Good article Jocelynne. I was dismayed when I heard that Tony Abbott was offering a counselling service for women - with his background and beliefs what else could it be but scuttlebutt? Your article clearly shows it as such. Well done.

I heard that in the US, 90% of all pregnant mothers abort if they're told their child will have down syndrome. Regardless of whether they were previously prolife or not. So I guess their strong moral convictions aren't set in stone after all.

Well, at least some are still human, and can inject some humor here.

I am not sure if yabby is being disuaded, but i hope the argument is, at least. I personally abhor the use of statistics from other countries used to support minority outcries here, as they are applied to Australia. It introduces primary flaws from the outset, and all arguments based on flawed statistics/use are fundamentally irrelevant in context.

I want to do a Practical Demonstration here about the implications of a-moral and immoral abortion. I dont mean to be rude and crude.

Consider this:-

When 1 is asleep, 1 is unconcious, inert, un-productive, incapable of anything, essentially completely vulnerable, unthinking, unloving, useless and consuming of valuable nutritution and oxygen. 1 is a thoughtless, meaningless blob of blubber and bones, a mass that moves very little, has no higher consciuos for period of time (8 hrs), will never be capable of virtually any concious act (except for certain phenomena), and cannot be spoken to, argued with or guided in any way, 1 sees nothing, perceives nothing, and recognises nothing (with scientific and specific exception).

Thus, 1 is a virtual zygote for a period of time; and generally speaking, for one-third of 1's life.

Now, if #2 were to enter into the sleeping room of 1 with a big pair of bolt cutters, and began to dismember 1, starting from the neck, 1 would be capable of nothing -no defence, no protest. By the time #2 get to the toes of 1, there would be no argument, and no evidence of conscious life having existed (#1 subject was rendered brain dead before sleep).

So, the question for the misandrist, misanthropic pro-baby killers is this: if you were 1, would it have been Murder? And if so, where is the justification with relation to feotoscide/zygotescide?

And to add further insult to the misandrist, misanthropic baby killer movement is this question: If #2 was spotted killing cats, there would be more human outcry over that, than if #2 were a practicing abortionist.

Are these postulations correct?

Yabby "Dickie, men dislike condoms for much the same reasons as you girls dislike showering in your raincoats, ie. it ruins the experience."

Time to buy a better brand.

They do alter the experience and some women don't like them much either but there are some benefits. Decreasing the sensitivity might help things last a bit longer which has some benefits for all concerned. Nasty diseases ruin the experience - not everybody knows or is upfront about what they have. Nor is everybody upfront about their history. C$A ruins the experience big time especially if end up with the bills but not the kids.

Responsibility should be shared but each of us also needs to consider the risks we take and deal with it. At the moment condoms or abstenance are the most viable options open to men, if any doubt exists about the likely consequence then use one of them (using both at once would be overkill).

R0bert

Gadget, no, your postulations are wrong, you miss the point, but
that does not surprise me :) So I'll explain it to you.

What makes a person, is the fact that they have a human brain.
Change the heart, lungs, kidneys, whatever, doesent matter.
No human brain = no person.

A person asleep, might not be aware, that does not mean that they
don't have a human brain. Their senses are still operating. Note
how a mother will wake up with the slightest cry of her baby.
etc. People dream, lots going on in that brain, that you are not
aware of. The slightest noise, its ready to go. If you came into
my room and tried to dismember me lol, you might be shocked as to
how capable I was :)

A zygote has potential, but its not yet a person. But then all those
400 eggs that most women shed have potential. Reality prevails, all could
be cute babies, but we can't keep them all. It should be a woman's
choice as to how many children she intends to raise and feed.

As a zygote is not yet a person, it doesent yet have a human brain,
it cannot think or suffer. Its still a being, but then so is the egg
or the sperm, they are all beings. A piece of steel has potential
to become a motor car. Its not yet a motor car, it just has potential,
given the correct circumstances.

As to statistics, all surveys I have seen taken in Australia are
overwhelmingly pro choice. In WA, when it was a political issue,
it was around 85% pro choice, a few % with no opinion and a very
small group of the godsquad were anti choice. At the time they
were singing their Hail Mary's outside the abortion clinics.

So Gadget, the bad news for you is that your's and the pope's
opinion simply don't matter in Australia.

A politician pontificating for truth, in advertising of all things. Advertising lies in very intelligent, tricky ways. Its love of the half truth prolly defines its effectiveness.

Half truth is the bread and butter of politicians.

Ever since dem-destroyer wore that tight little t-shirt, pushing up the daisies, when she was touting for leadership of iconographic redudance, how can anyone take her seriously?