The courage of love triumphs over the brazen culture of death

The March for Babies was held in Melbourne on Saturday. I had planned to fly from Brisbane to attend the rally but other commitments intervened. However, I did follow closely on social media and readers of this site have given me a detailed debriefing of the day. Bill Muehlenberg, as always, has also provided a useful summary of the rally at this link.

By all accounts, the Victorian Police did a fine job this year. In fact, they marched off after the rally to the applause of the estimated 7,000 strong crowd, who were greatly impressed with their efforts to protect them. It must be considered a vast improvement over last year’s fiasco, which the Victorian Police have now apologised for. As such, they are to be congratulated for their superb work on Saturday. And you can congratulate them by leaving a message here.

It was also encouraging to see that members of the Victorian Country Fire Authority attended the March for Babies in their uniforms for the first time. Defence members also requested to attend this event in uniform, following the precedent set allowing uniformed military participation in the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras. Unfortunately, Defence’s commitment to diversity is sadly hypocritical. It’s okay to let members march with anti-life organisations promoting themselves to homosexuals in Sydney, but it’s not politically correct to let members march with pro-life groups in Melbourne. And the primary criteria which Defence uses to make this decision is based on who its members happen to sleep with. Defence’s policies violate anti-discrimination laws.

LGBTQI AbortionDefence: supports the anti-life political agenda of the LGBT lobby.

There will be more to follow on this front. You can rest assured of that.


Of course there was a sign.

And of course it screamed, ‘THE ONLY GOOD BABY IS A DEAD BABY!!!’. And it was wrapped in barbed wire for good measure. The menacing words were actually transformed into a weapon.

Dead baby
The proud face and message of the abortion lobby.

And just hours before that sign was brazenly foisted on the streets of Melbourne a little baby did lie dead, half a world away.

His name was Shane.

And he died on the day that he was born.

But in his very short life, Shane proved that each life is precious. That each life has meaning. And that love and hope are far more powerful than fear and selfishness.

Shane was diagnosed with anencephaly while growing in his mother’s womb. It is a rare condition affecting about 1/5000 pregnancies and it meant that his tiny brain and skull would not develop fully. Shane was not expected to live long after birth and his parents were advised about termination ‘options’.

Courageously, they chose to put their little son first. And their adventures have captured the world’s attention. Millions have followed Shane’s beautiful story. How could they not?

Only the most hardened heart could not feel the love of Shane’s parents as they chronicled his quests and very short life.

Only the coldest of hearts could not admire and be inspired by the joy of Shane’s parents as they celebrated his development, marked off each of his little accomplishments and rejoiced at his birth.

And only the most brutal and callous of hearts could laugh at the death of a baby, instead of empathising with the tremendous grief and pain of Shane’s parents as they lovingly said hello and goodbye to their little son in such quick succession.

The man behind the sign in Melbourne did just that. He might not have known of Shane’s story. He probably didn’t realise that at about the same time as he was painting the words on his sign, Shane was spending his last moments in the loving arms of his mother.

But his message said it all anyway. This is a man who revels in all death and any tragedy.  And as the new star of the pro-abortion lobby stood smiling behind his sign with its sadistic and psychopathic message, he personified the culture of death. Meanwhile, in the midst of death, Shane’s parents were exemplifying the love that is the culture of life.

And there is a gulf between these two cultures.

One of these cultures is bright. The other even dresses in black.

One of these cultures is based on love, even to death itself. The other kills for its own reasons.

One of these cultures inspires and is the gushing flood of hope. The other runs on the void of hopelessness.

And because one of these cultures is hopeful, it is tied to forgiveness. The other only offers the unremitting pain of guilt.

One of these cultures is good. It lifts the heart. The other has no heartbeat at all.

One of these cultures leads to God, who is Life and has conquered death. The other is wedded to Satan and his kingdom of death. And boasts of it.

devil boyfriendPro-abortion protesters proclaim their love for the father of evil.

Shane’s parents live the culture of life. As a result they have proven that the shortest life is greater than abortion. But it comes at a price: courage.

The man in Melbourne lives the culture of death. And he unwittingly laid bare the truth regarding the abortion industry: it’s a barbaric business. Its price is the life of child. And it profits from their deaths by ravaging the souls of the fearful.

And when it comes to making money, the awful truth of the abortion industry is that the only good baby is a dead baby. That’s what it is all about. It’s only after a human being is placed inside a medical waste bag that the till is opened and the cash is stuffed in.

