Killing the Unborn, Trans-Tasman Style

The late Sir Joh Bjelkie-Petersen many years ago singled out the 8th of the 8th ’88 as his proposed date of retirement.  He was not able to last that long.  Now some thirty-odd years later, the 8th of the 8th has new historical significance, in the country of Sir Joh’s birth as well as his adopted homeland.  And he might be spinning in his grave about the role of his once cherished National Party in the events of the more recent August.

The 8th of the 8th in 2019 will go down as the day that abortion on demand, up to birth, was enabled on both sides of the Tasman.  New South Wales was the last of the Eastern seaboard states to fall, and Jacindarella across the Ditch has also gotten on board the baby-killing bandwagon.  And the NSW legislation was promoted and introduced by a Kiwi import, no less.

The NSW Legislative Assembly vote was 59-31.  A similar bill passed the first stage of the process in the New Zealand parliament 94-23.

The strangely much adored NZ Prime Minister stated:

How long a journey it would have felt for many inside and outside the House for this day.  The time is right for us to put women’s dignity and rights at the centre of this discussion.

Such is the Orwellian newspeak so typical of this debate, where pretty sounding phrases gloss over bloody realities.  The NSW Legislative Assembly burst into cheering at the passage of the legislation.

In both countries, the abortion legislation was introduced under the cover of removing abortion from the criminal code.

There are subtle differences between the respective bills, for example, the NZ legislation is proposing to move from two doctors being needed to agree, to one doctor.  In New South Wales it will be two doctors.  But the differences merely amount to different degrees of ghastliness.  They are both creating radically new and liberal rules about when unborn human lives can be legally ended, under cover of “decriminalisation”.  And passed on the same day!

There is process difference as well.  In New Zealand, there is only one house for the legislation to pass, but there will be a committee process with an opportunity for public submissions.  No such luck in Macquarie Street.  At least, despite NZ First’s members supporting the bill there, they are pitching for a referendum.  I cannot see the Kiwi population at large voting in such numbers for allowing abortion up to birth.

There are many aspects of the NSW legislation, including its content, timing, the lack of warning to the electorate, the divide between popular and parliamentary opinion on the issue of late term abortion, the lack of protection for pro-life doctors, and the legislation’s enablement by a so-called party of the right, that have left genuine conservatives in a state of shock. 

Tediously, the media, whose conduct in relation to this matter has been beneath contempt, even by the very low standards it mostly attains, sees the main issue not as the impact of the legislation on the innocent unborn, but rather in terms of the impact of the split in the Coalition on the political future of the Premier and the government.  Talk about getting things upside down.

The size of the anti-life majority in New Zealand’s parliament is truly gob-smacking.  Equally, in New South Wales, the callous indifference, not just to innocent life, but to the views of voters, of the leadership of the major parties is just as alarming.  Those supporting the radical abortion legislation include both the leaders and deputy leader of the ALP (not unexpectedly), the Premier, the Health Minister, the apparent contender for the premiership when Gladys is inevitably dumped (Andrew Constance), the NSW Nationals leader and his deputy leader.  Quite a bunch of conservatives there. 

Constance (Transport Minister) recently said he was “appalled” by an advertisement on a sign by the highway (and on a Newcastle bus) which simply said that a four week old foetus has a beating heart.  That is too much like letting the truth seep out into the public consciousness.

John Barilaro, leader of the NSW Nationals, actually had (or his partner did) an abortion thirty odd years ago, he said.  That, I suppose, is at least putting your money where your mouth is.  He claimed that they just decided not to have “the little one”, and he still (now) couldn’t decide whether that had been the right thing to do.  This is the leader of the National Party.

Mark Latham, increasingly seen as the coming man in the sensible, principled centre of Australian politics, has brought to light the real reason for the NSW Premier’s otherwise inexplicable behaviour in relation to the abortion legislation.  It was a grubby deal!  Classic log-rolling behaviour when the legislative numbers are tight.  You support me to form a government, Mr Greenwich, and I will give you what you want.  The Berejiklian cat has been well and truly belled.  Her other manifest incompetencies, including bungled planning processes, vanity projects digging up the city of Sydney at great expense and for little gain, skyscrapers falling to earth and hole-in-the-ground stadiums, are all nothing compared to the foul taste in the mouth that this chicanery will leave.

The media’s role in the passage of this appalling legislation has been something to behold.  Beyond evil.  The reporting has been utterly misleading, likely deliberately so.  The media’s role here, in such an area of moral import and sensitivity, where the two opposing sides are endlessly speaking past one another, almost in different tongues, is critical.  The public has the right to know what is really going on.  We all know the ABC is lost, and simply cannot be relied on by anyone to tell the truth.  But on this issue the whole of the media has swallowed the pro-abortion line, and simply regurgitates anti-life talking points.  Hence the legislation is “historic”, it is simply about “decriminalising” abortion, “tidying things up” and, wait for it, “bringing NSW into line with other states”.  Only some good old fashioned journalism, for example from the Daily Telegraph in its coverage of the fact that NSW MPs did not vote to exempt gender selection as a basis for late term abortion, a truly astonishing development, has saved something of the media’s reputation as a reporter of the facts.

Just like with the behaviour of some so-called leaders on the right over same sex marriage, the passage of the abortion legislation on the watch of a Liberal-National government has the potential to re-galvanise the non-Liberal Party right.  The Nationals are lost, seemingly reduced either to buffoons or baby-killers.  Many conservatives on the ground are in head-shaking mode right now.  Clearly, some in the media have been blind-sided, and are likely ashamed at the generous support they have afforded the NSW Liberals.

That eminently earnest and well-meaning Liberal Party reformer John Ruddick has claimed: “The only hope for sound conservative government is the Liberal Party.”

Well, I am sorry but, watching the passage of radical abortion legislation in NSW, not just on the Liberal Party’s watch, but as part of a cynical power-related move by the Premier, is right up there with allowing Malcolm Turnbull his turn as a Liberal Prime Minister.  The number of Dis-Cons, apparently diminished as a result of Turnbull’s banishment from high office, will now only stir again, and grow, and grow more.  How the pro-life Liberal ministers (like Perrottet and Tudehope) who bravely opposed the legislation, can even sit in the same government room as smirking colleagues like North Shore member Felicity “I forgot where I lived and that I only had one degree” Wilson, is quite beyond me.

The Liberal Party is increasingly to be seen as a legacy political form in a new, fundamentally different era.  An era that will increasingly demand new alliances, new forms and new strategies by those who demand conservative policy on core, backs-to-the-wall issues.  Whether banging your head against a brick wall in the hopes of persuading genuine enemies in what once could be described as a “broad church”, even of getting opposing factions to agree to internal party rules, stick to them and recognise all opinions, is worth the effort must be a question currently being asked in the Liberal (and Nationals) branches.

How do conservatives for whom life issues are paramount actually stay in the Liberal Party? John Ruddick is dreaming.  There is serious anger building in the trenches.

17 thoughts on “Killing the Unborn, Trans-Tasman Style

  • Stoneboat says:

    Australia and Australians seem hell-bent on rejecting self-government under God and this latest ghastly affront is fruit of our rebellion.
    God will one day contend for every murdered baby; the Bible makes it abundantly clear that God will avenge the souls of the blood of the poor innocents.
    We will pay for this wickedness. There is no neutrality, and God is not mocked.

  • lloveday says:

    It ain’t over in NSW until 20/8 at least, when Latham et al have their say and vote.


    I agree with Stoneboat. Abortion is a crime against God.
    It is also a crime against humanity.
    Abortion qualifies as torture. Abortion practices include chemical burning, suffocation, dismemberment, crushing, etc. It is no exaggeration to say that as soon as the child-in-utero is developed enough to feel pain, abortion invariably tortures it to death. Prior to the child’s ability to feel pain, abortion invariably harms it, even if the “harm” does not amount to felt pain.

