You brought up the demand aspect with your obscure reference to adopting Chinese babies.

When do you define what is a human life? What ends up on your bedroom sheets most nights? A cluster of replicating cells? 5 fingers and toes? Able to survive outside a mothers womb?

What about when the mothers life is at risk?

What about severe deformities.

What sort of punishment would you like to see for those women who spontaneously abort?

cautious connie wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2007 at 7:21am:


Of course you are completely correct connie.

There can never be any hard and fast rule in regards to abortion..and the only one who can make this decision one way or another ,is the mother herself. She knows herself and her life circumstances- noone else.

The most correct decision in any case will be made by the mother. Orpahanages are a miserable and last resort option for any baby/ child- they are instituionalised and cold..a childs cannot thrive in that environment.

Conception is the beggining of life..how can it be any other way?


How can we as a society arrange things so that child's voice is heard? Who could represent the child in the abortion decision? A lawyer, judge, psychologist? 


I dont think you can connie..the childs voice will be represented by the mother, its the way i should be.

Maybe the way is to educate the female population in schools -sex eduaction etc..to consider these aspects and outcomes as a result of pregnancy. Girls are quite mature at 13-14 now and would be able to consider and debate these issues with a fair degree of understanding  and empathy..as they themselves are fast approaching the age to become young mothers themselves without sensible guidance.

Education is most likely the best outcome for giving the unborn a voice. It has to be.   

Classic Liberal wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2007 at 8:44am:



pender hi,

From some of the orphanges we,ve seen in the media and around the world..you may as well be(dead that is). Of course some may be better than others , but on the whole , not good.

Classic Liberal wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2007 at 9:02am:



Well ok..but I still say an orpahange is not a good place for a child to raised. And I think this problem is not confined to Australia..the abortion problem.

Some orphanges are better than others, but even the 'best' would leave a lot to be desired.

Classic Liberal wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2007 at 10:03am:

 

no pender of course not, put  that way.

I think the mother's interests should definitely be spoken for too in the decision.

Really? Cause it appeared you were trying to frame the issue from a purely pro-life perspective.

There can never be any hard and fast rule in regards to abortion..and the only one who can make this decision one way or another ,is the mother herself.

I agree with this. A mother is a perfectly good advocate for her own child. To suggest an unborn child has no advocate trivialises the relationship between mother and child.

Education is most likely the best outcome for giving the unborn a voice. It has to be.

Another good point Oceans.

I think that in Australia orphanages are reserved for children no-one can take care of in a home setting.

---

Embryo-safe stem cells developed

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Embryosafe-stem-cells-developed/2007/06/23/1182019408850.html

Researchers at a US company trying to push the margins of stem cell research say they have grown human embryonic stem cells using a non-controversial method that does not harm the embryos.