Yabby, you are running away from the issue. Tama has given an impressive collection of references and you just dismiss them because you don't like the Vatican. Get a life. There doesn't appear to be any connection with the Vatican anyhow. Incidentally, Catholics have as much right to express an opinion as Calithumpions and athiests. Tama's religious affiliations if any are none of your damn business. I don't ask you whether you are a Communist, athiest,agnostic or whatever. I don't need to know. I judge you by the arguments you put up. Try giving the same consideration to Tama's post. Let's see you deal intelligently with the case she has so ably put up..

Well done and congratulaions Tama!

Al thanks for the comment. Fact is I have every right to ask if somebody is a Catholic. If they don't answer, I can draw my conclusions from that.

If ru486 is allowed in Australia, should be decided by independant medical experts, as with other drugs, not by theologans or politicians with a religious agenda which they would like to impose on others.

Today in much for the 1st world and increasingly so, abortion in the first tremester is seen as a right and so it should be! Catholics need not have one, nobody is forcing them to. They however have no right, through devious or other means to try and impose their theology on the rest of us. We do not live in a religious tyranny as we used to, much as some keep trying to reimpose it.

Let the pope preach to his flock, the rest of us demand freedom from religious tyranny.

Yabby, you have just given us "more of the same". This is no answer to Tama's post.
Everyone has an agenda to push. Catholics have theirs, Uniting have theirs, Jews have theirs, Muslims have theirs, athiests have theirs, Greens and Democrats have theirs, Marxists have theirs, Liberals and Labor have theirs. In a democracy, everyone can put their views forward, and push them in every lawful way they can. Nothing wrong with that.

You seem to have an obsession about silencing any ideas you perceive as coming from the Vatican. You even see the Polish Government as an arm of the Church of Rome.

Hippocrates, the father of modern medicine, was also opposed to abortion, and his Oath strongly forbade it. He couldn't have been a Catholic.
The Modern Oath [1964] contains the words: "Above all, do not play at being God". How can doctors and nurses who take the Hippocratic Oath break it so flagrantly? Isn't abortion playing God by violently snuffing out an innocent little life which could grow to adulthood and reach his/her potential?

The Melbourne Herald-Sun of November 29 carries a story about chemists in the Gold Coast giving "schoolies" a morning after pill. How can this be when this pill is not approved for such use?

Al the data on ru 486 has been done to death on these boards. There is clearly no problem. If somebody has a religious agenda to push
and uses selective data, I don't even bother anymore. I'll read data quoted by more objective medical people, not religious people.

I highlight the fact that the Vatican cares more about its own survival then the long term sustainability and survival of our planet. I highlight their agenda, their politicking, the damage
that they are causing to our environment with their policies.
I have every right to do that. You seem to have no problem with
relgious tyranny, so much for the depth of your philosophical thinking.

If in that case one day Islam overwhelms where you happen to live and forces their way of life on you, you can only blame yourself,
for there is not much difference between religious tyranny of catholics or muslims. No wonder people are constantly at war.

I really don't care what Hippocrates said a long time ago. I use science and reason to reach my conclusions. In his day, they still thought that the brain was in the heart, so his opinion or understanding of the human body were rather limited to say the least.

Yabby, that's sophistry. Have you read a single article published in a reputable journal about RU-486? All I can confirm, as a scientist, is that RU486 is a poor excuse for a drug.

If you want to call this selective data, that's fine. You can deny reality. If your religious fervour for RU486 access exceeds rational boundaries it only tells me that you are promoting a distorted ideology.

RU486 was approved is for ideological purposes. No other drug would pass with 10% failure rates and severe side effects. Authorities ignore these facts because it is a convenient solution to a problem of abortion access. It is not good healthcare. RU486 was stumbled upon and promoted as the solution to the lack of third world abortion access by population control advocates (see Emile Baulieu's book, The Abortion Pill - he was the discoverer and openly talks as such).

This is the real agenda. It's about pushing abortion down poor peoples throats because we're stuck in the backwards 1960's mindset that a population explosion is going to end the world. Catholics like me are only trying to prevent such distorted ideas.

I don't want a population debate here. It suffices to say the doomsayers were proven wrong 20 years ago. But now we have this drug, and we want to give Australian women access to it because it's easier than surgical abortion for doctors. So the doctors promote it as safe and effective despite the data showing it's no better - in fact it's worse for the patients.

And as you seem so keen on Vatican bashing I would like to point out two things. First, before you comment on Catholic teaching, read the Vatican’s definitive statement on abortion: it’s called Humanae Vitae. Second, in that document you’ll read guidelines on human nature and how to best preserve it’s good qualities. According to these ideas, abortion is not a very positive thing.

How is this teaching is contributing to the demise of the world? Perhaps you’d like to point it out using your highly developed scientific mind.

Yabby, Data from Tama was from medical sources, not religious. You are ignoring it because it may not agree with your information from elsewhere, or your own preconceived ideas.

I am opposed to tyranny, religious or otherwise. We must never give in to terrorists or our free democratic way of life will go under and our grandchildren will curse us for our weakness. I would have a lot to say about Islam, except that thanks to Premier Steve Bracks and his Racial/Religious Vilification Act, I could be forced into financial ruin hiring lawyers, or even jail.

It seems that you can vilify Christians with impunity, but even quote from the Koran and your're toast. So don't say I don't care about tyranny, Communist, Islamic or otherwise.

But we're getting off the subject again. You dismiss poor old Hippocaties, but can you dismiss the 1964 version of the Hippocratic Oath? They knew a lot about the human body in 1964. And what about the sources quoted by Tama?