The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Is it all about babies? > Comments

Is it all about babies? : Comments

By Mary Smith, published 18/9/2007

Is the opposition to abortion simply about saving babies? Or are there other motives behind the graphic images of advanced fetuses?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. Page 9
  10. All
Maryan, Jolanda, Wizofaus... I agree with what you are saying. I suppose my point of view is very Australia-centric where I make the perhaps mistaken presumption that, here at least, that we are past the whole contraception debate.

Felicity... perhaps you are right, after all what rational person would want to be raised by someone who would tell them they are killing them for their own good.
Posted by Meelamay, Thursday, 27 September 2007 3:41:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Meelaway and Jolanda,

Education about sex, sexuality and all that entails is probably the most important key to the low rate of teenage pregnancy and abortion in general in countries like the Netherlands.

People like Celivia and I who have personally experienced the Dutch approach can only look on in disbelief that in a wealthy and educated populace like Australia's there is such squemishness and outright wowserism where sex and sexuality is concerned. And as Celivia pointed out, especially about woman's sexuality from both men and women.

Telling anybody of whatever age, that a girl is not to have sex until you are of a certain age or are married is not education. Telling any body 'it is alright to say no' is not education. It is enforcing a particular moral code without any background or rationality. It is dishonest. What is a girl to think of herself if she wants to say 'yes'?

Whatever your personal moral beliefs are, they are only OK to pass on to your own children. And they would hopefully know the background of your moral beliefs and share them.

Education on sex in NOT about encouragement to go behind the toilet blocks to 'try it out'. It is NOT about relinquishing personal moral/philosophical beliefs or codes. It is all about becoming responsible sexual beings. Surely that is at least one thing we can all agree on.

Abortions are to be available safely and legally. Gnashing teeth over the numbers or lamenting the 'selfishness and irresponsibility' of women who got 'themselves' into this trouble is a waste of time. It is too late. There are worse things that can, and do, happen to a being than not being born.
Posted by yvonne, Thursday, 27 September 2007 9:39:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The question of where life begins is curiously, er, irrelevant.

Its funny how some want to define it in terms of when a 'child' exists. Its just quibbling with semantics, setting the definitions and terms to control the discussion and manipulate the outcomes.

Its called 'begging the question', where the conclusion is already set up in the way the definitions are constructed. Very sly and very effective.

Its very easy to drive a huge logical wedge thru the so-called 'life' debate, as follows.

A pregnant woman is on her way to have an abortion, when her car is hit by a drunk driver. She looses the er, feutus, in the accident. However, the drunk driver can be charged with manslaughter. Ergo, the feutus now has human rights.

This disctiction is usually rationalised in terms of the mothers intentions, which just puts lie to the whole idea that one is defining the concept of 'life.'

That debate is irrelevant and redundant. Abortion, definitions of life and pregnancy have nothing to do with anything other than what the mother wants to do. Fair enuff.

Why people waste their time suring up their little delusions over this blatant contradiction is quite amusing. Its easier to just accept it for what it is, namely SELF INTEREST and stop punishing yourselves psychologically.

The mental conflict, l suspect, is tied into the deeply conflicting messages females recieve about 'womanhood', together with the deeply conflicting aspects of how the concept of 'woman' is created. In this case the conflict is between the flowery stereotype of woman as self sacrificing, kind, gentle and nurturing (all nonsense... these things depend on character not reproductive biology) and the reality that females are humans being driven by the foundation of human nature, namley self interest.

Humans being what we are, just cannot accept the ugly truths, we gotta sugar coat it, hide it, redefine it, shroud it in propoganda and free licence. Of course, what we call things, how we define them doesnt change anything in reality.

Reasons dont change facts.
Posted by trade215, Saturday, 29 September 2007 11:36:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. Page 9
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy