Pregnancy

I am not an enthusiastic supporter of abortion…but I do think the laws surrounding abortion need to be amended because they reflect attitudes from a by-gone era.

What I can’t countenance though are threats from bullies, they do their cause no good at all:

Police are investigating an anonymous threat to destroy a new Invercargill abortion clinic and intimidate its medical staff.

Labour, National and the Greens all condemned the threat, but as the debate rages, Deputy Prime Minister and Southland MP Bill English is staying silent.

The threat against the clinic and its staff was emailed to the Abortion Law Reform Association on Wednesday. “People who work at the clinic are legitimate targets and so are you. You’ll be hearing from me again, that is if your computer, or in fact your premises, are in one piece,” it said.

The threat also referred to a hospital source providing details about clinic staff.

The Sunday Star-Times last week revealed the clinic opened in secrecy to protect the identity of its staff, after months of anti-abortion protest in Invercargill.

I wonder of these dickheads have thought about the irony of being pro-life yet threatening to kill?

Pharmacy Choice gets a very large oops for this.

ᔥ Stuff.co.nz

The Government’s plan to offer free long-term contraception for beneficiaries and their daughters is being labelled as an insult and intrusive to women’s right to have children.

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett yesterday said contraception would eventually be fully funded for female beneficiaries and their 16 to 19-year-old daughters.

The move was part of the first round of controversial welfare reforms that would cost the Government $287.5 million over four years, including $81.5m of new money.

No one is stopping people from their right to have children. But we as taxpayers need a similar right to say that if you want children then you should pay for them yourself, not expect the taxpayer to pay for your right to have children.

Of course Sue Bradford is outraged.

Auckland Action Against Poverty spokeswoman Sue Bradford this morning said while the contraception was voluntary, it was “totally unacceptable” for the Government to get involved in women’s reproduction.

“Most New Zealand women will not accept that. It’s because beneficiaries are seen as people who are worth less than others,” she said.

Actually the working poor who have to pay taxes probably do think beneficiaries are people worth less than others. Though she does make a good point.

If as Sue Bradford says it is not for the government to get involved in women’s reproduction then let’s se an end to free cervical cancer screening, free breast cancer check ups, almost free obstetric care, charge them for birth assistance in hospital, not to mention free abortions, something I am sure Sue Bradford would be a strong advocate for.

If the government really shouldn’t be involved in women’s reproduction as Sue Bradford says then I guess it really shouldn’t be involved in paying the DPB either.

Mr. Steve Chadwick has put an abortion on demand bill into the ballot.

A Labour MP has taken the controversial step of proposing a new law to legalise abortion on request for women up to 24 weeks into a pregnancy.

Steve Chadwick, a midwife and former associate health minister, is gauging support for what would be the first changes to abortion law since 1978.

The Abortion Supervisory Committee has repeatedly urged Parliament to review the Contraception, Sterilisation and Abortion Act, which states the legal grounds for abortion, but MPs avoid the issue.

A judge has questioned the lawfulness of most abortions.

Last year, 17,550 abortions were done, compared with 17,940 in 2008.

Mrs Chadwick’s Abortion Reform Bill would take abortion out of the Crimes Act, making it solely a health matter and a choice for the patient, at least in the first part of pregnancy.

I wonder is she would have proposed this had the former leader still been in charge and then i wondered if perhaps the former leader, currently residing in New York has had a hand in getting this submitted.

But since we are talking about killing babies, I still wonder at all the fuss over our abortion rate. Surely there is no right or wrong figure for abortions if it supposed to be abortion on demand? So why do people get upset about the increse in teh number of abortions. A dead baby is a dead baby, it matters not a bit if we have legal abortions, surely?

I also question the arbitrary limit of 24 weeks, why not 24 weeks and 1 day? Or 25 weeks? How about 36 weeks? Or 40 weeks? Hell go for leather and set the limit at 52 weeks, many in South Auckland are doing that anyway, way up until 200 weeks. Killing babies is killing babies, surely it doesn’t matter when the limit is?

Labour leader Phil Goff said he hadn’t given the matter much thought.

Oh yeah, she definately has had a hand in this. Putting this in makes Goff look like he has as much control of his caucus that a senile man has of his bladder.