on
12-01-2014
08:52 AM
- last edited on
12-01-2014
09:20 AM
by
pixie-six
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE left, be they from the ALP or the ABC, oppose free speech when it is their ideology which is under scrutiny.
That's why there was a sustained outbreak of clamorous opposition to Senator Cory Bernardi's middle-of-the-road discussion of cultural values last week.
The South Australian Senator broke two of the rules laid down by the left.
He asked why no discussion of abortion is permitted in Australia though there are anything from 70,000 to 100,000 abortions carried out in this country each year, according to evidence given in Senate estimates - and he questioned whether single-parent families are the golden standard for child rearing.
Under leftist dogma, abortion, or the more politically correct euphemism, termination, should only be discussed by women. Then, using the usual distortions of the language which have seen homosexuals insist that they be called gays and that the descriptive noun marriage be corrupted to include same sex unions, the so-called progressives say they are in favour of a pro-choice policy on abortion which means in fact that women are rarely presented with any options, in effect - no-choice.
By breaking these taboos, Senator Bernardi aroused the slumberous feminist lobby, few of whom it would seem have actually read his book, The Conservative Revolution, which was published almost a month ago and has been reviewed in numerous forums.
Senator Bernardi does not hide behind weasel words.
He is so plain spoken that most of the commentators who have attacked him have revealed their ignorance of his writings or have taken his words totally out of context.
He believes in the battle of ideas and thinks it is important for politicians to stand up for what they believe in. Indeed, he believes it's the right and responsibility of every member of the parliament to engage in the battle of ideas.
"It's absolutely critical that politicians are prepared to discuss ideas that are controversial," he told me.
"Otherwise we are stuck with a tyranny of political correctness. That's a stifling doctrine we need to rebel against in this country - that's the revolution I am calling for."
The Senator understands that abortion is an emotive topic, he understands - as most people do - that it can cause enormous stress and anguish, but he is also concerned that one in five pregnancies in this country are being terminated and believes that should be a cause for concern and debate.
He has not said we should outlaw or prohibit abortion but that was certainly the insinuation made by his critics.
His position on abortion is exactly the same as that as that held by former US president Bill Clinton - that it "should not only be safe and legal, it should be rare".
Last January, in his State of the Union address, President Barack Obama echoed president Clinton's remarks saying: "Today and every day, my administration continues our efforts to reduce unintended pregnancies, support maternal and child health, and minimise the need for abortion."
That view is also held by Prime Minister Tony Abbott, whom the members of the ALP and some commentators from the ABC have attempted to link to extreme anti-abortion views on numerous occasions when they attempt to drag his personal and private religious views into the political debate.
Senator Bernardi was also attacked by ABC breakfast presenter Beverley O'Connor for mentioning single-parent families in his book.
She framed her question: "The book really rails against non-traditional families; children within a gay relationship, children of marriage breakdowns. In 2014 now, this is a fact of life, this is not necessarily a fact that families want but it's a fact of life isn't it?"
In defence of traditional families, Senator Bernardi had written: "Why then the levels of criminality among boys and promiscuity among girls who are brought up in single-parent families, more often than not headed by a single mother?"
Had O'Connor wished to put the argument in an intelligent context, she might have noted that there was a footnote in the book which referenced a New York Time article on a Father's Day address delivered by President Obama which said: "We know the statistics - that children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime.
"Nine times more likely to drop out of schools and 20 times more likely to end up in prison.
"They are more likely to have behavioural problems, or run away from home, or become teenage parents themselves. And the foundation of our community is weaker because of it".
O'Connor's approach to the Bernardi book exemplifies the arrant hypocrisy taken by so many at the ABC when they are wittingly or subconsciously taking up the cudgels for the left and Labor against conservative figures.
They so obviously inject and infect their interviews and assaults with their own personal political prejudices.
While O'Connor may not like the mainstream moral compass which has served society well for millennia, she and other critics should note that on these issues, Senator Bernardi is actually in excellent company.
on 13-01-2014 07:13 PM
that wasn't me if anyone is thinking that.
I know though that it wasn't easy for the women nor the man when he found out after their relationship broke up .
He was hurt that he didn't get a say...she knew that he would be
She also knew that she wasn't well and she did what she felt was best for all concerned.
each case is an individual and very personal one .
