Liberal Senator Cory Bernardi hits out at 'pro-death' abortion, step-families, IR laws


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-06/cory-bernardi-says-pro-choice-is-pro-death/5183852

Anti choice conservatives are getting vocal … where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies?

____ wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 11:37am:

where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies?

On the side of the un-born child and it's life.

Swagman wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 11:41am:

____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life.

So Abbott wants to remove the rights of women … is this because he hates women?

And why draw the line there, how about all the babies denied lives by condoms. Will conservatives call for their banning?

____ wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 11:46am:

Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:41am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life. So Abbott wants to remove the rights of women … is this because he hates women? And why draw the line there, how about all the babies denied lives by condoms. Will conservatives call for their banning?

Link to the highlighted please moron....

I think Abbott said abortion should be legal, safe and rare.

____ wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 11:46am:

Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:41am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life. So Abbott wants to remove the rights of women … is this because he hates women? And why draw the line there, how about all the babies denied lives by condoms. Will conservatives call for their banning?

   >:(  Queers deny life by injecting their sperm into arsehole

FriYAY wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 11:51am:

____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:46am: Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:41am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life. So Abbott wants to remove the rights of women … is this because he hates women? And why draw the line there, how about all the babies denied lives by condoms. Will conservatives call for their banning? Link to the highlighted please moron.... I think Abbott said abortion should be legal, safe and rare.

The previous poster, swagman, stated Abbott was on the side of the foetus and so by being on that side Abbott would be for the death of a women vis child birth.

Basic deduction from the view of the other poster.

woody2014 wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 11:52am:

____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:46am: Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:41am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life. So Abbott wants to remove the rights of women … is this because he hates women? And why draw the line there, how about all the babies denied lives by condoms. Will conservatives call for their banning?    >:(  Queers deny life by injecting their sperm into arsehole

Other that showing what you spend a lot of time thinking about, your comment has no relevance to the topic.

Condoms kill the opportunity of human babies so the con anti choice brigade should state their view on condoms. Babies or the right to deny babies of life?

woody2014 wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 11:52am:

____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:46am: Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:41am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life. So Abbott wants to remove the rights of women … is this because he hates women? And why draw the line there, how about all the babies denied lives by condoms. Will conservatives call for their banning?    >:(  Queers deny life by injecting their sperm into arsehole

BLAHAHAHA

when has anyone in the liberal party ever done anything to limit womens rights to choose. tony was health minister for several years during which there was (and continues to be) a medicare rebate for termination.
tony would never do anything to limit a womans right to choose.  he would be deposed as leader before that would ever happen.  non issue

We should have retrospective abortion for green voters.

What a specious argument.

Because someone advocates that an unborn child whose beginning could have been prevented by any responsible adult deserves consideration over the 'rights' of a woman to her body.. does not mean he/she is advocating that women die in childbirth - a rare occurrence.

There is no 'right' to abortion no matter how you cook it - the entire premise on which legalised abortion is based is Roe v Wade - which specifies that the state should not place any sanction on a woman who procures an abortion.

That does NOT proclaim an absolute right to be given an abortion - which is why doctors may refuse etc.

So while you may say that abortion is not a wrong - that does not necessarily make it a Right. 

Perhaps not oddly - you will find that each and every 'woman's right' in isolation of all others in society falls into the same category. Rights are universal issues - applied to all equally.

In the context of abortion, no man has the right to demand abortion - nor does any woman - nor should they.  Procuring it via a very thin and transparent 'legal' means is another matter - but is still not a Right.

Me? I hate abortion and adore children - the mainstay and raison d'etre of civilisation - but I do not oppose it in some necessary cases.

aquascoot wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 11:59am:

woody2014 wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:52am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:46am: Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:41am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life. So Abbott wants to remove the rights of women … is this because he hates women? And why draw the line there, how about all the babies denied lives by condoms. Will conservatives call for their banning?    >:(  Queers deny life by injecting their sperm into arsehole BLAHAHAHA when has anyone in the liberal party ever done anything to limit womens rights to choose. tony was health minister for several years during which there was (and continues to be) a medicare rebate for termination. tony would never do anything to limit a womans right to choose.  he would be deposed as leader before that would ever happen.  non issue

Moron!

Remember the kerfuffle about RU486?

Now the simian is PM and has the evil son of a bitch Pell urging him on!

What surprises me is the way the pro abortionists get so hostile over the issue, the bare mention of it has them frothing at the mouth like lunatics, its almost like they want to pick up a scalpel and start killing the littlies themselves while screaming kill the babies kill them all now, very irrational, they would have enjoyed the aztec sacrifices.

____ wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 11:54am:

FriYAY wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:51am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:46am: Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:41am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life. So Abbott wants to remove the rights of women … is this because he hates women? And why draw the line there, how about all the babies denied lives by condoms. Will conservatives call for their banning? Link to the highlighted please moron.... I think Abbott said abortion should be legal, safe and rare. The previous poster, swagman, stated Abbott was on the side of the foetus and so by being on that side Abbott would be for the death of a women vis child birth. Basic deduction from the view of the other poster.

It’s a retarded deduction by you, and you know it.

Swagman wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 11:41am:

____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life.

Yes he cares a lot, when he thought he duffed his shag he opted to farm it out.

skippy. wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 1:52pm:

Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:41am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life. Yes he cares a lot, when he thought he duffed his shag he opted to farm it out.

