Mr Gerrit H Schorel-Hlavka, “It is a bit like when you drive a car and have an accident you have to face the consequences, likewise so when you have sex, you simply have to have guts enough to face the consequences.”

It is not.

The obvious difference is the car accident involves more than one cognitive individual, each occupying their own separate bodies.

A pregnant woman holds an embryo within the confines of her own body. Hence, an “accidental pregnancy” involving the woman has a completely different consequence to a car accident involving maybe the same woman and a different individual or even someone elses “property".

Basically, the embryo has no rights or authority which can precede or prevail over those of the woman, regardless of the demands of uninvolved third parties.

As for your blackshirts, such mindless idiots deserve the ignominy which they attract. However, it does remind me that Hitler was fervently anti-abortion and in 1942 declared that any Aryan woman seeking abortion would no longer face imprisonment but a death penalty.

It is strange the way authoritarian states, be they secular or theological, end up demanding the rights and will of individuals (they are supposed to serve) be subverted to their own omnipotent will.

Shesh Aqva, you continue to go in circles.

I remind you that its your beloved Catholic Church, which you
regularly attend, who are the one screaming loudest when young
women do go ahead and have an abortion. They will go out of
their way to make these women feel like murderers etc.

No wonder that women are sometimes confused

Shesh yab, if you actually took the time to read what I post you wouldn't be chiming in regularly with the most stupidest of unfounded assertions. If you can't understand what I'm posting or find it opposite to your own thinking, providing you do your own thinking, I can understand any counter argument. After all we are discussing abortion, a contraceptive tool used in only a minority of occasions relative to live births. Aprox. 1 in 4. And while the author is concerned with those numbers and what they mean to him, I am concerned with those who most likely should have used more care, contraceptives, or availed themselves of the use of abortion considering their youth, their future, and the life awaiting the innocent child. This does not mean I'm pro-abortion, or anti-abortion, or don't also think there is some validity in looking into the number of abortions and why they take place. Being pro-choice I have also learned that some choices are better than others depending on the circumstances at the time.

Aqva I don't misread your posts at all. You are blaming the evils
of feminist empowerment for the fact that many single mothers
decide to have kids without having a male partner, how this
apparently destroys lives etc.

Its been pointed out on this thread that we have the option of
having less single mothers, less abortions, if we follow the
example of countries like Holland, in terms of sex education,
contraception etc.

The organisations fighting this the hardest, happen to be the
religious lobby! Not only that, but when an abortion is required
by some woman wanting to make a choice, they scream even
louder. Now you personally might have a more tolerant view
on abortion then your church, but it stands that it is your
church that is one of the major impediments to less single
mothers, which you seem so concerned about.

As we can show from the US figures, trying to force abstinence
on people has been a dismal failure.

So its not feminism that is the problem, but your church.

Yab, you have picked your team and blame everything singlemindedly on that which does not follow your politicalised social view. I'm against todays feminism for the simple reason it no longer is an advocate for equality but now an advocate only for special considerations. To that same extent I do not hold with religions or their institutions advocating, or having any political lobby to influence social behaviors.
Your feminism and your beloved Pope are equals in this regard. One no better than the other. If you weren't so prejudiced by your own narrow feminist politic and were open-minded about the lives and choices of these young women, you too would be advocating not for the exclusive exercise of 'rights' but the exercise of commonsense and the doing the right thing considering the specific circumstance. Did you know 1 in every 4 young single mothers have their second fatherless child with in 24 months. Do you know how many attempt suicide, become chronically depressed, harm their babies, never finish secondary school, never escape poverty, end with aids, drug addictions, dragged into prostitution

I'm always on the lookout for good data. Aquarius, could you give me the source for your '1 in 4' statistic about single mothers and, if what you then wrote was other than rhetoric, could you give me the stats for the other consequences for single mothers too?