  • Greg Williams says:

    And over here in WA, both politicians and media are cheering on laws to allow doctors to kill terminally ill patients, which will no doubt evolve to just “old” patients, or just “patients who don’t seem to be of any use anymore”. Looks like our law makers are killing us off at both ends of our lives. The true tragedy of abortion is that with today’s technology and knowledge, there should never be an unwanted pregnancy. It’s just wanton lack of discipline, mostly, on at the part of the prospective progenitors that leads to such pregnancies.

  • Wyndham Dix says:

    Alas, men (males) bear the brunt of God’s wrath, as did the first man. Against the Divine Will they have heeded the voices of women and ceded control to them.

    Failure to observe a prophetic admonition from 2,700 years ago reinforces the error:-

    “As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.”

    Thunberg and her pubescent followers, Merkel, May, Gillard, Bishop, Payne, Wong, Triggs, Adern, Berejiklian, Palaszczuk, Lawrence, and Planned Parenthood are but a few names that spring to mind.

    Men are not error-free of course. They have compounded their disobedience over time. Many today are feminised. Nothing but Divine Intervention – again – will supply the corrective.

  • Andrew Campbell says:

    ‘The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. These contradictions are not accidental, nor do they result from ordinary hypocrisy: they are deliberate exercises in doublethink.’ George Orwell. 1984. Part II, Chapter IX

    This bill is not ‘Reproduction’ it is the very opposite, ensuring that the human species does not reproduce. It isn’t ‘Health’ it’s death. It isn’t ‘Care’ it is killing. It isn’t ‘Reform’ it is a degenerate society that eliminates it’s most vulnerable. It is a Bill’ I suppose. And is 2019 too, though that date reminds us of the birth of One who weeps over such doublethink.

  • Davidovich says:

    How can we have other than contempt for these politicians who have surreptitiously brought in this legislation? It is, to some extent, expected that the Greens would be in favour of such a shameful and awful Bill but for the Premier and many of her so-called conservative colleagues to do so is unacceptable.

  • Stoneboat says:

    Paul, I hope you are right that “There is serious anger building in the trenches”.

    And I pray that trench-anger is taken into the Christian Churches, kindled and fanned into a flame that awakes a band of “Black Robed Preachers” who are not afraid to thunder God’s wrath from our pulpits and in the public square.

    Australia could surely do with a revival of God’s Prophetic Ministry.

    I think the blame for our parlous condition lies squarely on the Christian Churches who, through cowardice in the pews and syncretism, have left off walking in the comprehensive Gospel of the Kingdom of God and exchanged it with a truncated gospel of a few propositions concerning the salvation of individual souls.

    Like some Old Testament kings who did right in the sight of The Lord but failed to destroy the groves and idols, Australia has learned the ways of the Pagan and been led to view The Almighty as just another small g god. The gospel preached here today is man-centred: and instead of being the Australian culture, Christianity has ceded control to things we ought not and our idols have become tyrants.

    This is Pagan Christianity. It drives us far from God and has a terrible price. My own Church in Alice Springs and, especially, the pew that I warm must toughen up, change and learn to fear God more than man.

    Wyndham Dix; I don’t think we can reasonably ask for Divine Intervention until we take a few steps of obedience. After all, our marching orders have been given and The Price has already been paid in full.

  • en passant says:

    It is hard to think of more than a handful of politicians who win the respect of their electorate.
    Some years ago I did have a small bit of influence on the selection of a Candidate when I was a member of the Party Selection Committee. The field had been reduced to three candidates. The front-runner was sure of his selection and laid out HIS (jarring) policies and what HE intended to do when elected.
    He was not the Chosen One (although a long-serving party hack endorsed by HQ) after I said to the other members of the Committee.
    “All we heard was his opinions and agenda. I heard nothing about him advocating OUR agenda. He is not working for his electorate, but for himself.”
    No. 2 got the nomination, but lost anyway …

  • Christopher Rule says:

    An article in The Daily Telegraph of 10 August was suggesting that the legislation would be voted down in the Legislative Council when the time comes. Hopefully that will happen.

