agvarivs: "Until such time as men have a choice in whether or not they wish to become parents men are enslaved to the womens choice."

Of course, men could avail themselves of condoms, vasectomies, abstinence etc if they don't want to take that risk.

"I can find no implication or statistical evidence that suggest fully consenting parent families suffer from drug abuse, alcoholism, child abuse, domestic violence, suffer mental distress or are broken in spirit."

Yeah right. Like to quote some reliable and verifiable stats to that effect?

David Palmer: "from what I hear the new TV show, Californication is setting a new standard in depravity..."

I suppose that's an example of your church's doctrine of "total depravity" in action? Why do those who know least about sex purport to set standards for those who actually do it? Next you'll be giving dancing lessons.

aqvarivs: "Hopefully in time society will mature to the point where all are treated equally under law and individual choice will be respected by all. "

I agree. And a good place to start would be by treating women equally, rather than as repositories for men's sperm, and by respecting their choices as individuals.

The more you anti-choice people rabbit on, the less credible you are.

Celivia, first of all I do not view it has to do with religion for a person to have a “soul”. You can give it any other name but in the end, so to say, it is what makes us different from the animal world.
While my children are all adults, there was the time I was caring for up to 5-of-my-children and spend ample of time between women in playgroups, etc. and, from there I learned how women were coaching each other about how to split up and get financially better and how child support was being used for purposes other then the children. Sure, it were not all women doing so, but ample of them!
We have a civilised Federal compact in the constitution where even “old age pensions and invalid pensions” are included. Not that we say that if a person is old and frail, and may have list their marbles (mind) then we simply kill them off as they as like unborn babies do not have a proper usage of their facilities on their own and would more then likely die if they had to care for themselves.
Over the decades I came across many people who in litigation were arguing that “they” had “rights” but when it came to the opposition” then they argued they could not care less about their rights! It just doesn’t work that way. We are living in a society that has a constitution and principles are embedded in it. One of them that a marriage is between a man and a woman, that paternal rights are applicable. As such, paternal rights are not for a man to be concerned about paying for pre-natal cost but not being permitted to have any pre-natal involvement but that with rights comes obligations and entitlements.
If an unborn child is meaningless, then are you going to accept that woman forced to abort by a State and refusing to do so are subjected to having it compulsory aborted is all right? Or is then the “unborn” child somehow having a certain value?
Continued..

Are you saying that if a pregnant woman is in a public transport vehicle we can all ignore it as after all why should anyone offer up a seat for the woman to be able to sit down if the “unborn child” is without any value?
Is it then that if any woman is cased the loss of the unborn child the Courts then can argue there is no case because after all you do not accept the value of an “unborn child”?
Why indeed should taxpayers have to pay towards pre-natal cost because a woman is pregnant if she can at any moment decide to abort it?
Why should employers have to be burdened with giving time of work merely because a woman is pregnant, if she might in any event abort it and seemingly the unborn child has no real value as being a human being?
I could list a host of other argument but merely seek to make clear that you cannot have that on the one hand a woman can argue she can do what she likes because the “unborn child” is no ones business but the woman herself while on the other hand she can argue that she has rights and entitlements because of the “unborn baby”.
Pregnancy itself is not a medical illness, keep that in mind!

I view we should respect the “unborn child” to have rights as a human being and not being delegated to the trash can whenever it may suit a woman. After all, society need to keep respect for pregnant women and hardly could do so if pregnant women themselves lack the dignity to show they deserve this respect.
My arguments are not based on religious grounds but what I consider “common and civilised decency”.

"if women knew before hand that men would not be compelled to pay child support against their wish not to be a parent, much fewer single women would be having the child. And many fewer children would be supported by society."

Aqva, frankly thats a lot of nonsense. I'm a male and I know the
stories that men tell women, to get into their knickers. Lets
be honest here.

I know of a few guys who became real experts at pushing female
emotional buttons, kids everywhere were the result! Paying child
support was the only thing that stopped them from spreading their
genes even further around the countryside.

To suggest paying child support is descriminating against men,
is a heap of hogwash. If he lands up with the kids and she
goes to work, she has to pay him as well.

It costs one hell of a lot more to raise a child, then what
most pay in child support. Its simply a contributioin and to
say that it doesent benefit the kids, is more hogwash.

There was one post I loved by an aboriginal man in a previous abortion debate: He stated that Aboriginals never debate abortion because the men don’t interfere in women’s business. Women decide. Seems that they practiced 21st century thinking thousands of years ago while we’re stuck with a government that still practices ooga-booga style thinking about some issues.

David,
I am not ‘against’ religion as such; it’s none of my business what others believe or what choices they make. I am just against people who try to impose their beliefs upon others. The pope is a good example.
The only reason that atheism is getting more attention is because people are more educated and are fed-up with religious, backward views interfering in their lives.
Christians are over-represented in the government and impose their Christian values, e.g. discrimination against homosexuals or forcing very ill people to die a violent, scary and painful death.

If church communities would stick to their own members as they are supposed to they wouldn’t encounter opposition. If religions aren’t kept private then don’t be surprised if religions will be criticised and scrutinised just like any other organisation and institution.

In the Netherlands the abortion rate is the lowest in the world and the vast majority of the girls who do get pregnant are the immigrants who have missed out on sex education. This should tell you that proper sex education and free contraception reduce abortions.

Also, In the USA, when Clinton introduced better sex education, abortion numbers decreased. When Bush came into office and stopped these sex-ed programs, focusing on abstinence only, the abortion rate went up again. That should tell you that abstinence education is not the best way to reduce abortions.

Your religion’s priority is to control others, not the ‘unborn’ you claim you care about so much. These come second on your list, obviously.

I see your point about Europe, but I don’t share your anxiety about it. Over the next few thousands of years, things are bound to change. Change happens.
Does it really matter?

Continued later.

Gerrit,
Humans differ from animals because their brain has evolved more than those of animals. Without a human brain there can’t be a ‘person’. Until about 25 weeks, the foetus’ brain is undeveloped. There is no evidence of souls. You either believe, without the backup of any evidence, that blastocysts have souls, or you don’t. If you do, then you have a religious belief.

Forced abortions?
*Sigh*
You obviously don’t get what this debate is about: WOMEN’S RIGHT TO CHOOSE over their body.
Forced abortion is just as no-choice as forcing a woman to give birth.

Standing for some time is very uncomfortable when pregnant especially in a wobbly bus. Feeling like a roly-poly, she can lose balance and fall or suffer from giddiness or vomit.
Have you ever experienced your stomach being forced up into your lung space while on a wobbly bus?
It has nothing to do with the value of a foetus and everything with considering other people including pregnant, elderly or disabled people.

Pregnant women deserve medical attention. That’s how our system works. That’s why elderly people or the poor receive pensions. I'm glad.
Why shouldn’t a wealthy country like Australia have a good, social and welfare network and support one another? People are social beings.

If a woman decides to have a baby of course she should be entitled to her rights. If she decides to have an abortion she also should be entitled to her rights- just different ones.

Aqvarivs,
I’m with Yabby on this. I know all too well that men can put the pressure on! I’m glad a man pointed this out.
I‘ll keep saying: financial arrangement simply has to be in the best interest of the child. The child’s welfare should be given priority, no matter which of its parents is the worse victim. The non-custodial parent should pay support, point.
I DO like men, just not violent ones :)
Men are cute and interesting and can read maps.
YOU started talking about violent men; I have zero tolerance for violence from either sex.