Laurie, there has never been an abortion performed on "a small clump of cells". By the time a woman knows she is pregnant, and can have an abortion, the fetus has a heartbeat and brainwaves. But presenting the facts makes abortion less palatable, doesn't it?

Scout, you claim abortion is the "LAST RESORT" for women. I think most people would agree that the last resort means the last option looked at, the choice taken only after all others have been seriously considered because it is less desirable. Let's look at some data:

In 2004, there were 254,200 registered births in Australia (see http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/ProductsbyTopic/3C467E74C23239FFCA256E8A0077ADD9?OpenDocument). In the same year there were around 90,000 abortions. As for the total number of unwanted pregnancies, I don't know that there is any data available. Certainly the 90,000 aborted pregnancies were unwanted, and for argument's sake, let's assume that half of the 254,200 births came from unwanted pregnancies (I'd argue the share is far, far lower, but let's be generous to the pro-choice lobby).

So that would be a total of 127,100 unwanted pregnancies. Of the total, around 70% ended in abortion. Is it just me, or does that seem awfully high for something that's supposed to be a last resort? If abortion is indeed a last resort, the other options are extraordinarily unpopular. Adoption certainly is - only 65 Australian babies were adopted in 2004/05 (see http://www.aihw.gov.au/publications/cws/aa04-05/aa04-05.pdf).

If abortion really is the last resort, shouldn't we be doing something to make the other options are bit more attractive? Or is it the case that abortions are increasingly the first option in the event of an unwanted pregnancy?

No-one really knows, but what is clear is that a very high proportion of unwanted pregnancies end in abortion. Since most people on both sides (eg. Lyn Allison) agree that abortion is often a traumatic experience, the fact that unwanted pregnancies so very often lead to abortion should be of concern to all Australians, whether they are pro-life or pro-choice.

Tim B

It's been said, but there's some thick skulls out there, so here we go again:

Don't like abortions, don't have em. Your belief, your choice, go for your life, leave the rest of us alone and stop publishing misleading nonsense like this article. Go suck on your sour grapes and make up some more dodgy statistics somewhere private.

And as for the 50 million Tony Abbot counselling consolation prize, does anyone else think that the smarter way to prevent abortions would be to prevent unwanted pregnancies? Radical idea, hey? Maybe a bit more education for people, more use of virtually failsafe contraceptives like the implantable ones, and men, get used to using condoms, even if she's on the pill? Is it really that hard?

Well, at least Alan Baker has proven that opinion polls can be manipulated by asking questions with different slants.

I wonder if we could find out the "true" attitide to the majority of Australians, if pro abortion people like me played word games too?

How about something like this?

"Would you prefer to see poor Australian girls dying in backyard abortions, and have their dead bodies dumped at sea like what used to happen, rather than legalise abortion and have the surgery performed by a doctor?"

"If your daughter became pregnant to a recently incarcerated professional car thief, who had the social skills to manipulate your daughters emotional vulnerabilities, would you rather see your daughter have an abortion than have this parasitical man linked forever to your family?"

"If you got your secratary pregnant, would you rather she had an abortion, or would you rather tell your wife that you are going to have a couple of new dependents."

The mind boggles.

Laurie
"Its really quite simple. If you believe that abortion is murder, then find a partner who agrees with your view and don't abort. If you believe that aborting a small clump of cells is something like "a stitch in time saves nine", i.e. suffering now to prevent larger problems later, then find a partner who agrees with your views, and if a mistake occurs, abort."

I'm sorry. But this is an incredibly moronic position. By the same logic, you could tell people not to outlaw ANY crime. Rape, murder, assault, theft. If abortion on demand is murder, then it should be stopped. It is that simple.

And it aint just your uterus Laurie. It is a seperate human life. It is not your property, to be disposed of if you find it inconvenient.

I am sorry you feel that way Alan, but until around the 3-4 month mark, I simply do not regard a pregnancy as a "child", I see it as a "potential" and a "collection of cells". And until such time as that potential becomes something which could exist outside of my body, then I do not regard it as having rights equal or greater than me. From around six months, when that potential is kicking and could easily survive outside the womb with the available medical care, then yes, I see it as something with its own rights. But not until such time as it could survive without using my body.

I understand these shades of grey are difficult for people who see any abortion, be it at two days or two weeks or two months as murder, but that is how I see it. And I'm sorry for people who see it that way, but it IS my body, and I shall not ever accept anyone so wholly uninvolved in the situation (i.e. not myself or my partner) trying to influence decisions which could affect my entire life.

FrankGol and Rex

May I express my support to your both for your reasoning.

FrankGol, as you accurately and persuasively point out,

Ask anyone if they support the idea of the taxes they pay supporting anyone else and you will get the loaded reply to a loaded question.

“Loaded questions” are a form of the very hypocrisy the author of the article is "hypocritically" whining about.

Ask them if you think other people should have a right of choice and the overwhelming majority will agree.

I would point out, the Vote was a “conscience vote”.

I would further point out that a MP in the “House of Representatives”, is there to “represent” his or her constituents and their views. It is perfectly reasonable for someone to hold a personal view yet vote differently when they know the overwhelming majority view of the people they are elected to “represent”.

The only way of expecting a reduction in abortion is to improve the delivery and reliability of contraceptives. One step in the right direction would be for “anti-contraceptive agencies” to stop promoting ineffective alternatives to effective contraception.

As one who had a vasectomy many years ago, I found it a painless experience with no side effects and would recommend it to any man who thinks he has “sired” enough children.