I don't believe that it's an easy way out for anyone
13-01-2014 07:14 PM - edited 13-01-2014 07:14 PM
@silverfaun wrote:Why would you try to correlate another country's laws into this debate?? this is something you do all the time. I think it's because your argument doesn't hold water so you cast around for an extreme example to prop yourself up.
Now this type of behaviour is not helpful & does nothing for the debate. If you have anything relating to this country that says the morning after pill induces an "abortion" your words, or that women are in imminent danger of having their rights denied them then that would be helpful.
what Country's Laws did I mention ?
on 13-01-2014 07:25 PM
I don't understand your inability (or resistance) to understand that the morning after pill is considered an abortion pill ?
Abortion is the termination (end) of a pregnancy. A low-risk surgical procedure called suction aspiration or suction curette is generally used for first trimester abortions. Medical (non-surgical) abortions using medications such as mifepristone (RU486) are available in some clinics. Studies show most Australians support safe and legal abortion.
http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Abortion_in_Australia
on 13-01-2014 07:34 PM
If we are going to start splitting hairs over what is or isnt an abortion, then, technically, a miscarriage before 20 weeks is known as a spontaneous abortion.
on 13-01-2014 07:44 PM
@the_great_she_elephant wrote:If we are going to start splitting hairs over what is or isnt an abortion, then, technically, a miscarriage before 20 weeks is known as a spontaneous abortion.
You are right. Up to 24 weeks, it is an abortion, after then it is a miscarriage.
on 13-01-2014 07:51 PM
@polksaladallie wrote:
@the_great_she_elephant wrote:If we are going to start splitting hairs over what is or isnt an abortion, then, technically, a miscarriage before 20 weeks is known as a spontaneous abortion.
You are right. Up to 24 weeks, it is an abortion, after then it is a miscarriage.
Mr Google told me 20 weeks, Polks - do you think we should start a long, interpersonal dispute over which of us is right.
on 13-01-2014 07:56 PM
@the_great_she_elephant wrote:
@polksaladallie wrote:
@the_great_she_elephant wrote:If we are going to start splitting hairs over what is or isnt an abortion, then, technically, a miscarriage before 20 weeks is known as a spontaneous abortion.
You are right. Up to 24 weeks, it is an abortion, after then it is a miscarriage.
Mr Google told me 20 weeks, Polks - do you think we should start a long, interpersonal dispute over which of us is right.
No, let's split the difference. Mr. Google told me 24 weeks.
So 22 it is.
on 13-01-2014 08:09 PM
@polksaladallie wrote:
@the_great_she_elephant wrote:
@polksaladallie wrote:
@the_great_she_elephant wrote:If we are going to start splitting hairs over what is or isnt an abortion, then, technically, a miscarriage before 20 weeks is known as a spontaneous abortion.
You are right. Up to 24 weeks, it is an abortion, after then it is a miscarriage.
Mr Google told me 20 weeks, Polks - do you think we should start a long, interpersonal dispute over which of us is right.
No, let's split the difference. Mr. Google told me 24 weeks.
So 22 it is.
I can almost hear the mods breathing a collective sigh of relief.
on 13-01-2014 08:14 PM
@the_great_she_elephant wrote:
@polksaladallie wrote:
@the_great_she_elephant wrote:If we are going to start splitting hairs over what is or isnt an abortion, then, technically, a miscarriage before 20 weeks is known as a spontaneous abortion.
You are right. Up to 24 weeks, it is an abortion, after then it is a miscarriage.
Mr Google told me 20 weeks, Polks - do you think we should start a long, interpersonal dispute over which of us is right.
Is it known as a miscarriage or still birth at the later stage?
I've seen much later miscarriages written up as spontaneous abortion. It's quite shocking for the person who lost the baby if they didn't previusly know the language used.
on 14-01-2014 12:04 AM
@the_great_she_elephant wrote:If we are going to start splitting hairs over what is or isnt an abortion, then, technically, a miscarriage before 20 weeks is known as a spontaneous abortion.
I think it might be different state to state? Not sure.
I understood that any miscarriage before 24 weeks is called a spontaneous abortion by law. But not 100% sure.