  • Max Rawnsley says:

    If we take the general Judeo-Christian code under which our legislation is developed this issue concerning abortion legislation may be clarified much as St Augustine of Hippo postulated in the 5th century when addressing ‘free will’ and obedience to God. It is how the issue is currently addressed rather than by authoritarian legislation, essentially as a matter of conscience. When people act as they wish, placing their position above that of the unborn, they exercise their free will. However once legislated the state has yet another measure of control over the citizenry, an even stranger notion when its an allegedly Liberal political grouping (supported by Labor and alleged independents such as Greenwich). The rights of the unborn seem to have been sidelined in the interest of seemingly populist politics.

    I would have thought the Baird ‘greyhound’ fiasco was a lesson from recent history but it seems not.

  • DUBBY says:

    Stating the Obvious.
    I offer a few comments on bishop Michael McKenna’s Pastoral letter to his diocese of Bathurst, on the proposed abortion legislation. His letter is dated 31/07/2019. The text of his letter is in quotation marks.

    “You would be aware, from media reports, that there is an attempt underway to push through abortion legislation in our State Parliament without adequate consideration of its consequences.” So, what does this legislation involve that needs adequate consideration? Why is it so important? What are the consequences? We are never told. Is it wise to rely on media reports?

    “I salute those Members of Parliament who are resisting this attempt; and encourage you to support them.” Resist the attempt to do what, specifically. We still don’t know what he’s talking about.

    “Those who propose the legislation are no doubt sincere in their arguments.” Is the bishop suggesting that their sincerity gives some legitimacy to their cause?
    Barnaby Joyce states, in his ‘petition seeking letter’ to oppose the legislation, dated 5/8/19, (the new law would give New South Wales the most extreme abortion laws in the country. The laws ….. will effectively allow abortions to be performed right up until birth.) So now we know what it’s about. Thank God for Barnaby Joyce.

    The bishop failed to mention the crucial details of this legislation. I would have thought that was an important piece of clarifying information, wouldn’t you? Instead he takes the opportunity to acknowledge the sincerity of those who propose the legislation.

    “However, as so often in this debate,” what is there to debate? “someone is forgotten.” Of course, someone is forgotten – overlooked – ignored. Is this some deep insight from an intellectual giant? No! It’s stating the obvious, but to what purpose? Why use a weak term like ‘forgotten’?

    “That is the human being: unborn, but human, who has no rights when her or his life or death is being decided.” Didn’t you know you were ending the life of an unborn human? I forgot. The rights of the unborn are given by God, they last forever. When was the last time the bishop stood up and publicly defended the rights of the unborn? Does his letter do that?

    “Also forgotten are those medical professionals who would conscientiously oppose such procedures, from whom the law could withdraw protection.” He’s very concerned that the protection of the law might be withdrawn from certain members of the medical profession. At least then they will have first-hand knowledge of how the unborn human feels.

    “And thoroughly forgotten are the mothers faced with difficult circumstances in their pregnancies, for whom, instead of genuine care, only the bleak option of a termination is offered”. If he’s so concerned about the mothers, then why not direct some of his diocesan funds towards this ‘genuine care,’ he talks about, instead of squandering it on his Palace, the Cathedral, Overseas Travel and whatever. Notice that the bishop acknowledges that termination is a bleak option. Earlier he mentions that the legislation relates to the life or death of unborn humans. Option? Really?

    “Whatever the outcome of the political debate, we cannot be silent in the face of what is being attempted.” Does the bishop seriously think that his letter qualifies as a model for not being silent? Is this our brave leader, on his white horse, fearlessly calling us into battle? He effectively kept silent during the gay-marriage debate. Read Robert Browning’s Lost Leader. He wrote it about William Wordsworth, whom he considered to have deserted the cause.

    “Lord, have mercy on us.”

    There are three persons the bishop forgot in his letter. The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God. The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit of not the Father. There is one God.

    This letter has no heart. It provides no spiritual or intellectual food for the reader. Where is the call to fasting and prayer? The call to reach out to God our Father and beg for forgiveness and healing. There is no urgency for the protection of the unborn. This letter reeks of humanism. It could just as well have been written by a person who has never known Christ.

    The bishop’s performance on the abortion issue, and, indeed, on the same-sex marriage issue, has been less than edifying.

