What went on in the Victorian Parliament?

In 2008, Victoria’s Parliament voted for the most horrific abortion laws in the Western World.

This video will tell you what went on behind the scenes and what was rejected. The shocking truth is that unborn animals have more protection from pain in Victoria than little babies.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3WHP7Q5dp8

Author: Bernard Gaynor

Bernard Gaynor is a married father of nine children. He has a background in military intelligence, Arabic language and culture and is an outspoken advocate of conservative and family values.

Share This Post On

9 Comments

  1. The politicians who voted for this hideous legislation in Victoria deliberately designed this legislation to be malevolent, cruel and discriminating. They say they had a “conscience” vote. That only goes to prove that those that voted for this legislation (who allegedly have consciences) have consciences that are morally defunct. Being morally defunct, they should be disqualified from public office permanently. Furthermore, these politicians are complicit in murder, and probably more correctly, genocide, and they have to answer to each and every abortion. Melissa Ohden is proof that a supposed aborted foetus is an independent human that deserves a life. The raving nazi-feminists can’t argue otherwise. How ironic that it is a crime to kill a baby in utero – such as a violent act by someone, and that person can be charged with murder, yet the abortionist who performs this most vile act gets paid for his dirty work. Interestingly, if you look at the legal definition of “in utero”, the foetus is seen as an independent person. From Wikipedia: “…In legal contexts, the phrase is used to refer to unborn children. Under common law, unborn children are still considered to exist for property transfer purposes.”

    Post a Reply
  2. One can only conclude that libertarianism is death and individualism is a berserk value.

    Post a Reply
  3. The contradiction of elected “abortion” activists might be explained as follows. They seem to most resent the idea that women are left to try and force commitments from men and that they also demand some form of freedom to go with the servitude that is demanded of them by a harsh and unremitting religious upbringing. It’s not so easy, in this situation, for women to freely exercise their own autonomous choices: men are resisting playing their part in what adult women might want to do – and THAT is why people in control have to tell them what to do! Its for their own good!

    For female autonomy to work best, men have to fall in line with what women want at each stage of a woman’s life. This won’t happen if men are pursuing their own version of an autonomous, independent lifestyle and just getting on with the important bits.

    So autonomy theory breaks down in practice. For women to maximise their autonomy, they require men to follow traditional, non-autonomous values (a willingness to self-sacrifice, reject self-indulgence, remain loyal etc).

    But men are unlikely to accept the purpose of such self-sacrifice. Faced with a female individualism, they are likely to respond with an individualism of their own – possibly even a short slap. This is especially true when male and female identities are held to have no essential existence except under cover of feminist university courses, the ABC staff canteen and some pockets around Glebe and Carlton.

    Until the Vic Government explains what has become a very confusing dialectic, we cant really expect the readers of Andrew Bolt, Larry Pickering and Tim Blair to get their heads around it – even though they know what they like. And they dont like feminists or single mums! Or abortion on demand in the streets of the Victorian capital, subsidised by the corporate state via international “morality crusaders” hellbent on the political correctness brigades!

    Post a Reply
    • This is not the first occasion, and I’m afraid it won’t be the last, whereby some expert will proffer a wide range of implausible rationalisations (read: excuses) for perverse individual behaviours and outcomes that contradict the principle of individual responsibility as a guiding principle for action. Think of “anti-morality” and the relativists that attack the Churches for standing up for what is TRUE human nature – and against animalism in all its raw form!

      Do individuals commit crimes against nature? Blame poverty, free speech, Palestine or Christian “fundamentalism” (choose your poison, depending on your argumentative persuasion). Do individuals drink too much or take poison or dress up as a nun? Blame deregulation and nightclub opening hours. Are individuals obese? Blame the “obesogenic” (whatever that is!) environment about them. And the list goes on and on…and mostly in the blogs on the ABC website.

      I am certainly prepared to accept that the increasing tendency towards insipid policing, unaccountable parenting, and the welfare state certainly has done absolutely nothing to assist in maintaining a culture of self‑command and responsibility conducive to personal maturation and social cohesion. Dont jump to conclusions that perversion is always right, that life isnt sacred, that heresy is spread by the fairies at the bottom of the so-called “garden”…

      Post a Reply
      • While this sick legislation was being debated in the Victorian parliament, Archbishop Denis Hart made a public threat that he would close every Catholic hospital within his jurisdiction if the law was passed. When the enemy called his bluff, Archbishop Hart was found wanting – he reneged on his word, and whimpered back to his chancery with hardly a whisper. We heard from some of his more strident supporters that the Archbishop would mount a challenge if the law was ever enforced. Well, at least one Victorian Catholic doctor is now the subject of disciplinary action for his “failure” to refer for an abortion, and we still haven’t heard any response from Archbishop Hart. How many Catholics who supported this vicious legislation have been refused Holy Communion in the Melbourne Archdiocese??? We need Prelates with backbone – not spineless cowards!!!

      • Archbishop Hart seems to have a penchant for weasling away from taking courageous corrective action to save souls under his care. When faced with the scandal of the so-called Catholic Knights of the Southern Cross collaborating with the bloody freemasons, Archbishop Hart took no corrective action whatsoever – and instead took aim at the messenger. Glad to see that Christian Order editor Rod Pead was good enough to hold Archbishop Hart’s feet to the fire…
        http://www.christianorder.com/features/features_2004/features_apr04_bonus.html

  4. Once the wrong MPs are elected [often this means ‘preselected’], it’s too late to prevent these atrocities. The time to act [intelligently] was long before polling day.

    Post a Reply
  5. Thankyou for Posting this Bernard, I had it before, but the reality as to the nature of this bill never ceases to upset me, especially at the end of the video seeing Peter Kavanagh visibly upset that the politicians failed to get done what was needed to avoid this bill being passed. My only consolation in this matter is when the politicians who voted in favour of this bill allowing partial birth abortion as well as relaxing all abortion procedures, they will one day pass into a flawless justice system headed by God. In the mean time we must pray for those politicians who voted so blindly and ignorantly, as well as deliberately ignoring facts especially as we have increasing knowledge of human life in utero. And may God have mercy on their souls.
    An inspirational video to keep fighting for the unborn and their right to life https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uosZ59Z4hCM

    Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares