The gender card again...

[catsnknots]

Sorry to interrupt your no politics idea  but I still find the subject important and want to rant... 

How dare Gillard make abortion an election issue... There is no way that is acceptable and to even suggest that the Coalition will remove your right to one is scare mongering to the max. 

In this modern day time it is incredibly important that we don't use these topics to inflame a false war. 

Even if a person in any party did not like the idea of abortion there is no way that they would get the support to make it illegal. Or limit your access to one... or even make you feel bad for having one. 

So if Gillard wants to launch a campaign called "Labor Women for Gillard" then fine... but don't pull out the gender card and make something out of nothing.. 

And personally I find it sexist to have a women's only group calling for women to support Gillard. 

I have two sons and I also want their future to be positive and not forgotten but it seems that this PM only want to think of the future of women. 

[freakiness]

That was a summary... it is made at the end of an article, speech, thesis... it sums up what the gist of the argument is and makes solid your opinion or debate. 

that is what Gillard was doing.. she was summing up and closing her argument. 

Abortion was not mentioned until the almost the end. She was not summing up what was already said.

It was an event for women. Why should issues that affect women not be mentioned?

[freakiness]

Again, why is every comment about women labelled as playing the gender card?

why is mention of Men's Sheds never referred to as playing a gender card.

It's a double standard. Nothing more, nothing less.

[nevynreally]

Abortion was not mentioned until the almost the end. She was not summing up what was already said.

It was an event for women. Why should issues that affect women not be mentioned?

I'll type slower.

This is not an election issue. The fact that the current PM stated (basically) that voting in the opposition would give them the power to change the current abortion laws is grubby, nasty, untrue, do you need more?

[catsnknots]

Because Men's Shed is not used as a political tool to divide the nation. 

[donnashuggy]

Tony Abbott does not agree nor does he believe in abortion.

It does not matter what he says, this is politics.

[nevynreally]

Tony Abbott does not agree nor does he believe in abortion.

It does not matter what he says, this is politics.

His views are known. 

There has been no suggestion of changing the current laws.

So your point is?

[donnashuggy]

His views are known. 

There has been no suggestion of changing the current laws.

So your point is?

He may tell fibs to the Australian People.

[freakiness]

I'll type slower.

This is not an election issue. The fact that the current PM stated (basically) that voting in the opposition would give them the power to change the current abortion laws is grubby, nasty, untrue, do you need more?

On March 3 this year Senator Madigan was asked by ABC Radio National's Jonathan Green on Sunday Extra, whether - if he found himself holding the balance of power in an Abbott government - he would use that position to further restrict abortion.

"Yes," he said. "Unashamedly so."

[freakiness]

Because Men's Shed is not used as a political tool to divide the nation. 

And women at an event for women are allowed to mention abortion without it being turned into a gender war.

[donnashuggy]

https://twitter.com/bazarazzi/status/344712169121783808/photo/1

Nite everyone!