Uncategorized

UPDATE: Tasmania’s Proposed Abortion Law Changes

I just want to start by saying a huge THANK YOU to all those people who have already written a submission to the Tasmanian government’s dismaying abortion bill. Some of you have posted those letters here on this blog, to help others frame their own response – thank you also. For those who have not written a submission…

IT’S NOT TOO LATE!

The initial consultation period was extended to April 5. Your letter doesn’t have to be long-winded, spouting figures and quotes and evidence. Put it simply, succinctly – just say respectfully what you think of the bill and why.

Here are the links again:

To view the draft Reproductive Health (Access to Terminations) Bill 2013, click here.

To view the information paper on the above bill, click here.

To read an article about the flaws in this bill, click here.

To get informed about abortion, click here.

And, most importantly, to tell our government what you think about this disastrous legislation, email public.health@dhhs.tas.gov.au or send a hard copy letter to GPO Box 125 Hobart, TAS, 7001.

If you’re still feeling like you need to do something more to speak up for the unborn and the hurting mothers out there, here’s the details of something else you might like to consider being involved in:

PEACEFUL PROTEST
Wednesday March 27 (tomorrow), 11-11:30am
Outside Health Minister Michelle O’Byrne’s office,
St John Street, Launceston (cnr Cameron St)

Note that this event is not affiliated with any church or pro-life group, it was simply arranged by a concerned woman. Eighty people attended last week – hopefully many more this week. This is a peaceful, silent protest – bring signs and banners but zip your lips, pray quietly, and your presence will send a strong message.

Thanks again – I have been so buoyed to see so many speaking up, taking action against this horrible legislation. Be encouraged – you ARE making a difference.

Advertisements

11 Comments

  1. I think in all these situations where humanity is at stake, law forms a ridiculously rigid basis for dealing with individual situations.

    The best outcome would be to simply rule that a person or persons choosing to terminate a human life should have to face a jury of their peers and justify that decision.

    That covers Euthanisia and abortion, as well as some other, equally difficult life and death situations.

    It gives scope for the difficult choices that must on occasion be made to be made, but requires consideration beyond the immediate.

    Once you go establishing statute law about when these things are ok, you immediately place yourself in the position where either circumstances cannot be rightfully taken into consideration on one side, and where deeply wrong acts occur without consequence on the other.

    • Fiona Vosper says

      Yes, let’s put vulnerable women and terminally ill people in front of a jury of their peers to be judged on a personal and difficult decision.
      Are you serious? What about compassion for the terminally ill? What about compassion for the woman who has to carry and then raise the child? A woman who may not be physically or mentally stable enough to even carry the child to term.

      A woman needs education and support, it doesn’t matter what her decision is. She does not need judgement.

      • No woman in that situation is as vulnerable as the child she carries.

        Compassion for the terminally ill starts with treating them as human, just as it does for an unborn child.

        If you can ‘terminate’ another human without consequence, where does that leave us? We don’t even allow the state to terminate convicted mass murderers these days, and yet you see inconvenience as a valid excuse to do so?

        If a woman needs education and support, and not judgement, then she shouldn’t undertake actions that demand judgement.

  2. Fiona Vosper says

    I disagree that a woman is not as vulnerable as the fetus she carries. The decision to end a pregnancy must be extremely difficult and would not be made lightly. It is up to the woman who has to carry and then raise the baby. She is the one who’s body is being used as the incubator. She is the one who has to go through the emotional trauma of labor and then care for the child. You have no say over my body in that regard.

    What is your solution then? do we put women into jail who might be at risk of terminating their baby? Do we prosecute them for carrying it out? Do we make women turn to unqualified backyard butchers? Abortion is a part of society. That choice needs to be there, otherwise there are huge consequences. Women need education and support to make the best decision for them. Not the best decision for the church or you or Claire.

    What is the problem with a terminally ill person making the decision to end their own life, exactly? That is a personal decision and I don’t see why you or anyone else should have a say in that. Let people die with dignity, in a manner that they choose.

  3. You can’t really do much about suicide and its not particularly relevant. At issue here is cases where other people are choosing to terminate a human life.

    You don’t put people in jail for something they might do; that is completely out of line with our legal system. You put people in jail for something they have done.

    There are at least two options for how a jury system could be set up; either as a binding prejudgment, or, as you say, as part of a prosecution. Both are workable, and in different situations might be preferable.

