TRTL
I was actually thinking of those children like that girl(subject of controversy over having her growth stunted) in the US who have enough brain function to draw breath but are not responsive to the world around them. Rather than Brain damaged adults.

Franzy
The killing of a fetus does not meet the definition of murder under our criminal code. So your Hypothetical musing is wrong. I want to make abortions that are truly necessary safe and available. However I do want that decision given enough gravitas to match the act being contemplated so don’t mince words about what is being considered.
I am a great believer in prevention rather than a cure and I will certainly be suggesting to my children that abstinence is the most certain and effective contraception. The next best "choice" is some form of barrier method (like Condoms). Next comes hormonal contraceptives and then changing your life to accommodate the child if the more preferred options fail, Finally if there is some pressing reason not to have that child …

By the way Franzy what is the URL to your blog?

You see I have had to consider the matter because as older parents we faced the decision should the Ultrasounds shown that either of our children have had Downs’s syndrome so this is not just an academic issue…
Laurie see my response to Franzy
Cornflower
Good point about the use of words

Opp2
Your last post made no sense please try again :o)

Laurie:

I think the life of the woman must come first (where there is a chance of serious harm to her physical or mental health).

I think it is entirely reasonable to consider all abortion killing, but murder is a sub-category of killing. (All murder is killing but not all killing is murder).

Murder is a combination of knowledge, intention and motives - thus it wouldn't apply to all abortions (particularly as mentioned in my first paragraph).

There were about 265,000 births in Australia in 2005. Abortion rate seems to hover around 25% at 90,000 annually. Upper band of the most conservative estimates of paternity fraud put it at 8,000 annually - we avoid measuring that even more.

As men, I guess we should be grateful for small mercies women (and state) allow us these days when it comes to male reproductive rights. Apart from rape, health reasons, contraceptive failure, and lifestyle choices, doubtful paternity could well be up there with the best of reasons that validate abortion.

Attempts at bullying men into marriage don’t seem to work so well with mere threats of contraception failure, either.

Hey Iain,

I think the pressing reason not to have that child is not wanting to bring a life into the world that is not immediately wanted and cared for from day one. That mothering instinct doesn't come naturally to everyone.

My URL is in that little house on the icons at the bottom of this post. Gadget found it and has posted a couple of sarcastic remarks already. I'm sure you will do much better than that zealot. Can you believe this guy? Salvationism and witchcraft? I'm beginning to suspect that he's pulling everyone's leg - no one could be that far out. Could they?

Gadget... you took the part of blackstone's post you liked and ran with it. You also ignored the 'women should have freedom over their bodies' and the 'I am not anti-choice.'

As far as I could tell, Blackstone's post was discouraging abortion if there are other alternatives, and to her, the foetus was a 'living amazing thing'

All fair enough. I didn't hear her raving about 'rabid death cults.' It is language like that that really annoys me in this debate.
I can just as easily call the other side 'rabid body-hijacking reproduction enforcing zealots' but that wouldn't contribute to debate.
It would merely make me sound hysterical, foolish and unable to absorb other people's views.

I note that your panel would consist of 1 atheist, but a range of church leaders. So... how many church leaders would there be against this one atheist? (who I'm assuming is a token pro-choice individual, but perhaps not).

To the anti-abortionists - do you really wish to create a world where once a woman is pregnant, she has no choice over the matter at all?
She has to give birth regardless? what of cases of rape?
Am I to believe that all women will just give up and accept this?
What do you say to the notion that many women will have to attempt backyard abortions, risking their very lives?

These are but some of the problems I envisage. What exactly are the anti abortionists proposing in relation to them?

Gadget - abortion will continue in the country whether or not it is legal and under medical supervision.

In the glorious 1960s the Royal Womens Hospital in Melbourne had a 20 bed ward for women who were admitted with botched backyard abortions. There was one death a week from sceptecaemia. Of course the wealthy classes visited Collins St. specialists.

You would have liked the 1960s when married women couldn't work in the public service, when no women had no access to superannuation, all women earned two thirds of the male wage and no women, except barmaids, were permitted in pubs. Women really knew their place when they wanted to borrow money for a house - where was their male guarantor. Although there were up front university fees only one third of students paid them - the rest were on cadetships and scholarships and when you dropped out there was full employment. ie walk around a small factory area for a morning and get 3 job offers for full time work starting Monday.

Why aren't young women worried that the growing right wing trends won't strip away their current rights.