Runner <"Some men have won the right to mutilate their daughters in Islamic countries. One day you will learn Suzi that just because it is legal does not make it right."

One day Runner, probably never, you will learn that just because religious men and 2000year old books say it is right, does not mean that you can ignore the laws that sane people agree to follow.

Again I say, abortion is a woman's legal right in this country.
Get over it and move on.

Abortion on demand is only a legal right in Victoria because EMILY's list have gotten their way.

SHOULD it be a legal right?

The law as it SHOULD be interpreted in NSW is sensible: Only if her physical life is in danger or she is severely psychiatrically at risk (e.g. suicidal rape-victims).

The way it is interpreted is that a woman can get an abortion for any reason whatsoever.

The great irony of abortion-on-demand legislation: in Victoria, if two doctors say the woman is physically fit, she can get an abortion for any reason whatsoever the day she is due to deliver.

However, if she gives birth to the child, then kills it, she is put in jail for murder.

I believe in reproductive rights and reproductive responsibilities.

I am not ready at this stage in my life to be a mother. Therefore I will either a) abstain from sex or b) use contraception, taking into account that it's not 100% effective. If I choose to go with the second option and fall pregnant, I will take responsibility for my actions by NOT killing the foetus and allowing him or her to continue to live out the rest of the 9 months, and then adopting the child out to a couple who really wants him or her.

In QLD last year 6 children were placed on the adoption list- less in Victoria. It's one of the factors in infertile couples being on waiting lists for years even decades before they might get the chance to adopt.

Why? Because all the unwanted kids are getting aborted.

Prochoice people aren't always prochoice. One of my friends was told if she fell pregnant and chose not to abort, her parents would cut off her financial support. Another friend of mine was FORCED against her will to get an abortion.

Did you know 1/3 women are coerced into abortions?

Abortion should never be allowed for financial or social reasons. This is one of the most incomprehensible travesties of our time.

suzeonline,

A few short years ago, when nascent life was still valued...
"abortion is illegal in this country.
Get over it and move on."

Today, when a barbarian can legally abort her healthy baby in the third trimester...
"abortion is a woman's legal right in this country.
Get over it and move on."

How can you use current law as justification for your stance when you would have undoubtedly opposed the preceding law?
Law changes, not necessarily for the better.
Law is not a moral arbiter.

Herman, I am not a fan of abortion as such, and I doubt I could have an abortion myself. However, I could never presume to tell any other woman what to do with her body. That is my choice about my body.
An unrelated male has an even lesser right to say what women can do with their bodies.

I was a midwife for several years, and thoroughly enjoyed bringing new life into the world.

There were a few mid-term abortions I knew of, but in 8 years I never saw or heard of any late term abortions at the major hospital I worked at. These are mostly attended for very serious reasons, and it has to be approved by the hospital board.

The mid-term abortions all involved very disabled foetuses- usually babies with no brains, and all incompatible with life.

If these devastated parents decided to carry these babies to term, the babies would die in the uterus at some time, and then the poor mother would have to carry the dead baby around inside her until she could be induced. How terribly awful that would be.

So before you condemn these sort of 'barbarians' (more often with both mother and father deciding), take the time to inform yourself of the true facts of most of these sad pregnancies.

Hear, hear, Suzie!
An excellent point- I'd like to hear what the antis say about that- but usually I find their thinking to be way too simplistic to even touch an issue like that- or any post-birth issues for that matter.

Net junkie and other anti choice advocates.

You keep on harping about when life begins, and the right of the child.

No one doubts that life begins at conception, however sentience does not.

The issue simply focuses on whether the woman has the right to decide what happens to her own body, or whether the state can force her to incubate the child for 9 months.

A similar hypothetical situation:

You wake up after a car accident to find that you are attached to someone to keep them alive, and if you are disconnected from them they will die.

Can the state order you to remain attached, or do you have the choice to disconnect.

The answer is obvious, you have the right over you own body, and the state cannot command you to do anything irrespective of the consequences.

This is how the 24 weeks is determined, as it is the point at which the baby is likely to be able to survive on its own.

Forcing someone to continue with an unwanted pregnancy is institutionalised slavery.