"No, but the demanding women are the same: feminist ideologues."

Oops Shocka, people like me are actually male, are not even
feminists, but people who understand the danger of fanatics
trying to impose their little moral lines in the sand on
others. Peoples rights matter, as in this case.

"And equating whether to abort with whether to *wear a tie* to work shows just how corrupt and demented your mind really is."

Why? You have yet to give a good reason why you flush human
sperms and ova down the world's toilets without a second thought
and kill them by the mega billions, but get fussed over a
zygote and claim that those who don't, are"corrupt and demented".

Mr Gerrit H Schorel-Hlavka “I did write “me, as a member of society” and NOT “Me, as an individual” as such your argument is rubbish!

Whatever way you wrote, you are both “me as a member of society” and “me as an individual”
I personally identify more with the individual, after all being merely one of a collective is nothing compared to being an individual and since all human spirit and endeavour is the product of individuals, I see little merit in considering oneself as merely a member of society, that you seem to think otherwise is sad.

As for “rubbish” my previous statement would deny your subjective assertion to the quality of my statement, I suggest if you want a “slanging” match ,keep up that invective, if you want this to remain civilized, moderate your words.

Re “What is relevant to me, as a member of society is that they somehow demand that laws are changed! Now, to me that does have relevant to me as a member of society,”

prior to the middle of the nineteenth century, abortion was not illegal. It became illegal to prevent women being exploited by quack doctors offering dangerous remedies.

In the 1960’s / 1970s the tide turned, it ceased to be illegal. The law changes to reflect social expectations. So I guess, you are the one who is demanding the law be changed, again.

I might suggest you are just out of step with the rest of “society”.

“To me this also is nonsense of an argument!”

I was not suggesting it was germane to the abortion argument, I was merely illustrating how differences of opinion affect everyone, just as abortion seems to effect you.

Shockadelic “So all those years of medical study should just be thrown away,”

What ill considered and simplistic drivel.

I suggest they go and work in a cardiac ward or a cancer centre, where I am sure they would find job satisfaction and comparable remuneration without having to face the “horrors” of the abortion clinic.

Shockadelic “It's hypocritical of feminists..”

That does not explain me, I was born and remain male.

As for the trashy argument “And the guy who rapes, robs and kills my neighbour”

well it is like this, your neighbour is a separate entity to his assailant.

Whereas, the embryo subordinately cohabits the pregnant woman’s body.

If you cannot understand the fundamental difference of separations versus cohabitation, then it is likely you understand nothing.

“And equating whether to abort with whether to *wear a tie* to work shows just how corrupt and demented your mind really is.”

So, I am corrupt and demented, well my posts are based on reason and logic whilst yours appear to be based on emotional hyperbole and the rambling dross of the inarticulate and intellectually challenged.

I would conclude, you are not competent to assess my degree of corruption or dementia.

Lets face it, anyone who feel the need to use a logon like “Shockadelic” must be dealing with some fairly serious personality disorders.

I suggest if you want to “spit the venom”, do so only if you are prepared to receive the same back.

Yabby “people who understand the danger of fanatics trying to impose their little moral lines in the sand on
others. Peoples rights matter, as in this case.”

Exactly. It are the prolife fanatics who bomb clinics and shoot doctors to impose their will immorally.
I have never heard of an abortion doctor threatening to blow up a prolife meeting.

I see that Shocka's views with respect to abortion are as screwy as in other areas of life. Hates refugees who are people, loves foetuses who are not.

Weird morality.

>>Shocka, people like me are actually male<<
Funny, Yabby!
You, Col and others earlier in this discussion are male; perhaps Shocka needs to realise that all people can care about other people’s rights no matter whether they belong to the same sex. race or religion.

Shockadelic,
If you think that shooting a person is the same thing as abortion, you are morally disadvantaged and are a danger to society.
First, you disregard the example about miscarriages while these involve embryos/fetuses of the exact same development stages as the ones that are aborted (and even happen at later stages!), and next you proceed to compare shooting a person to abortion.
Read back; we have discussed your shooting sprees in past posts.
ColRouge adequately points out the difference again, so hopefully you get it this time.
There is no reason why a dependent being with about as much consciousness as a vegetable should have rights over those of the pregnant woman who 100% supports this embryo. =

“I generously let you off with your gross misunderstandings of my statements about immigration and Islam.”
You have not ‘let me off’ at all. *I* dumped your subtopic and generously explained to you why. Read back and you’ll see that I do not discuss moot points if I don’t feel like it.
If you start your own thread about this, people would probably discuss this with you. I might even give my opinion there.

Gerrit,
A bit off-topic, but just a quick remark that the latest reseach in Holland showed that children in same-sex families are just as happy and doing just as well as children from heterosexual families. A stable home with parents who love them is important to the development and happiness of children, it doesn’t matter what sex these parents are.
Again, people want to impose their own beliefs on abortion as well as homosexuality on other people who do not share that belief.

QUOTE “David Palmer” published 13/8/2007

Ms Candy Broad, member for the Northern Victoria Region in the Legislative Council (i.e. the Upper House) in the Victorian Parliament has introduced her Crimes (Decriminalisation of Abortion) Bill 2007 into the Upper House. The purpose of the Bill in amending the Crimes Act 1958 is threefold:
END QUOTE

QUOTE Col Rouge Sunday, 7 October 2007 4:50:20 PM

prior to the middle of the nineteenth century, abortion was not illegal. It became illegal to prevent women being exploited by quack doctors offering dangerous remedies.

In the 1960’s / 1970s the tide turned, it ceased to be illegal. The law changes to reflect social expectations. So I guess, you are the one who is demanding the law be changed, again.

I might suggest you are just out of step with the rest of “society”.
END QUOTE

Seems to me that Col Rouge may not be aware of the tread commencing with the statement of David Palmer, that Candy Broad wants the law to be changed! And neither that as a member of society I have very much a right to input in this debate, regardless of my gender! As being a member of society I deem it affect me, regardless that I am a male!

Celivia
At no time have I questioned the capability of a gay person in his/her own right to be a good parent, what I have however made clear is that gay people demanded their right of freedom in their bedroom and now that they got it demand their rights to be above the right of a child to have a father and a mother!
If gay people demand others to respect their rights to be gay then they also must respect the right of every child to be in a natural family! We might as well argue that a money might be able to bring up a child and so this then is acceptable? come on! As gays cannot between themselves create a child they therefore cannot be deemed to be a natural family!