Shane could have been aborted. His parents were offered this ‘choice’. But they chose love and life instead. As a result they were able to hold their son.

In doing so, this brave young couple allowed Shane to shine. His life might have been short. He did not achieve great things by the modern way of thinking. In fact, Shane could not really do anything at all.

But he could ‘be’. And just like that, Shane propelled others to do things. The greatest things. To love beyond love imaginable. To be compassionate past the point of pain. To give everything for someone who could do nothing but be cared for.

Without Shane, his parents would never have become the true heroes that they are. And without the Shanes of this world, the rest of us are diminished. Humanity itself is brutalised.

We all become smaller. Those who support abortion support the stunting of society.

That is the communal tragedy of abortion. It hurts us all.

So from the bottom of my heart, I would like to applaud Shane’s parents, Jenna and Dan. I would like to thank them for their inspirational love and courage. And while I can only imagine their grief, I would like them to know that their decision is inspirational. The world is a better place for Shane who has accomplished his short but important mission. Now Shane has returned to the God who made him to be loved so greatly for his whole life.

God bless you both and your little son who was joyfully baptised on his birthday.

True loveInspirational: Baby Shane, Jenna & Dan.

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


  1. Yes Marc, you are right about one thing – it is totally pointless arguing with you as, like all of the anti- choice brigade you have this smug self – righteous attitude that you are unquestionably right. I have said time and time again ( and will explain once again for you as obviously you are incredibly slow at understanding ). You or anyone else has the right to not undergo an abortion ( this is what it is, an early term abortion is NOT a baby, therefore it is not murder. NOT ONCE have I stated that I believe in late – term abortions. I absolutely do not, unless the woman’s life is in danger. As you have so little regard for women and their right to make their own choices I guess that you would let the woman die in that case. For your information there is a clear difference between a zygote and a late- term foetus. At this early stage the nervous system is not developed, hence no consciousness – therefore NOT a baby, no matter what you would like to believe. According to your argument vasectomies should also be outlawed – should men be unable to kill their sperm? ( A potential baby) Should you also be forced to donate your kidney or bone marrow to save someone’s life? Oh wait, that’s right – your only concern is BEFORE birth, not after. As for me being an “irrational fanatic”!?! How on earth is my stating that I or any woman should have the right to a safe, legal abortion, fanatical? Women would still undergo illegal abortions and many would either die or suffer irrepairable damage as a result. But of course that would not concern you in the slightest. How about saving your “irrational fanatic” comment for the despicable individuals that picket abortion clinics, or the real fanatics that feel justified in murdering the staff at these clinics? Please don’t bother replying – you have lost the argument (as evidenced by the fact that abortion IS and will ALWAYS be legal ) Hate to break it to you but you are overwhelmingly in the minority. Here’s a thought – why not just worry about your own conscience and what is right for you.

    Post a Reply
    • Yes Sandra, I said I wouldn’t reply but I’ve got 2 stories to tell you.

      1. Imagine if someone said to you, “No, you’re wrong! You never know: there just may be a bachelor with a wife in another galaxy. Just because you say it’s impossible doesn’t mean it can’t be done somewhere else.”
      2. Many decades ago, when I was working in London, I was punched in the face from behind. I didn’t know that I was unconscious, even despite my walking and holding onto a wall. I didn’t know that I had woken up, despite having walked into a building guided by a passer-by to a chair, despite, apparently, speaking with several office workers.

      Now, Sandra, in both cases, it just isn’t worthwhile arguing with the person or attempting to gather some sense as the person has become irrational. Accusations about arrogance against the person who insists the other is lacking logic isn’t a rational argument but gainsaying.

      May I suggest you download Monty Python’s skit, ‘The Argument Clinic’. You may see what I mean…comedically speaking that is!

      Post a Reply
  2. I find it interesting that not one of you has managed to respond to my comments regarding fathers murdering their children. Does this not concern you? Is your anti-abortion stance merely a result of your misogynistic attitude? You are so quick to condemn women having terminations ( this is what it is, it is NOT a baby at this stage – if the mother dies, the pregnancy will not continue). Brian – really? Snuff films cannot be an analogy to abortion -are you really that moronic? Abortion is murder IN YOUR OPINION, not mine or countless others. Yagron – you stated that your virginity is your FREE CHOICE. Of course it is and I would defend your right to that absolutely. Why though do you feel the need to condemn others who have made a different choice? Who made you the judge of morals? That choice is great for you and NOT ONCE have I stated that YOU have to live by my beliefs or others’ beliefs. THAT is what free choice means. Where is the free choice made by a woman or girl in cases of rape or incest? The “decision to have sex” was not made in those instances, except by the perpetrator. Again, where is your outrage in those cases? Please do not put words in my mouth – I am not stating that people are slaves to their passion, merely that they have FREE CHOICE. Again you feel the need to be condescending and smug in your attitude. I, on the other hand have stated SEVERAL times that it is up to the individual. I am so sorry if your limited intellectual capacity fails to grasp this point. Who are you to judge? I have a son who is also 23 and makes his own decisions. He is tolerant of the choices that others make for their own lives – of this I am most grateful. If he showed your level of condescension and intolerance I would feel that I had failed as a parent.

    Post a Reply
    • Sandra,

      Apart from a few comments, I believe it’s no longer worthwhile arguing with you on this. It’s clear from someone with academic training in philosophy (i.e. the skill of arguing rationally i.e. aiming to not commit the hundreds of fallacies that we are prone to when voicing something we hold dear and forms an integral part of our worldview) that you do not understand the basis for your own position. Argument is not just a case of saying “I believe X”, which, as has been apparent from your responses so far, is all you have been doing. Most people hold that their ability to articulate their thoughts is an automatic ticket to rationality and tacitly cling to the conviction that they have a right that they should be accepted as equal, or superior, to anyone else’s. I mean, no one would credibly value, say, an untrained car owner’s mechanical diagnosis over a 30-year experienced trained car engineer’s, would they? Yet, when it comes to social issues, such as abortion, expressions of sexuality, we are “obliged” to accept someone’s merely claiming their OPINION has the same status as all by virtue of their having stated it. It’s the classic example of the slobbering pub drunk’s opinion counting!

      Here are my final few points:
      1. You failed to understand a single point I was making in my previous comment. That’s not my failure, but yours. I say this because of your vociferous demand to the right, so-called, of a woman to procure the death of a baby. You haven’t taken a moment to actually UNDERSTAND the complexity of the Pro-Life position, and that counts as unforgivable ignorance.
      2. As far as fathers murdering their children, would you be interested to know that the vast majority of cases involve step-fathers? It’s called the Cinderella Effect. I have nothing against step-fathers – my mother was raised by one – but the clear evidence seems to point to a breakdown in the traditional family structure as one salient cause for this horrible crime.
      3. Throwing in the word “misogynistic” at every opportunity is not an argument (but it bares a quite similar ring of late teenager undergraduate mantra!). Rather, it’s a distraction AWAY from the meat of the argument. There are only a few issues: (i) is the unborn baby biologically human (Yes!) (ii) is the unborn baby genetically the same as the woman’s genetic makeup (No!) (iii) is killing someone who has passed (i) and (ii) wrong (Yes!), and (iv) therefore does a mother have the right to take the life of her unborn child (A big syllogistic NO!). You have failed to address these questions and that makes you an irrational fanatic and ideologue, just what the world needs one more of!
      4. You proffer the opinion that at the abortion stage the unborn is “NOT a baby”. Of course, once again (Yawn!), it’s a fact-free zone of intolerance. Go and study a bit of genetics and embryology and you may be surprised (though I’d be surprised that you actually do go and study!) that you are perversely wrong. In any case, if the life you call a “thing” were snuffed out a day before it was due to be delivered, it wouldn’t be a baby, right? I suppose that’s why you would argue that the judicial systems which have this, according to your “rationality”, weird law that if a person hits a pregnant woman in her stomach and the “thing” “dies” are just plainly stupid, yes? (Whew, too much philosophy for you, Sandra?!)
      5. You throw up the word ‘intolerance’ as though it is a game winner. Sandra, it just ain’t. Everyone is intolerant of something. The only people who aren’t are the dead. It is whether or not you can rationally argue for your intolerance, something you have failed to do, that makes yours a boast or mere gainsay. Anyway, try this for size: You say pro-life is intolerant of the pro-death side and that we have no right to seek proscription against pro-death legislation. By your saying we have no right to say a woman should not have the right to murder her unborn child is itself unambiguous intolerance. It’s just another epistemological casualty of the moral relativism that you promote.
      6. Finally, one other thing: In Christ Jesus there is forgiveness, even for someone having had an abortion. Why? Because there is no other name in heaven and earth in which salvation can be found. As Creator, God and the Author of Life in Him and only Him can we seek the peace and love that all of us want and need.

