|
progressiveslol
|
sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 20 th, 2013 at 11:29am: progressiveslol wrote on Mar 20 th, 2013 at 11:26am: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 20 th, 2013 at 11:20am: progressiveslol wrote on Mar 20 th, 2013 at 11:04am: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 20 th, 2013 at 10:55am: progressiveslol wrote on Mar 20 th, 2013 at 10:52am: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 20 th, 2013 at 10:46am: progressiveslol wrote on Mar 20 th, 2013 at 10:42am: Everything in that article that is supposed to be what Abbott said, is actually all debates that need to be had while the women of Australia are using abortion as a form of contraception.
The killing of potentual life is in no means the same as the stopping of potentual conception.
The debate needs to be had at all times while abortion rates are so high.
I hope Abbott never changes in this department and one day we get to have the debates from his past words. Well that's the point isn't it? He has changed his stance on the debate to suit both needs. It'd be nice if he actually stuck to one issue, but the point remains, as highlighted in the opinion piece, that he has changed his stance to suit. And is now getting unstuck. As for the ACTUAL debate on abortion, I don't think people on purpose in Australia would use abortion as a form of contraception. And in the end, women have their right to choose. And if they choose to abort, then it's for no one else to try to politicise and say otherwise. I put the following in as an edit to which you may have missed. In order to have “safe, legal and rare”, we need those debates. Abortion should be a well informed decision. All the decisions made before getting pregnant should be well informed. The debates need to be had in times of over representation of abortion because abortion makes us gods, judges and jurors, killers, life less important. Abortion is a necessary evil, but should never be allowed to run rampant like it means nothing to kill potential life and abortion is exactly that in the 21st century. The debates from Abbotts words, need to be had. Which Abbott's words? The ones for, or the ones against? Or the ones that have simply stumbled? This isn't about the actual debate of abortion, which I am happy to have anyway if you truly want. But it's about Tony's inability to maintain an opinion, and his constant changing of his opinion to suit the message of the day. abortion was the “easy way out” and an “objectively grave matter” that has been “reduced to a question of the mother’s convenience" referring to Australia’s abortion “epidemic” Abbott described the abortion rate as “this generation’s legacy of unutterable shame”. From the article At the recent Madison forum I criticised Abbott for politicising abortion... Well how else can you get a much needed debate to begin. Criticize all you want, but the debate needs to be had and the only way to do that is to make it political. Which it should be. Abbott is not changing his mind. He is wanting a debate on the issues. One way of bringing on the debate didnt work, so he tries another, then another. But at no time does he say he doesnt want a debate and all is well with abortion in Australia. I guess at some point, when you fight against dummies, you will eventually look like the dummy at some stage, to which the real dummies think Abbott is a dummy by changing tact. Abbott is no dummy, just unsuccessful in a world without morals toward potential life, but all the backing of the judge and juror who owns the temporary garage space. So you're claiming tony wants a debate and is creating one by denying he wants a debate and denying he is debating and denying events that have occured during the debate. Ok. I would suggest he started a debate, realized it is not a vote winner and quickly backtracked from his own convictions. Great leader. You must have missed what I was saying when I said he has had to change tact and Abbott is no dummy, just unsuccessful in a world without morals toward potential life, but all the backing of the judge and juror who owns the temporary garage space. " There may never be a right time to debate against all the immoral judge and juror's of potentual life, but someone else should take up the slack from Abbott. No I got that, it's okay. I just think its delusional to think he is changing tact when he isn't just rephrasing but completely denying. That is a tact change toward populist vote grabbing, and nothing more. No, it is a realist position for him to take. He tried and failed in every tact. It is for someone else to bring on the debate and hopefully the debate is had when he is leader. You cant have ambitions to be PM and keep bringing up a subject that you keep getting knocked down on. They just dont co-exist.
|
Forum
Pages: 