    What God thinks is obviously not at the forefront of the bishop’s mind. He never mentions it. He seems more concerned not to offend anyone. When he stands before God, he will discover that ‘I didn’t want to offend anyone’ is no defence.

  • en passant says:

    Two years my wife and I married, she had a miscarriage, about which she was distraught for months. It was a natural event at 10-weeks and not an induced abortion.
    It did not particularly bother me, just one of life’s little miscarriages and detours. We got on with life and had two wonderful children in the next three years.
    Through ignorance I accepted the line that it was the woman’s right to ‘choose’ not to have an unwanted child. The world had enough Leonardo da Vinci’s and Beethoven’s so potentially aborting some more was no great loss as, after all, we might also abort Hitler, Pol Pot and other monsters.
    As the debate heated up I took an interest and found some abortion videos online. Really early abortions left me unmoved, but I have since watched six late term and post-birth abortions in which live-birth babies are killed. Dr. Mengele and the worst of the Nazi horrors are available today in American hospitals on demand, and now in Australian and New Zealand hospitals.
    I would like every politician who voted for ‘Abortion on Demand’ to watch these videos and then rethink their position. If they can sit through theses videos and still support the murder of foetuses by cutting out their beating hearts, then they have no part in civilised humanity, but instead should rejoin the barbarians of the Aztec cult. They appear civilised, but are monsters.
    I can (and still do) support selective abortions on severe medical grounds, but ‘Planned Parenthood’ is simply another name for murderous sadism in support of careless and shallow women. As accuracy in titles is important PP should be renamed “Baby Murder & Recycled Parts Incorporated”.
    The testimonies from Planned Parenthood Hearing in 2015 in USA, illustrate what a bad decision was made in our parliament.
    Abortion survivor Melissa Ohden testifies before the House Judiciary Committee
    Rep. Franks Delivers Opening Statement at Planned Parenthood Hearing
    Watch & weep, then go find the abortion videos. Abortion clinics are just human abattoirs

  • Lapun Paul says:

    Dubby – that is one great comment. To quote your words:
    “It could just as well have been written by a person who has never known Christ”.
    Those words sum it up. They point to the reality that the Catholic Church in Australia is in poor shape. I know from my long working life that that the ability of any organisation to successfully fulfil its mission eventually comes down to the quality of its leadership. Weak leaders and anaemic leadership eventually result in organisational collapse – and that is what seems to be happening with the Catholic Church in Australia – as too with the NSW Liberals & Nationals.
    Catholics who have remained loyal to Christ and the gospels deserve far better leadership than what they have been getting from many of their bishops. Although some Catholic bishops have spoken out about the NSW abortion legislation, collectively they have failed to mobilise and marshall their major human resource – the large number of church-goers – to put up some decent resistance by pushing-back against those low-life political representatives who have railroaded this abortion travesty through the NSW parliament.
    If the Catholic bishops have any guts then they should now take action to initiate a process of punishing those MPs responsible. It is simple – just urge voters to remove them from parliament at the next election. In Queensland the ‘Cherish Life’ organisation has already published a broadsheet (complete with photographs), listing the MPs who waved the Queensland abortion legislation through last year. This list will receive wide distribution and publicity as the next QLD State election approaches. It is not too late for the Catholic bishops of NSW to get off their derrieres and get that ball rolling now. Support ‘Cherish Life’ and start to frighten the bejesus out of those legislators who pushed this ugly, ugly legislation through the NSW parliament. Are you listening bishops?

  • Steve Bonner says:

    The Orwellian duplicity of our NSW politicians is breathtaking. Capital punishment for mass murderers is barbaric and uncivilised and their right to life must be preserved. However the state sanctioned killing of innocent babies is a cause célèbre for the NSW parliament. Madness !!

  • pgang says:

    It is becoming increasingly likely that our children will be slaves to a tiny, wealthy ruling class. That is the fate of all Godless societies.

  • Max Rawnsley says:

    Felicity Wilson? This is a creature of the NSW moderate faction of the Liberal Party who does as she is told.

Leave a Reply