      Post a Reply
  3. Sandra, seeing as though you made a sneaky shot at me, I am going to run with it for a while. You said “Maybe you just haven’t had the opportunity yourself” Whether you slipped this little sucker-punch in as a joke or a cheap shot I dunno. In relation to opportunity, I have had as many opportunities to lose my virginity as you have had to commit murder or thief. Every time you go shopping, you have the opportunity to steal. Every time you lose your temper at someone, you have the opportunity to kill them in anger. But you do not do so, because of the free choices you make to refrain from these behaviours. I am a 23 year old male. I have not had sex, been to a strip club, bought a crap magazine or anything like that. Those are my choices! which I make FREELY, in accordance with my beliefs and values. I know many people my age that have made the same decision. In fact, most of my friends are exactly the same, so I’m neither unique nor a hero. Your comment is gratuitous and opportunistic. In todays society, girls are a dime a dozen and cheap as chips, in every respect and I certainly agree that young men are no better. My virginity is a result of my FREE CHOICE. Just as your children have resulted from the choices you freely made. You argue that no sex before marriage is impossible. I know its hard, but like I said, I know many people who are still virgins by choice. I also note that many of my non catholic friends have expressed sentiments of regret for throwing their virginity away, as a result of their free choice. Maybe if society was a little more old fashioned and stopped insisting on absolving people from the consequences of their actions, promiscuity would not be so pronounced. So yes, we are still in the 21st century, now provide a decent comeback to my argument which I will state again for you. The argument of choice is pointless because the free choice occurred when the decision to engage in sex was made. If I want to drink and drive then I accept the consequences that if I get caught I am in trouble. I may not always get caught but thats the risk I accept..freely. I’m interested in your logical and thought out reply.

    P.S To push the point, are you saying man is nothing more than a slave to his passions? If so how can society punish those who commit crimes because of passion if they had no ability, through free choice, to remain above their base inclinations.

    Post a Reply
  4. Sandra, sorry if that got abit emotional, its been a long day. I retract my insults, they are unnecessary and I apologise for them. I entirely agree with you point however that it takes two to tango. But I would like to point out that this is because the laws of today do not look to hold people responsible for their actions anymore and rather looks to excuse them for it. Rather todays laws would actually encourage people to go and engaged in sex no matter what age they are at.

    Post a Reply
  5. To Jon – I am so sorry that your daughter had that dreadful experience and yet you still show no compassion. Once again I am not stating that my view is right for everyone I am stating that it would be right for me as it is also right for many women. Are you so lacking in intelligence that you cannot see the difference? I am NOT imposing my view on others ie. forcing anyone to undergo an abortion if that is against their beliefs. You, on the other hand feel it is YOUR right to force others not to, regardless of THEIR beliefs. Pretty one-sided I would say. To Marc – it may not be chiselled in stone, but it is the law – you cannot deny that. As for your ridiculous analogy whereby you compare a mother stabbing her newborn baby to having a termination – I wouldn’t condone the father doing this either. However many fathers do murder their children – where is your outrage about that? As for a surgeon cutting of a woman’s limbs if she wanted – I don’t agree with a plastic surgeon performing outlandish procedures that are not in the patient’s best interest either – but that has NOTHING to do with the subject! How dare you presume that I would advocate anyone watching snuff movies – and what precisely does that have to do with the abortion debate? As to your final statement – “if you don’t like snuff movies, don’t watch them”, I would say to you – ” if you don’t want an abortion, don’t have one!

    Post a Reply
    • You ARE forcing your opinions (i.e. babies can be murdered for no reasons at all, when they are not born) on others despite your own denials. No one is buying them. Just because the law allowed it doesn’t make it right. Murder would still be wrong even if it was legalised. The snuff films are merely mentioned as an analogy to abortion. Abortion is murder.

      Post a Reply
  6. The Lord is Merciful and wanting to save but The Lord is a Holy God and an angry one.

    Romans 1 says such people are given over to their perversion. The Lord has delivered them to it. They have a spirit of error. Scripture tells us that ‘God mocks His enemies’. It is nearly impossible for these wicked children of Satan not to spend eternity in the lake of fire. For some of them, they will be there soon. Jesus can and has saved homosexuals & lesbians. But proud baby killers and open lovers of Satan – very few if any of such wicked demonoids will be saved. May The Lord’s judgment on these evil sons and daughters of darkness quickly. It is entirely scriptural to pray God’s vengeance upon them (Revelation 6: 10). God told Jeremiah to not even pray for such the days when backslidden Judah & Israel has sacrificed their babies to Molech.

