The IVF programme is technologically driven, without proper concern for the social implications for the child and the families, and friends, involved. The donation of an egg to an otherwise infertile mother has ramifications at a social level for all involved. There may be some success stories, but they would surely be in the minority, if there are any successes at all. The ones I have encountered are major disasters.

egg sperm – human being simply does not mean anything.

Fertilized single cell is simply not a human anymore that a sperm or an egg is a human. And it is certainly possible to produce a human from the egg only.

Life does not begin at conception.

Now you may be for abortion, you may be against it – there are very good arguments on both sides

But you statement does not mean anything.

Jade,
egg sperm = human being.

What does the law say in relation to a man that assults his partner by repetedly punching her in the abdomen,causing a miscariage because she wouldn’t have an abortion?
Surely more than just a common assult on the said partner.

What if my mother had decided to abstain the month I was conceived? That would mean that the egg that resulted in me would have ended up in her sanitary napkins and in the rubbish bin! What if the egg which resulted in me, had been fertilized by sperm no. 989 231 45 instead of sperm no. 723 491, would I still be the same person?

http://www.abortion.org.au/whenhuman.htm

At the point of conception is when life began for you. This was the start of your existence. Your own personal big bang. Three weeks after conception heart started to beat. First brain waves recorded at six weeks after conception. Seen sucking thumb at seven weeks after conception.

Many people say that life begins at birth, and prior to birth all you have is a clump of cells or a fetus and not a living human being.

Soon after you were conceived you were no more than a clump of cells.
This clump of cells was you at your earliest stage, you had plenty of growing to do but this clump of cells was you none the less.
Think about it.
Aren’t you glad you were left unhindered…. to develope further.
Safe inside your mother’s womb until you were born.

Want to know how to find humanity-?

True humanity can only be achieved, by concidering others/ caring about others, as much as, if not more than yourself.

Until we do we are no more than an uncivilisation,

with all the uncivilised things that we do…

Ask your doctor…………….

“Abortion Access and Information”
http://www.abortion.org.au

It has all the information women need:

*Abortion clinics list
*Links to pro choice organizations
*About anti-abortion propaganda
*How to recognize deceptive anti sites
*Articles about abortion and religion
AND proof that pro lifers also want to ban contraception!

PS The Bible is Pro Choice!
Don’t take my word for it, click here
http://www.abortion.org.au/abortionbible.htm

Try this link
post #4 will get you to more threads.

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=187373&highlight=atwill%20josephus%20rome

But as for this:

Would it be fair to say that Centacare does the same – that is , refer out to experts in termination rather than get involved themselves ?

- my point is that they aren’t the same issue.

The issue with CbyC is about lack of information. The possible problem with Centacare is an attempt to actively discourage one option.

That said, of all the possible choices I agree that Centacare is one of the least bad. But having followed the senate inquiry closely, I don’t think the concerns being raised are unfair.

your point about CbyC is an interesting one, but I don’t agree. Yes, adoption doesn’t take up much space on their site, but that’s for a few reasons.

Firstly, they provide more info about abortion because it’s something that women find it difficult to find good information about. They have no hesitations in referring women to adoption services if they need it, but as you said, limited resources mean they don’t pay for experts in another field that’s already well covered.

Would it be fair to say that Centacare does the same – that is , refer out to experts in termination rather than get involved themselves ?

Secondly, there is a difference between not highlighting, and actively discouraging or lying about.

I think its quite a jump to assume the practice framework of a proposed service when we havent seen the tender..

It isn’t highlighted partly because most women who choose adoption are the kind of women who usually don’t consider abortion.

i’m not sure that this assumption necessarily holds true these days…

Yet another reason for truth in advertising – so that women who don’t want to consider abortion can choose the service that’s right for them. But mostly it’s because CbyC counsellors are primarily – as is this new phoneline – about helping women who’ve just discovered they’re pregnant. She has 9 months of pregnancy to really consider the adoption issue.

These things are evolving processes. Adoption does not always occur in the immediate period after birth. One could be forgiven if looking at the info provided, if it all just isn;t too hard and complex. It is clearly stated that disabled children are “not in demand’ and unlike the termination option, there is an omission of examples of succesful outcomes of women who choose to adopt or parent after an unplanned pregnancy.

At the early stages, there’s really only two options to decide between: continuing or terminating the pregnancy. That’s why properly advertising anti-abortion services are a much more urgent issue.

Anna, i’m FOR transparecy in advertising around pregnancy options for women. I’m not particularly comfortable with the catholic framework necessarily , but argue all services have bias. Options is the key word here. For me being Pro-Choice means I have the right to choose from all available options, and to have my choice supported and made possible with the most possible support /technology and understanding available.

A look at the questions the CBC site asks pregnant women to consider when deciding on their options would appear heavily weighted toward termination and omitts any positive and profound impacts that parenthood can bring, especially over the long term. There is also no mention that i can find of the issue of age related fertility decline, and how that needs to be factored into our choices.

Perhaps if these issues werent addressed in their application, than could that explain why they missed out?

The catholics do not have a monopoly on bias; I have opinions, you have opinions and we all bring them to any discussion on this topic. I guess i am just interested in finding ways we can present more balanced and affirming services for all women, and understand why different services may have been sucessful (or not) in their tender.

Sorry, I erred, the suggestion to visit Internet Infidels should have been addressed to Silkworm, not you.