Home > Issues > Abortion Rights of the Fetus > Inquiry into the Health of Pregnant Women |
||||||||||
|
Empowering Men:fighting feminist lies |
|||||||||
Inquiry into the Health of Pregnant Women© Paul Clarke 2004 |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
 |
||||||||||
One puzzling aspect of the abortion issue is that about one in four pregnancies ends up being aborted on the grounds that the continued pregnancy would be a serious danger to the mother's mental health.
So why doesn't Parliament try to find out why there is such a high number of women who conceive who are then certified as being in such a poor state of mental health - merely because they are pregnant ?
The annual figure of about 15,000 abortions is a staggering number, which makes one wonder why women in previous years bore the child and didn't have such mental problems form carrying an unborn child.
If the certifying consultants are lying, they should be brought to account. If the women really are subject to such mental catastrophe because they are pregnant, then a major investigation should be undertaken by the State to determine what has caused such a state of affairs to come about.
It probably doesn't need Parliament to instigate such an investigation - I imagine the Ministry of Health could do it.
When one considers that the unborn child is both defenceless and innocent (and also voiceless, for he has no vote, and also the law deliberately allows no one to speak on his behalf), and when one considers that Parliament legislates for his killing - then what respect should we give to politicians for their sense of values ?
Section 159 of the Crimes Act says that a child becomes a human being within the meaning of the Act when it has completely proceeded in a living state from the body of its mother. Note that it refers to a "child", and note also the words "within the meaning of the Act." So, while Parliament is admitting that it is a child, it is at the same time saying that the nuborn child is not a human being.
And, as for the father of the unborn child, he is also a nobody, because he has no say in whether his "wife" does or doesn't have an abortion.
Natural law isn't made by people deciding by deliberate vote. It is principles of justice that are always going to be in existence, discovered by pure reason; that is, the law was not made but was found. So it isn't only politicians who make the laws. Natural law gives the unborn the right to be born and not to have life taken from them. So, if an enactment says that an unborn child is not a human being, then that law is invalid according to natural law.
If the unborn could speak, he would say, "I haven't even seen the light of day, and yet I have been found guilty of causing my mother to suffer serious danger to her mental health. That isn't just. The politicians shouldn't have such a law.".
So, finally, why should a politician vote against abortion ? The simple reason is that abortion is wrong. An innocent, defenceless being who has no voice is going to be slaughtered in the process. It's an MP's job to keep the peace and abortion is one of the worst forms of violence.... which is the opposite to peace.
See also:
-
Human Rights in China and New Zealand
-
Abortion, Government, the Degradation of Men, and “the Sacredness of Human Life”
-
Why Nobody Talks About Blue-Eyed Babies Any More
-
Submission on the Abortion Legislation Bill 2019
-
Submission to Law Commission on Abortion Law Reform 2018
-
Committing Genocide With Kindness
-
The Deteriorating Health of Pregnant Women