    Post a Reply
  7. Sandra,

    You argued for three propositions:

    1. NO-ONE has the right to force a woman to continue with pregnancy and childbirth.

    2. It is not for you to decide what I or any other woman does with her body.

    3. How can you possibly state that you are not forcing your view on others when you proclaim that no-one has the right to a termination.

    Try and leave emotion behind and begin to reason and allow reason to take you where reason demands. If reason isn’t Queen then we descend into madness or uncivilized behaviour where, ultimately, the strongest wins. Someone once said, “Logic keeps you honest.” Try to be honest, Sandra.

    Re prop 1, Can you tell me where this “right” originates? Is it chiselled into stone somewhere? Is it by your own reasoning? Is it an act of Parliament or referenda? Or, more chillingly (and certainly tautologically), does it arise from your belief that you believe that NO-ONE has the right to force a woman to continue with pregnancy and childbirth?

    Question: If you are correct and NO-ONE has the right to force a woman to continue with pregnancy and childbirth, would you allow a woman to stab to death her one-minute-old born baby because she changed her mind just as the kid popped out?

    Re prop. 2, Two points: (i) Biologically and genetically speaking, the unborn child (or, if you answered yes to the previous question, the born child) is quite distinct from the woman’s body. If the child is male, how can that male baby be a part of the female mother’s body? (ii) If a woman went to surgeon and demanded he cut off both her arms and legs because she believes “it is not for you to decide what I or any other woman does with her body”, do you think the surgeon would and should agree to the operation based on your belief?

    Re prop. 3, Sandra, hullo, are you there? Take a look around, young lady, and understand that you live in a society where, unlike 3 year olds, adults don’t always expect to get everything they want. On your belief I should be able to watch snuff movies where women are kidnapped, tortured, raped and them murdered. If you object to my right to watch these, how dare you force your view onto others. If you don’t like snuff movies, don’t watch them.

    Post a Reply
  8. To Brian – how am I a hypocrite by stating I am against sexism? That is nonsensical. St John – how dare you state that a women does not have the right – apparently the law states that she does. You are perfectly entitled to your opinion on whether it is right or wrong, you do not have the right to force others to live by that opinion. Yagron – however much you state that the father should support and assist, this is so often not the case. I know of several cases where the father has neglected to support his children – and this after being married to the mother. What century are you living in – you honestly believe that people should remain virgins until they marry? Maybe you just haven’t had the opportunity yourself. Your statement regarding girls “being promiscuous” – it takes two to tango does it not? Are the males not equally “promiscuous”? I myself have had two children and have ” gotten over the birth” as you so scathingly put it. However, other women aren’t so lucky as their health suffers afterwards, particularly after several births. Did you know that teenage girls are five times more likely to die from complications during pregnancy and childbirth? Legislating against abortion will not stop it occurring – we would see many more deaths as history has proven that it will happen regardless, resulting in more deaths. As for the statement that a woman conceiving a child during rape and giving birth to this child is heroic – give me a break! She is not a martyr,
    it is merely HER CHOICE whether to continue with the pregnancy or not. John Abbott – yes my mother had the choice, but I was wanted, just as my two children were very much wanted. But I was also able to make the choice to not have more children as is my right. Jim – I did not profess to be an expert on the subject. An unborn person becomes a human being when it can exist independently of the mother. Bek – you have every right to not seek an abortion. I respect this right absolutely, however you don’ t seem to extend the same courtesy to anyone who does not share your beliefs.
    How is my opinion warped? Apparently the law is on my side as abortion is legal. The law will not change however much you want it to. The hypocrisy of you people is astounding – I am not dictating what anyone else should or should not do, so it would be great if you could give everyone else the same respect.

    Post a Reply
    • Sandra, give us a break. People make a law and you think that somehow imbues it with a finite moral quality? For thousands of years human society has generally regarded heterosexual marriage to be a cornerstone of society. A brick in that particular wall has also regarded abortion as murder. At best you are offering a circular argument. I have a daughter who was raped and thinks as you do. The trauma of her experience has coloured (and even perhaps ‘birthed’) her view. Just because you feel strongly about this matter doesn’t mean you are right. Could you consider indeed that you may in fact be wrong? Life is a miracle, a precious and unique gift and yet you think that it’s you’re right to be judge, jury and executioner over human life just because you think that your right to choose is the paramount concern? I believe that there is a God who is the creator of life and He also states that He will render judgement over all humans for their deeds in this life – maybe you don’t believe that. Maybe however you are wrong and you will have to stand before the judgement seat of Almighty God to give a full account of your words, deeds and actions (as I shall) and how you sought to impose them on others and yes, maybe even a death sentence against an unborn child but nonetheless a living soul. Have you genuinely considered that your view that a child remains a foetus until born may be flawed because I think that it’s a nonsensical premise – “a full term pregnancy aborted at 9 months less one week = a mere collection of protoplasym with no rights” or a prematurely born child nurtured to independent living by medicine = a human life with as much right to express an opinion and be heard as yourself.

