing off the evidence.

Facing and accepting consequences enables making better and more mature choices, especially when we also consider the effects we have on others.

If others and I remain happily married with children (to the one partner) for decades, I guess that indicates a positive choice and is something I might like to recommend.

On the other hand, if another lifestyle results in poor life choices, killing unborn babies, divorce and unhappiness, I might hesitate to try it myself...hardly rocket science - it seems logical surely.

I guess that's a good reason for the Catholic Church to continue to preach the tried and true rules to live by, even though human beings are imperfect and sometimes don't live up to them.

Good luck to all of you, I hope your quest for the good life leads you to the BETTER LIFE!

Should I let this thread end on a sanctimonious, prissy note? NO!

Meg1, if you are the woman of integrity you purport to be on this post - what would you do if you discovered your daughter or granddaughter was pregnant to a man she no longer liked or who the family heartily detested? Would you make her continue the pregnancy or would you support her if she decided to terminate the pregnancy.

As a mother you are aware of the risks entailed in pregnancy like diabetes, increased risk of tumours, incontinence later etc.

Or do you wish we had the Irish institution of Magdalen Laundries where wayward girls went to deliver their babies, then were incarcerated for the next 20 years until their looks and health had gone.

I am truly frightened by the thought of you providing counselling, I don't think you have the compassion to be helpful.
An example of compassionate counselling occurred when my father died in a catholic hospital. The elderly sister quickly established that prayer would not comfort the bereaved so sat with us quietly then explained the process of secular funereals. Compassion is approaching conversations with the client from their point of view and putting your views aside.

Billie its clearly pointless to even think of reasoning with Meg,
as is evidenced by her posts. After all her vitriol, I'm sure
that the Catholics wish she were a Muslim instead :) So much
for the meek inheriting the earth, clearly Meg will miss out.

So far Meg has been extremely keen in wanting to tell other
women what to do with their uterus. So I have a solution for her.
Considering that she thinks that all those poor little IVF
embryos have a soul and need protecting from murder and considering
that she has a spare uterus doing nothing right now, perhaps
she could volunteer to save all those poor little embryos
from a dismal future and agree to have another one implanted every 9 months, feed them and clothe them until they are old enough etc.

If Meg cares about the souls and future of the little darlings, she will clearly want to rescue them. If she doesent, then all her talk on here has been no more then rhetoric, much as expected

Yabby, you never fail to lower the bar on the debate...speaking of vitriol you will need to re-read your own posts to find it :)

I would suggest that someone who argues for women to kill babies in order to reduce the population (because he feels they threaten chimps and bonobos, no less) has a serious credibility problem and probably an obsessive disorder or two to boot.

I love my pets too, Yabby, but reality is that I love my family more...and regard other peoples children more too.

I'd even choose life for you, Yabby, over a chimp...if the choice had to be made. What would your choice be? A little African child or a chimp?

Billie, you hypocritically suggest that you support the mother's choice, then ask if MY FAMILY OR I detested the 'man' who may father my grandchild or great-grandchild...would I encourage or allow an abortion...whichever. So much for her choice, huh?

Disliking a future son or daughter in law is no reason to cause problems for him/her, nor to kill my grandchild...what sort or reasoning is that?

You'd have to qualify as the in-law from Hell!

I have no grandchildren, or great-grandchildren so the situations you have raised are hypothetical. If my child were to make a decision that resulted in pregnancy...she has already made a choice. The consequences of that choice means she has a responsibility to decide how she will either raise or ask for assistance to raise the child or adopt.

I would support her decision to raise the child herself or would be prepared to do so myself, I would find it difficult if she were to adopt the child out but would respect her wishes if she decided to do so.

My like or dislike of the father would have no bearing on my feelings towards my daughter/grandaughter's child.

Your statements and questions expose your own bigotry and are no recommendation of your willingness to allow or welcome your own children/grandchildren's choice of partner, or your attitude towards their children.

God help them if they 'choose' someone you dislike...what hypocrisy!