Re: In all seriousness about the abortion "debate"

[Sylvia Else]

David Moss wrote:

> On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 22:06:51 +1100, Su Solomon <susol@zemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Aaaaaah how sad, all those baby factories going to waste.
>>
>>You are a joke David, a bloody joke.
>>
>>I wonder what Jessie Street would have thought of a liberal wanker like
>>you?
>
>
> About the same as many present day members of the ALP I imagine.
>
> Are you suggesting that she would have voted against the UN
> Declaration of Human Rights had she been permitted to take her
> rightful place on the committee drafting it?
>
> My point was, and I'm sure you realise this, that not being able or
> willing to support a child is not a valid excuse for an abortion in
> today's society.
>
> There are currently ten times as many people willing to adopt as there
> are babies put up for adoption.
>
> Women today who claim they had an abortion for economic reasons, or
> because they didn't want to be tied down to looking after a child, are
> being disingenuous. This increases the guilt feelings I spoke of in a
> previous article. They really had an abortion for personal
> convenience.

Or because they realised that when the time came, they would not be able
to overcome the maternal drives that evolution has inflicted on them,
and would end up in unwanted parenthood.

I made this point before, but of course you didn't let that get in the way.

Sylvia.

[David Moss]

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:08:49 +1100, Sylvia Else
<sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:

[cut]

>> There are currently ten times as many people willing to adopt as there
>> are babies put up for adoption.
>>
>> Women today who claim they had an abortion for economic reasons, or
>> because they didn't want to be tied down to looking after a child, are
>> being disingenuous. This increases the guilt feelings I spoke of in a
>> previous article. They really had an abortion for personal
>> convenience.
>
>Or because they realised that when the time came, they would not be able
>to overcome the maternal drives that evolution has inflicted on them,
>and would end up in unwanted parenthood.
>
>I made this point before, but of course you didn't let that get in the way.

OK I admit I am totally unqualified to comment on this aspect.
The changes in brain chemistry associated with late pregnancy and
childbirth have a marked effect on women's perception. I've seen it in
my wife but, not being female, I can't ever know what it is like.

I haven't experienced any feeling that I would kill an innocent,
non-threatening and defenceless person to avoid. There are many
situations in which I would kill to prevent an event or outcome, but
no feelings that I believe justify killing.

I also believe killing in order to avoid dealing with feelings is
counterproductive in the longer term. Killing also invokes powerful
feelings. It can provide an instant gratification of need, but leave
the person with a lifetime of having to deal with the psychological
consequences. Most people choose instant over delayed gratification
without a considerable investment in self development.

My wife, who is far better qualified than I in understanding this
issue, cannot understand how any woman could choose to kill her unborn
baby rather than let it live with someone else.

DM
personal opinion only

[Bertie the Bunyip]

Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in
news:41918644$0$2678$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au :

>
>
> David Moss wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 22:06:51 +1100, Su Solomon <susol@zemail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Aaaaaah how sad, all those baby factories going to waste.
>>>
>>>You are a joke David, a bloody joke.
>>>
>>>I wonder what Jessie Street would have thought of a liberal wanker
>>>like you?
>>
>>
>> About the same as many present day members of the ALP I imagine.
>>
>> Are you suggesting that she would have voted against the UN
>> Declaration of Human Rights had she been permitted to take her
>> rightful place on the committee drafting it?
>>
>> My point was, and I'm sure you realise this, that not being able or
>> willing to support a child is not a valid excuse for an abortion in
>> today's society.
>>
>> There are currently ten times as many people willing to adopt as
>> there are babies put up for adoption.
>>
>> Women today who claim they had an abortion for economic reasons, or
>> because they didn't want to be tied down to looking after a child,
>> are being disingenuous. This increases the guilt feelings I spoke of
>> in a previous article. They really had an abortion for personal
>> convenience.
>
> Or because they realised that when the time came, they would not be
> able to overcome the maternal drives that evolution has inflicted on
> them, and would end up in unwanted parenthood.
>
> I made this point before, but of course you didn't let that get in the
> way.

You didn't you stupid cunt


Bertie