      Post a Reply
  9. Sandra, your position isn’t that it’s a woman’s right to choose. Your position is that you don’t want women to have to deal with the guilt that is the consequence of doing an evil thing. Make no mistake – to kill a child is an evil thing. But even if your position were logically consistent with your position on aspects of it’s consequences, it is and will always remain wrong to kill a human being. A baby, born or unborn, is a human being. Even the scientific community has grudgingly come to accept this, and as technology develops, it drives nail after nail into the coffin of any lie to the contrary.

    Plenty of these unborn children are little girls, with the same chromosomes you’ve got – what about protecting their rights? No. Its not about women. I’m a woman and I feel oppressed rather than protected by your position. To claim it’s a woman’s issue is not only arrogant – speak for yourself, not your gender, who do NOT all share your warped opinion. To claim it’s a woman’s issue is nothing more than window-dressing. Orwell said “some pigs are more equal than others.” It applies as much here as it ever did to it’s original satirical context.

    A lie can never be truth, even when it’s dressed up to look like it. You, my friend, have fallen for a lie, hook, line and sinker. You needn’t be such a slave to political correctness. Surely if a woman is free to choose, she is free to choose not to have her thoughts policed by the politically convenient view of the day? You could be freed from your slavery to multi-billion dollar industry that is infanticide, if only you’d REALLY stand up and exercise your freedom.

    Granted, if you CHOOSE to fall into the herd mentality, you’re welcome to do so, with the full knowledge that all choices have consequences. Your’e failing the common good if you do so, however. Women who are brave enough to stand up in the face of public opinion and exhibit some independent thought, however – that is what our world needs right now.

    Post a Reply
  10. Sandra, when it comes to choice we all know about the very real possibility of pregnancy after ‘choosing’ to have sex, even contraception is not 100% effective, you said this your self. Tell us, in your opinion what is the difference between killing an unborn baby and a new born baby?

    Post a Reply
    • Fletch, it is actually a foetus at this stage, not a baby. It is not just failed contraception – there are the cases of rape and incest. Do you honestly believe that after a woman has been raped if she becomes pregnant, as though this is not traumatic enough she should then have to endure nine months of pregnancy, the pain and possible complications of childbirth? She would then have a living reminder of this trauma she has suffered while most likely the perpetrator gets off scot-free. What if her life is endangered by giving birth, does her life matter less than a foetus? This reduces women to being merely a vessel for carrying a pregnancy, with no rights whatsoever. It is a fact that childbirth mortality rates for women are 10 times higher than for abortion. Obviously the incidence of this occurring is far less than in previous years, but so is abortion related deaths. This is due to the fact that we have safe, legal abortion. Why is it that you don’t seem at all concerned with women’s deaths?

      Post a Reply
      • Sandra says: “… it is actually a foetus at this stage, not a baby”. That sounds pretty dismissive, Sandra, as it implies that a foetus is not a human being. But, as you seem to be pretty confident in your condescension, perhaps you may be gracious enough to tell us this: exactly when does an unborn person actually become a human being that is worthy of the protection of the law? You know, an actual “baby”. As you seem to be a bit of an expert on this subject – perhaps you would be kind enough to tell us all just exactly when a “foetus” becomes a “baby”?

      • Only the perpetrators should be punished over rape. The unborn babies conceived from rape are just as much of a victim as their mothers. One injustice cannot be fixed by another injustice.

    • No point arguing with Sandra. Take my word for it. She has been told everything she know and obviously is not able to do her own research. From the minute of conception a life created is a baby. No matter how much the P
      C police wants to twist and turn this. I also have no idea where the idea comes from that women have the right to kill a baby while it is still in the womb. It is not a part of the woman at all only connected by the umbilical cord for good supply. That’s all. A new creature that will be killed at will. This murdering babies at any state of their lives in the “incubator “will fall back on our country soon enough.

