Only the amoral have abortions.

yvonne, very well said.

I find it difficult to cut through the spin regarding the post abortion distress factor. Those pushing that line are often strongly against abortion for other reasons such as religious beliefs and their impartiality is suspect. Ian D's comment is interesting as he claims that his views are humanistic not religious but then that's one persons experience and I don't know the context of his experience.

Likewise material from the strongly pro-choice side of things is likely to be coloured due to concern that any admission of a downside will be seized upon by those opposed to abortion.

Far better to avoid abortion by avoiding unwanted pregnancies.

As I think I mentioned in another post the out of pocket costs of a vasectomy seem very high for an in surgery procedure for someone paying a lot of money for both private health cover and to support the government run schemes. That's an area where we could perhaps make significant gains in reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies with little effort.

R0bert

You're so right Robert. The option of vasectomies should be strongly encouraged. It is a simple day procedure. I'd prefer money spent on this than the baby bonus.

I agree with you re the spin on how much and how many women suffer from regret or relief after an abortion.

Recently in Time I read how automatic trauma counselling post an event has actually been discredited. It appears on the numbers and follow ups over a number of years to worsen symptoms. It is still very popular, but that seems to be because there is a whole industry catering to this now.

I found this very interesting. I've always instinctively felt that by 'preparing' people by counselling for possible effects from psychological stress would make symptoms appear.

How many women, certainly not all, experience themselves and their decision because of influence by outside suggestion and opinion?

Nevertheless, making tough decisions is a part of life. What really irks me is this increasing tendency by adults to blame others for the ramification of their own decisions. What is happening to people's self confidence: that they know they made the best decision for themselves at that time?

David you are entitled to follow them be they philosophical or religious providing they don*t harm others. But the problem with your argument is the bogus assumptions/arrogance you use to justify them being enshrined in law.
You state that yours is a Christian view supported by most churches.
I would more realistically argue that the views are that of the Hierarchies not necessarily all “Christians” or “nominals” Churches inaccurately claim to represent otherwise why churches are diminishing in attendee numbers?
Using Eire as an example a catholic (Christian) country which bans abortion why there 10’s of thousands of Irish abortion tourists each year to England? How many people actually follow dogma when their circumstances are faced with a conflict? Not that many.
Organisationally speaking, the first objective of any organization is to its own continuance. People being what they are all hierarchies are likewise primarily engaged in personal power/prestige rather than true representation. Hence the Reformation and the continual fragmentation of Christianity.
Constitutionally Australia is a secular country so arguments strictly on religious grounds are pointless, what counts is those prepared to vote.
Religiously I am reminded of the line “Give to Caesar…. et al”
Where does it say impose Christianity on others? Then ask yourself how Christian is it to punish a woman/girl and or the child both physically, emotionally, socially for something that may not have been their fault. Particularly if they don’t subscribe to your views?
Why should a victim of say naivety, rape/incest be forced to suffer and bear a child they neither want nor able to cope with? Naivety and education are not necessarily synonymous.
Evidence suggests that there can be long-term harm caused to both by single parenting and adoption. How do you assess suitable parents? If you don*t believe in abortion then don*t have one but as a minority to impose your religious views on others whose circumstances you’re not living is hubris if not insensitivity at its worst. This not a matter of religion but rights of others if there is a sin/victim let it be the mother's choice not yours.

David and others from the religious right are fighting a rear guard action as only 10% active oppose the right to abortion in spite of the continuous indoctrination of the church.

The pro lifers have lost the ethical and moral argument in that the secular world has deduced that the right of the individual cannot be over ridden by the rights of others, the state or the church.

That having an abortion is a difficult and traumatic experience cannot be denied, but stopping abortions for the handful of people who have regrets afterwards is insane.

The further proposal that "Humane" proposals like enforced counselling or a cooling off period be enforced are anything but humane, as all they do is extend the trauma for those who choose to proceed.

All I can say is I am very grateful that "Big Brother" or the Church with its hypocritical teachings is no longer a substantive influence in our lives.

I thank everyone for taking the time to engage with my article, although I noted some such as ianbrum, were so filled with malice toward me they were unable to get past spewing bile, omitting to engage the argument.

Billie’s logic is wrong. There is no point in using 1970’s figures as back then the rate of seeking abortions was far lower as people seem to have a better understanding of the value of the human life developing in the womb, and besides there was a lot less sex outside of marriage. In fact a reasonable argument can be mounted that the post 1960’s rejection of the notion that in order to engage in sexual activity, love and commitment preferably within the bonds of marriage were required has been the main reason for the ballooning rate of abortion through the 70’s and 80’s, though not the only one.

In response to Foyle, as “a middle aged male moral crusader”, I have never cheated on my wife nor been didling little boys.

I find it interesting to observe all these men rushing in to defend a woman’s right to abortion and cannot help wondering if they are the same kind of men who say to the unfortunate women they impregnate, “It’s your choice”, as they walk way.....

I refer Doc Holliday to the most recent study of Australian attitudes to abortion, the Sexton study, which found only 42% of the community hold that a human foetus is not a person.

I find interesting that while I’m prepared to acknowledge that a clear majority of the Australia support a woman’s right to an abortion, my opponents on this thread (Yvonne is the honourable exception) are unwilling to acknowledge Australians disquiet at the numbers occurring. The Sexton Marketing research cited in my article shows that Australians are clearly deeply conflicted on the abortion issue: 87% of Australians would like both to reduce the rate of abortion and retain the right of women to legal access to abortion. 73% say outright that the rate is too high