David,
Unborn child or blastocyst/zygote/embryo/foetus? I prefer to use the technical terms because of clarity and they point out the stages of development.
I view the term ‘unborn child’ as contradictory: a foetus becomes a child after birth.
If a blastocyst/embryo/foetus is an ‘unborn child’, then a grass-seed is an ungrown blade of grass, an acorn an ungrown oak, a pile of bricks an unbuilt house, and we are all undead corpses.
I prefer to stick to the here-and-now and call things the-way-they-are, not what they potentially can be.

Aqvarivs,
The question you should have asked is “Would you plan a way out for him? The answer would have been, “No.”

Do YOU plot with your children to find a way out for their actions so they don’t have to face responsibility? I teach my kids to take responsibility for their actions.
I’d hate to be one of those parents who always find excuses for the irresponsible behaviour of their kids. Do the crime and face the time, as to say. No emotive victim-stories impress me as excuses for irresponsible behaviour.

Kids need to be taught that they are responsible for their actions or we end up with the poor little rapists who are protected by pathetic parents, and rock-throwing no-hopers bailed out by ignorant parents.

If my son happened to get a girl pregnant, he’d have to accept any decision his girlfriend would make. He’d need to support the child, ready or not, if she decides to continue the pregnancy, even though it might mean that he’d have to change his lifestyle or future plans.

I would be there for emotional support, but I wouldn’t accept my children to escape their actions.
My children have been taught that if they have sex, they must use contraception themselves and make sure that they choose a partner who also uses contraception.
If they fail to do that or if contraception of both partners fails then they know they have to accept responsibilities. I will be there for advice and support, or help find them the support they need.
No victimisation crap.

Celivia, the way it ought to work in an egalitarian society, and not our female dominated family structure would be for the woman having found herself pregnant, go ask the man if he wants to go on to the next step. Yes or no answers only. Then the woman returns home and makes up her own mind how she wants to go forward. Whether that is to carry the child or to terminate the pregnancy. If she had a yes response from the man, they may want to commit to some civil or religious union. If the man answered no, then she could make any choice freely, according to her own wish.
You see I'm part of the pro-choice movement that includes men and women. Not the feminist limited-choice, pro-abortion movement that enslaves men to the female decision making process.
Along with contraceptive education we encourage people to speak openly about their future plans and to make known prior to any sexual relationship any lifestyle expectations they may have. In this way we feel more people will not be sand bagged by unexpected events and will feel more in control of their lives and less likely as mature adults to be blaming the opposite sex for their situation. We also believe that if both men and women are free to choose and not compelled to, or to be with out choice, that more men and women will do right by each other and the propagation of man vs.women will disappear from the political stage.
We represent true equality and freedom for both sexes and find that the laws as they stand are socially reactionary by nature and not proactive or designed to represent people with out discrimination.

So we all want to see a reduction of abortions albeit for different reasons; and we all know the best way to achieve that.

David,
Why don’t you do a good deed and write an article about the importance of comprehensive sex education and free contraception to show that you primarily care about embryos rather than about sins of pre-marital sex?
You either want to see a reduction in the abortion rate as your priority or you don’t.

Aqvarivs,
I think we had this discussion about men’s right to escape responsibilities elsewhere.
You need to understand that once a woman is pregnant, two people are responsible. Men are just as much responsible for contraception as women are. If contraception has failed, then the woman, who didn’t want to be pregnant in the first place, has the task to choose between two evils.
If she chooses to carry the pregnancy full-term, of course the child needs to be provided for by both parents.
If men can just walk away from responsibilities, the chances are that we see an increase in the abortion rate.

Men might not like to support their children, but in the interest of the child, they should share financial responsibility with the partner.
The child’s welfare should come first- why should the men’s rights have to come before the child’s? Because they want to maintain their life style over the welfare of their offspring?

There are a lot of single mothers living just below the poverty line. Children shouldn’t have to suffer just because their father is an irresponsible person who wants to get his rocks off without any responsibilities whatsoever.

Even if the woman has a job that pays as much as her partner’s, this won’t be the case anymore after she has the baby. Even if she manages to get back to work, there needs to be money for child care and everything else that comes with having a child.
Hate the thought of having to provide for a child? You’re welcome to have a vasectomy and be risk-free.

I would like to recap where we have got to, from my perspective.

1.On the basis of Christian pro life conviction, I oppose abortion as the taking of human life, whether in the form of blastocyst, zygote or a discernible, developing human shape.

2.The pro choice side and I take Celivia as a thoughtful, cogent exponent of it, argue that it’s the woman’s business alone, a necessary safeguard for an unwanted pregnancy and therefore should be allowed, even better decriminalised.

3.Other arguments advanced in favour of the pro choice side are largely furphies: death from backyard abortions went into rapid decline once antibiotics made available, Lesley Cannold could only cite three instances of doctors facing proceedings over a 20 year period Australia wide in which 1.5 – 2 million abortions occurred.

4.My own position has been misrepresented on this thread. A number of entries have asserted I want Governments to ban all abortions. It is perfectly true I would like to see no abortions occur, but I don’t demand that no abolition occur (and I will come back to the reason for this, for it is also the same reason why prohibition failed in America).

5.What I argue for is a community wide acceptance that the absolute number of abortions is far too high, that not only is the taking of human life involved in an abortion, but women undergoing abortions are themselves damaged, and in particular that action should be taken (Governments can help in this) to reduce the number of abortions (and of course late term abortions, especially by virtue of how undertaken, are an abomination).

To be continued.

6. Such action could include leaving the Menhennitt common law ruling in place (other States, other rulings), provision of pre and post abortion, independent counselling which can include placing ALL options on the table, abortion and adoption included and a requirement that the woman (potentially a mother to be), be required to view ultrasound images of the foetus/unborn child.

7. The bottom line for me remains that abortion is a barbaric life destroying practice with the must vulnerable member of the human race, the unborn, being its victim.

8. The reason why I cannot, as much as I would like to, call for the outlawing of abortion is that it has become a safety valve for our society’s disregard for the purpose of sex, a most wonderful gift of God, viz the joining of two lives together in love, male and female, in a life long union to the exclusion of all others, a union open to and welcoming of children.

9. Until our society is willing to turn its back on the sexualisation of the young, until women refuse to offer themselves until vows are made and until young men become willing to make the necessary commitments, abortions will remain, even though better alternatives, not least of which is adoption, exist, and God knows there are more than enough childless couples longing to adopt such children.

10. My challenge to Celivia and other pro choicers on this thread is, “do you agree that there are far too many abortions (more than 1 to every three live births), and if so what are you prepared to do about it?”.

11.There are of course other reasons for abortions like the baby will be deformed, sex selection, economic decisions, which are all highly questionable if not downright repugnant, but I’m running out of words.

Celivia, you have just posted a good question to me - I will give it some thought. I have done my dash for the day.

"My challenge to Celivia and other pro choicers on this thread is, “do you agree that there are far too many abortions (more than 1 to every three live births), and if so what are you prepared to do about it?”."

Nope, I don't agree, with you, I simply believe that your philosophy
is flawed.

The world is full of thinking, feeling people, starving babies
etc. Other species are being wiped out, in the name of ever more
humans.

Given the limited resources, why should I become emotional about
diploid cells? Much better to help those already starving, then
create ever more problems on this earth, for the proplem will
simply otherwise keep perpetuating itself.

I care more about the suffering of thinking, feeling beings, then I do
about cells. All quite straight forward and prioritised, as we
must do at times in life.

I've met too many people from the last generation, whose parents were
forced to have them. They remain scarred for life, by parents who
did not want them and kept reminding them that they were the cause of
all the parents problems. Irrational as that may be, thats humans
for you. If you think that with some magic you will change human
behaviour, think again.

So I think that the world would be a better place, if children were
actually wanted, loved and not starving. Forcing people to have
children that they don't want, only leads to more suffering.

If I were not here, I would not know that I was not here, so why
would it matter?

A world with a bit less suffering and a bit more happiness is
a lovely thought, but clearly its not going to happen. All these
people read their particular holy books, follow their religious
agenda and we land up with the mess we have now. All very sad
really, but clearly humans are not the rational creatures they
are often claim to be.