      Post a Reply
  11. Well “St”? ( is this supposed to stand for saint ?) John of Grafton – I hate to break it to you but a woman DOES have the right to a termination just as anyone has the right to not have one. So sorry to tell you this but the abortion laws in Australia will NEVER be repealed, no matter what you or any of the other do-gooders happen to want to believe. Apparently most intelligent people realise that it is a woman’s right to choose. When you are faced with this situation, then you have the right to make your own decision. Oh wait, of course – you won’t ever be faced with that choice. As for Fletch, you are trying to force your own agenda on others,
    then have the audacity to call ME selfish. I think you must have a problem with comprehension – therefore I will try to explain it to you yet again. I am not forcing my view on anyone, I have stated that it is up to the individual – you or anyone else do not have the right to make that decision. Obviously the government agrees with me as abortion is actually legal.

    Post a Reply
    • Sandra, you argue about rights and choice. I would say the woman makes her choice, in most cases when she decides to engage in sexual intercourse. That is a free choice. That action has consequences and that is why the Church has always stated and continues to state that sex outside of marriage is not allowed. This protects not just the future parents to be but also the life of the future child to be. If girls are going to be promiscuous and engage in sex then they make that decision freely there and they should accept the outcomes of it…as should the father by giving his undying support and assistance because he is just as responsible for the child as the mother. This argument of choice is pointless because the choice has already been made freely by the mother and father. In cases of Rape where the choice is not freely made and the girl falls pregnant, it is nothing but sad. The child will grow up never knowing a stable home with a pair of loving parents and no doubt the mother will have to work and suffer alot but all that is still not a reason to ends another life, just because it was not wanted. Yes pregnancy is traumatic but look around you. There are mothers every were who have gotten over it. My mother had nine children and we are so thankful to her and dad for all their time and effort and we are a very close family thanks be to God, funnily enough I was the hardest. I saved her life when I was younger so I made up for it. Well worth the effort I’d say and seeing as I’m her favourite son I’d recon she’d agree :p. I have 21 nephews and neices my sisters and sister in law have all gotten over their pregnancys. And there is not one of us who would ever say that the struggle was not worth the reward when we look at the children we raise around us. A mother giving birth to a child concieved in Rape is one of the greatest acts of love you could think of. Its nothing short of heroic. To choose yourself over someone else is nothing short of selfish and self centered. Particularly when the other is helpless and relying on you to help him live….kind of like an unborn child.

      Post a Reply
    • Sandra – and others
      The point that may have been missed by Sandra and others is that man made laws may change from time to time but there is a greater law and that is the natural law. Many are still debating the demise of of the great terrible lizards – the dinosaurs. Some say it was a meteorite impact with the Earth that caused the great catastrophe while others question this theory given that many dinosaurs survived and evolved. For example, we still have crocodiles (alligators), turtles just to mention some survivors and so it would make no sense to consider extinction by a single event as discriminating amongst the species.
      I will advance what may have caused the destruction of many species. During the time of about 500 years, most dinosaurs, became extinct and about the same time, the marsupial we recognize as a rat evolved. In the early days of this new specie (the rat), there was little to no impact on the quantity of eggs which all but laid on the surface with the only protection the undergrowth or camouflage. However, with abundant food (Billions of eggs), the rat multiplied and soon enough (about 400 years), the rat population all but matched the number of eggs of the extinct species. The rest is history.
      The moral of the story (punt intended), any specie that fails to protect its young is doomed to extinction.
      Sandra, I will leave you with these words: Your mother had the choice too but considered you more important than her own selfish reasons.
      The crocodile and the turtle have a choice also and that is to put themselves before their young but chose to put their you first. They are still with us!

      Post a Reply
  12. What a marked difference between this example that’s as close to ‘perfect’ love as I’ve seen…what an amazing example to their children…and what a wonderful way to show them just how precious their children are to them…AND THEN the nauseatingly abhorrent statement of hatred and evil on that sign and on the face of the self-absorbed man holding it. I still think the Vic police should be paying him a visit to ask what ‘dead babies’ he might be responsible for and perhaps bring a sniffer dog or three to go over his yard and living area for anything suspicious…this sign sounds too much like a statement of justification for a past…

    Post a Reply
  13. It is a shame that people like this man put the pro-choice argument back decades. Every woman has the right to control her own fertility and to decide when or if she will have children. No-one, especially a man who will NEVER be faced with the situation of an unplanned pregnancy, has the right to comment. No contraception is 100% effective and it is no-one’s decision but hers alone. For anyone who does not believe in termination, the answer is simple – don’t have one. How dare you force your misogynistic views onto women who are already facing an incredibly difficult decision. If men gave birth, we would not even be discussing this.

