Why now?

Chris Trotter has written an excellent piece on abortion, questioning just why Mr. Steve Chadwick, scum List MP has decided to make a stand on abortion right now.

THE FIRST QUESTION I’d like to ask the Labour List MP, Steve Chadwick, is: “Why now?”

What’s convinced her that the time is right to re-open the abortion debate? What ill-omened denizen of the current political environment has told her that this is the moment to introduce a private member’s bill permitting abortion-on-demand up to the 24th week of pregnancy? I would really, really like to know who it was. Because, try as I may, I’m finding it really difficult to make the cost/benefit analysis come out in Ms Chadwick’s, her party’s, or even her gender’s favour.

My bet is orders. Orders from New York. Trotter tries to work out why, and this is the best bit.

Clearly, Ms Chadwick’s proposed private members bill has got me genuinely perplexed. I simply cannot see what difference – in practical terms – changing the current legislation would make.

According to statistics supplied by the Abortion Supervisory Committee, there were 18,382 abortions carried out in New Zealand in 2007. That’s 12,437 more than were carried out in 1980 – barely two years after the Contraception, Sterilisation & Abortion Act came into force on 1 April 1978.

Does Ms Chadwick not believe that 18,382 abortions are enough? Does she think there should be more? Has the existing legislation created an unfulfilled demand for abortion which her proposed private members bill seeks to satisfy?

That seems unlikely – given New Zealand’s undoubted competitiveness in the international abortion stakes. Among a selection of twelve of the world’s low-fertility countries we jostle with Australia, Sweden and the USA for the honour of recording the highest abortion rate. We’re consistently well ahead of countries where abortion-on-demand is already legally enshrined.

Could it be that Ms Chadwick is hoping to bring down New Zealand’s gold-medal-winning abortion rate?

This is the nub of the issue. The same liberal elite that demand a woman’s right to murder a baby at any time, in this instance up to 24 weeks, also express concern at our abortion rate. This is of course a nonsense. If, according to them, it is ok to kill a baby up to 24 weeks then why the big fuss over the abortion rate? Indeed why the big fuss of any abortion no matter the timing? In fact why limit it to time measured in weeks, I mean one of the arguments of the liberal elite is succinctly explained by Chris Trotter and a supporter of Mr. Steve Chadwick.

In the words of one blogger calling herself the Queen of Thorns: “Dear anti-choicers: go get yourself a fucking tapeworm already and sit down to a marathon of the Alien quadrilogy and then whinge to me about ‘it’s no big deal, just wait X months’.”

Yeah, no big deal. Having the child will punish the poor woman for the rest of her life. Well the logical extension of that is if say the child gets to 5 years old, and has become a bit of a burden on the mother then why not advocate for the putting down of unwanted children, no fuss, no bother, I mean we shouldn’t expect someone to be burdened the rest of their lives should we? It would sure save a lot of child abuse, it could be argued.

If abortion is to be legal then can we please stop the hand-wringing over the abortion rate and the time limit, just get on with the killing. After all, what’s the big deal? We are already killing 612 classrooms of children every year. It is saving the government billions in education, health care, and a myriad of other social ills like murder, rape, bashing, alcoholism, and death by cigarettes are all solved by abortion.

Some pro-killing advocates say that it is just like pulling a tooth, well I can see a real boon in commercial real estate with that. I mean, even in Howick there are 3-4 dentists, imagine if every suburb had 3-4 abortion clinics and all the ensuing staff, imagine the employment, tax gains and so forth….oh now I’m starting to see where Mr. Steve Chadwick is coming from. Hell, you could even shop around for the cheapest extraction or get a two for one deal, or even better have loyalty cards like the coffee shops have, every 10th abortion is free.

Nothing will convince me that abortion is nothing short of murder. If murder is wrong then why isn’t abortion?

  • mediatart

    Working out what Trotter is thinking ? Good luck. Hes probably on commision from the ACT party. Like the old days he turned at their Friday night drinks in Wellington, yes he was invited to this, it was a win win situation. They got to hear why labour was useless and he got …. well!.
    As for why now ?
    Two little words , Karl Rove. Which means play to your base. And your link to NY is a bit silly Whale. This would have had to be approved by Goff, or more likely King. Theres your answer , look to Miramar.
    After Clark was in charge for 9 years and if H1 & H2 wanted it to happen , it did.

  • mediatart

    If mur­der is wrong then why isn’t abortion?

    Well indeed and since when has a mother killing her new born child been murder?
    Its called infanticide, and it ranks well down the scale of serious crimes. Like after manslaughter, after attempted murder , gee it comes after GBH.
    This is just to ginger up your 7th day adventist mates.
    And its nonsense

96%