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Link sweet cheeks

Innocent bystander wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 1:07pm:

What surprises me is the way the pro abortionists get so hostile over the issue, the bare mention of it has them frothing at the mouth like lunatics, its almost like they want to pick up a scalpel and start killing the littlies themselves while screaming kill the babies kill them all now, very irrational, they would have enjoyed the aztec sacrifices.

maybe we could build a large mayan temple on chritmas island to help them satisfy their blood lust.

FriYAY wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 1:18pm:

____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:54am: FriYAY wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:51am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:46am: Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:41am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life. So Abbott wants to remove the rights of women … is this because he hates women? And why draw the line there, how about all the babies denied lives by condoms. Will conservatives call for their banning? Link to the highlighted please moron.... I think Abbott said abortion should be legal, safe and rare. The previous poster, swagman, stated Abbott was on the side of the foetus and so by being on that side Abbott would be for the death of a women vis child birth. Basic deduction from the view of the other poster. It’s a retarded deduction by you, and you know it.

It was you who jumped to the wrong conclusion via selective reading. Open your eyes and your grey matter could possibly follow.

____ wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 11:46am:

Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:41am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life. So Abbott wants to remove the rights of women … is this because he hates women? And why draw the line there, how about all the babies denied lives by condoms. Will conservatives call for their banning?

No I guess he believes that the human rights of the un-born child need protecting.  It cannot protect itself so society should be protecting it.

Society protects children because they cannot protect themselves,  society protects the aged and infirm because they cannot protect themselves.

Human life begins at conception, not 1 week, not 20 weeks or 9 months but at conception. :(

woody2014 wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 1:56pm:

skippy. wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 1:52pm: Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:41am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life. Yes he cares a lot, when he thought he duffed his shag he opted to farm it out. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Link sweet cheeks

How many links would you like?

Swagman wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 5:14pm:

____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:46am: Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:41am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life. So Abbott wants to remove the rights of women … is this because he hates women? And why draw the line there, how about all the babies denied lives by condoms. Will conservatives call for their banning? No I guess he believes that the human rights of the un-born child need protecting.  It cannot protect itself so society should be protecting it. Society protects children because they cannot protect themselves,  society protects the aged and infirm because they cannot protect themselves. Human life begins at conception, not 1 week, not 20 weeks or 9 months but at conception. :(

Why conception and not at the sperm or egg stage?


And if it's at contraception stage then parents should be paid Abbott's paternity leave from conception.

____ wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 5:45pm:

Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 5:14pm: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:46am: Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:41am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life. So Abbott wants to remove the rights of women … is this because he hates women? And why draw the line there, how about all the babies denied lives by condoms. Will conservatives call for their banning? No I guess he believes that the human rights of the un-born child need protecting.  It cannot protect itself so society should be protecting it. Society protects children because they cannot protect themselves,  society protects the aged and infirm because they cannot protect themselves. Human life begins at conception, not 1 week, not 20 weeks or 9 months but at conception. :( Why conception and not at the sperm or egg stage? And if it's at contraception stage then parents should be paid Abbott's paternity leave from conception.

Simple answer is that conception is required for life to begin.  Human life cannot spark with the egg or sperm alone.

You want to trace your life back to it's start then you will end at the moment of your conception and not 20 weeks later.

Paternity leave is a rort. 
 

Swagman wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 5:58pm:

____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 5:45pm: Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 5:14pm: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:46am: Swagman wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:41am: ____ wrote on Jan 6th, 2014 at 11:37am: where does Abbott sit on the right of women over their bodies? On the side of the un-born child and it's life. So Abbott wants to remove the rights of women … is this because he hates women? And why draw the line there, how about all the babies denied lives by condoms. Will conservatives call for their banning? No I guess he believes that the human rights of the un-born child need protecting.  It cannot protect itself so society should be protecting it. Society protects children because they cannot protect themselves,  society protects the aged and infirm because they cannot protect themselves. Human life begins at conception, not 1 week, not 20 weeks or 9 months but at conception. :( Why conception and not at the sperm or egg stage? And if it's at contraception stage then parents should be paid Abbott's paternity leave from conception. Simple answer is that conception is required for life to begin.  Human life cannot spark with the egg or sperm alone. You want to trace your life back to it's start then you will end at the moment of your conception and not 20 weeks later. Paternity leave is a rort.

We can create babies without men, claim scientists
Fertility specialists have found a way for women to have babies without men.

It involves a cocktail of chemicals acting as an 'artificial sperm' to trick a human egg into forming an embryo.


And paid paternity leave, rort or not, it is still the policy the cons promised at the last election.
If conception is the beginning of a baby's life to some conservatives then paternity leave should begin then.

____ wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 6:15pm:

We can create babies without men, claim scientists Fertility specialists have found a way for women to have babies without men. It involves a cocktail of chemicals acting as an 'artificial sperm' to trick a human egg into forming an embryo.

Scientists make lots of claims mainly to extort taxpayer funds from gullible public servants.


____ wrote on Jan 6^th, 2014 at 6:15pm:

And paid paternity leave, rort or not, it is still the policy the cons promised at the last election. If conception is the beginning of a baby's life to some conservatives then paternity leave should begin then

Juliar had her own rorting paid maternity / paternity leave scam, Abbott's is only marginally better because it treats it as an employment entitlement and it's paid by a levy on business.

Juliar's was just a pork barrell and paid for by the usual suspects being the minority that pay the majority of tax.