POINTS to use in this discussion:

David P,
With the Jesus example of cutting of hands Mark 9.43,47. I wanted to get across that Christians pick and choose what and how they want to take things from the Bible, either literally, symbolically, or totally ignore. An example of someone who took Jesus’ words literally. http://talk.livedaily.com/showthread.php?t=401939 “…man…plucked out his own eye and then quoted from the Bible…” I’ll leave it at that as it is off-topic; just wanted to make a point.

Mr Gerrit,
I must agree with Col that your point that taxpayers pay for abortions is a non-issue; so what? Taxpayers money SHOULD pay for loads of things that taxpayers can benefit from.
Indeed, if the money didn’t go towards abortions, it would go into other things to do with the child: like hospital costs for giving birth, family payments, baby-bonus, baby’s immunisations, child care allowances, health checks, baby clinics, education etc, which would work out far more expensive than an outpatient abortion.

You are telling us that your views are not based on religious doctrine, but you seem to have adopted all the Christian values and want to impose them on others.

Johnny R,
that was an absolutely refreshing and promising article, thanks.
The only thing I was tripping over in this article was the following: “Ministers do not have a right to impose their religious views on the public nor should Parliament allow them to do so” I wonder how the Parliament would stop that. I doubt if in reality that’s ever going to happen.
Some time ago, there was a discussion (I think by RObert) about the compromised position that our Catholic ministers are in, such as Abbott and Pyne.
Benedict XVI warned about the way Catholic ministers should vote on abortion (and I assume on other life issues as well); can we trust these ministers with their portfolios that include abortion and euthanasia?
We had "The Peaceful Pill" banned by the government- what next, and where do we draw the line?

Why should tax dollars be spent on hospital costs for giving birth, family payments, baby-bonus, baby’s immunisations, child care allowances, health checks, baby clinics, education etc, we are not responsible for your decisions. Abort your children or take the responsibility but, don't foster it off on society. We're not responsible for your sex acts. Jeez. There is just no end for some women to pass on the duty and responsibility of parenthood. Taxes. Who cares if your brat lives or dies. You could have aborted it and done the world a favour, because you didn't, isn't societies job to pick up the bill

Yabby,
You did state;
“Hang on whoah. If a woman agrees to have sex with a guy, thats
all she has agreed on. Having children is another story.”
.
Let me give you an example to contradict what you were stating. There was this case in the Family Court where a man obtained the services of a prostitute and paid her for the service. He left. Later she gave birth to a child and she took the man to court for child support. His response basically was “GET LOST, I HAD SEX WITH YOU FOR WHICH I PAID YOU AND THAT IS IT.” Obviously he didn’t contemplate to have sex with a prostitute to have a baby!
Well, the Family Court took a different position. It held that the man failing to prove he was not the biological father therefore was deemed to be the biological father and paying he shall!
.
So, here you have it, that the Court wasn’t interested in that he paid for the services and neither intended to have a child with her, all it was concerned with that as he did not disprove to be the biological father he was deemed to be it.
.
Well, if this is good enough for the goose then it likewise should be for the Gander!
.
There are plenty of men who had a one night stand never intending to have a child with the female but being lumped for 18 years with child support! There was this woman who pursued child support and the Court even made an order she had to list all men she had sexual intercourse with at the time the child was conceived. She refused to comply, and didn’t get the child support orders!
.
Again, once you take the car out then you lumber yourself with responsibilities, duties, etc and no longer have the right to decide it all for yourself.
.
As for the financial issue, I did not raise this in the first place, merely responded!

"There are plenty of men who had a one night stand never intending to have a child with the female but being lumped for 18 years with child support!"

Yup that is true, yup it can be unfair on some males, but let me
explain to you the way the courts see it. Child support is paid
for the benefit of the child, not the benefit of the mother.
If no child support was paid, those ultimately losing and suffering
would be the children.

Where I have a problem is when males are forced to pay child support
but are denied access to their kids, which can happen.

In the case of abortion, no children suffer as that child does
not exist yet. It is a potential child, not a child. So no point
trying to compare apples with oranges, as you are doing.

David Palmer “But it is not really as simple as this, is it?”

Yes it is!

“So you are saying her sovereignty includes an action and a consequence she regrets so much she seeks an abortion?”

If it were your body, I would support your right to exercise your choice.

“…they must accept responsibility,”

Why do you presume I have ignored responsibility?

An abortion requires a conscious decision and planning. It may later produce feelings of guilt etc.
I have no doubt many women having chosen abortion later experience such feelings.
That “guilt” is theirs to deal with.
I would speculate many women who have endured pregnancy and childbirth reflectively consider that they would have better chosen an abortion when they could.

The point, people only “grow” through making their own decisions and accepting responsibility for the outcome of those decisions.

Their Body, their Choice.
Not your body, not your choice.

What you seek is to limit women’s opportunity for personal growth through denying them the right to make material decisions for themselves.

Better that some may experience guilt and regret; than all resent being forced to conform with the demands of strangers to endure a pregnancy against their own will and better judgement.

RE barbarians and wimps. How crass and stereotypical.

We men are “individuals”. (this attribute we share with women).

Some men may choose to be “barbarians”, others “wimps” and a lot more will be honest, considerate, caring and compassionate.
Your simplistic labelling of some individuals inadequately characterises the infinite combination of qualities of all individuals.

If you were big enough to see men and women all as individuals, you might understand why they want to make their own decisions, rather than being force fed your decisions.

“foetus - like it is a piece of garbage.”

They were your words. I can only presume they sadly, reflect what you really think and feel.

Certainly you rhetoric is insistent of treating women’s “right of choice” like garbage

Celivia

Thank you for acknowledging that those of us on the anti abortion side have “some reasonable arguments”. For my part I do realise the dreadful quandary a woman can get into with an unplanned pregnancy with a man who has no commitment to her or the prospective baby. This of course doesn’t cover every potential abortion situation.

I am unconvinced by the first trimester argument. A lot has happened in the first trimester as you no doubt know (see http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/prenatal-care/PR00112 for example). This is a baby on the way, a unique human being, no question, deserving of all the protection possible.

I think the point about miscarriages is that for whatever reason, they occur naturally (and as you point out causing great distress for a couple seeking a child - not just the woman!), whereas an abortion is a deliberate cognitive act.

You are technically incorrect to claim the embryo (I think you mean, using your language “foetus”) has no human rights. The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognised the child before birth as having human rights to be protected by the rule of law and this was reaffirmed unanimously by UN General Assembly on Nov 20th 1959. Further the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Clause6(5)) says the pregnant woman by virtue of carrying a child is entitled to special protection from the death penalty.

You speak of facts that not until week 12 does the foetus have this and that but as the Mayo Clinic site I referred you to above demonstrates, the 12 week old foetus’ sex is known, at 9 weeks movement begins, at 6 weeks the neural tube along the foetus’ back is closed, etc. I note you want to define when pain begins, you may or may not be right, my concern is when life begins.

Would you agree to no abortions after the first trimester? I would see that as a step in the right direction.