    Providing a jury trial immediately gets around all the ‘difficult’ cases that pose so much difficulty to statute law; the whole point is to be able to say that in some cases we accept the need to terminate a life, or from the other perspective to say that in this case it is not acceptable.

    I’m not suggesting it is my choice, but rather that it, in each case, is society’s choice, represented in practice by a jury.

    • Fiona Vosper says

      You brought up euthanasia, I was merely posing the question.

      Your proposal will never happen. We actually live in a free society where we have choices and if one does not want to go through the trauma of labor or if one does not feel ready to be a parent, then they have that choice. If one has been raped or if one’s life is at risk, then they have that choice. A jury is not needed nor wanted in this case. Plus, we don’t make laws purely based on certain people’s morals. If a woman chooses to abort a fetus, then that does not really affect your life. If you prevent a woman from making that choice, then that can have huge consequences on hers. Do you see how that works?

      • so glad to see someone with a logical argument who is thinking of the greater population rather than just seeing this issue from a white, middle to upper class woman’s perspective!!

  4. thanks so much for all the info on how to tell the government what i think of the legislation, it’s allowed me and 90 of my female friends to write letters and say HOW MUCH WE SUPPORT THIS BILL so I’d just like to thank you in enabling me to support safe legal abortion! 🙂

    • Paul says

      Don’t worry about this troll. Trolls don’t have that many friends!

  5. Sarah says

    It frustrates me when people try to justify abortion by focusing on arguments other than whether the preborn baby is actually a person or not and whether they have legal rights.

    When push comes to shove its the real issue. You can argue all you want about womens/mothers rights, but if the preborn baby is considered the same as a newborn it doesn’t make any difference.

    No matter how stressful a situation might be for an expectant mother, if performing the same procedures used in abortions on newborns/infants/children is not acceptable by law, then performing them on preborn babies should not be acceptable unless an credible argument is made that preborn babies are not actually living humans (as far as i know there hasnt been).

    Except for the rare circumstance of a pregnant mother who has serious medical condition that will kill her if she does not terminate her pregnancy (which at 24weeks onward is not relevant anyway as the baby can survive outside the womb), there is no reason a pregnant woman could put forward for wanting to end the life of their preborn baby that a mother of an already born baby/child could make for wanting to end their child/babies life. Rape, disability, financial burden, accident, teenage pregnancy, affair, mental illness, not feeling ready etc. could all be used in both situations.

    It could even be argued that motherhood is considerably more stressful than pregnancy so if the wellbeing of the mother was really the issue, terminations would probably occur more commonly the other way around (it would probably be named termination of motherhood). Of all the stages of motherhood pregnancy is probably the stage that requires the least effort from the mother in taking care of their child as the things involved in baby care are also pretty much self care: rest, healthy eating, gentle excercise, avoiding stress. Some women love and enjoy the pregnancy so much they get addicted to getting pregnant!

    Abortion procedures are horrific: bodies being ripped apart by vaccuums, bodies injected with poison, bodies eaten by acid, skulls crushed, brains cut out…I could go on…I hate the fact that many people will read what i just wrote and consider it offensive, fearmongering, agenda pushing. For those people I ask you this: as uncomfortable as it may feel to hear it, is it true? Whether you admit it on this website or not you will know in your heart.

    Yes the reasons why women seek abortions are valid stressful life situations that need addressing. I do not mean to brush off or condemn anybody who feels unable to maintain a pregnancy or be a mother because of the reasons I have mentioned. But these issues are not addressed (however much it may seem like they are) by geting an abortion.

    The issue is never really about the mother and her rights, the issue really is at what point is a human a human? And when if ever is it justified to end that humans existence and who decides?

  6. Chris says

    I find some of the comments here very difficult to understand. How can terminating a human life not be bad? There are people out there struggling to get pregnant or struggling and unfortunately losing a child and a child is THE only thing a couple wants and then there are people who will have them terminated.
    There are options, adoption, education, counselling, all things which can be provided. I know someone who survived an abortion attempt by their mother and I have heard others speak who were the result of a sexual assault where their mother had the choice to terminate but decided against. They have gone on to achieve many more things than others.
    How would your life be different had your mother had an abortion? What if the child that has been aborted could have grown up to cure cancer or be a Prime Minister or something like that. We just never know. God has created that person right from the beginning and has a whole life mapped out for them.

Comments are closed.