    Post a Reply
    • Thanks for your comment Sandra. You might be shocked to know that in the last 12 months, Medicare reports show that 44 males received Medicare funding for Item 35643 ‘EVACUATION OF THE CONTENTS OF THE GRAVID UTERUS BY CURETTAGE OR SUCTION CURETTAGE’. This is commonly known as an abortion. Evidently, men can have babies according to the government. So here’s your choice: are you going to accept that males can speak about this, or will you limit it to ‘special males’ and thereby concede that gender-reassignment surgery is a farce. By the way, even if you do take the latter option, unless you are also going to argue that males should not be required to pay child support, your claim has no logical basis whatsoever. If you’re arguing that it’s entirely a woman’s choice to bring a child into the world, then I’m sure you wouldn’t be hypocritical enough to expect that someone else should carry the responsibility of paying for her choice. Remember, that is the logical conclusion of your position. Not mine.

      Post a Reply
      • Firstly, these Medicare claims need to be investigated as obviously this is a physical impossibility. The fact remains that biologically women will always be the childbearers. It is also a fact that a male needs to donate the sperm for this to occur, therefore they still have a responsibility to support the child financially should the pregnancy go ahead. Please don’t misconstrue my comments to provide an excuse for men to shirk their responsibilities. I stand by my comments that NO-ONE has the right to force a woman to continue with pregnancy and childbirth. You will never know from experience but this can be a traumatic event, even when the baby is very much wanted. What about cases of incest or rape, or when the mother’s health or life is endangered?

      • The vast majority of abortions relate to convenience, not to medical purposes, rape or foetal deformities.
        Various studies show about 97% of all abortions are performed for psychosocial reasons, including half of late-term abortions (after 20 weeks gestation).
        Less than 3% of abortions are performed because the child has a disability.
        Less than 1% of abortions are performed on women who are the victims of rape. One extensive study of women who conceived as a result of sexual assault showed nearly all the women regretted their decision to abort. Those who continued their pregnancies were glad they did. Sandra, if you want to see these facts and more, visit this website.

      • To Fletch, I reiterate my previous comments – it is not for you to decide what I or any other woman does with her body. I am sure there are many women who do not regret their decision – and it is HER decision and hers alone. I can only assume by your name that you are male and therefore will never be faced with this choice. I find it astounding that on this issue and many other issues that involve an individual’s choice, people, particularly conservative churchgoers feel that they can force their views onto others instead of just making their own choices.

      • Sandra, your right I am male and i can only imagin what some women must go through in a pregnancy. But you are also very wrong. No one is forcing their view on you just like no one forced you to read this blog. You came here freely and criticised the views and values of others and accuse people of cramming their beliefs down your throat, all while you air your own views without any reasonable argument. Rather hypocritical wouldn’t you say? The concern is not what women do with their bodies, the concern lays with the well being and precious life of the unborn child. No one (women or man) has the right to take the life of an unborn child.

      • To Fletch, how can you possibly state that you are not forcing your view on others when you proclaim that no-one has the right to a termination. How can you know every individuals circumstances? I think the hypocrisy lies with you – I am merely stating that women need to have a choice, however you feel they should not. I am not advocating forced terminations, unlike you who believes that women should be forced into giving birth. So who is the hypocrite here?

      • Sandra, according to your logics, my arguments are invalid because I am a man. And to claim that you are against sexism, you are a hypocrite.

      • The simple answer, Sandra, is that a pregnant woman does not have the right to have the child in her womb murdered.

      • Apparently a statement like this is called forcing your view on someone, I call it a simple fact of life. Sandra your free to believe whatever it is you want to believe, I just hope one day you’ll have a more selfless attitude towards the issue.

  14. i believe in choice for people but should not a baby have a choice as well to be born and then have a say what about the ones who they want an abortion thats their choice but what if their parents had done that to them they would not be here to have any choice and well done to these brave parents to have their baby for a short time and give him the dignity of being born.

    Post a Reply
  15. Such beautiful words for Shane and his parents. 🙂

    Post a Reply
    • It is an inspiring story – it was made for beautiful words. I hope I did it justice and I was really torn about even adding in the completely offensive actions shown by those trying to disrupt the March for Babies. They really don’t deserve to be part of that story, but the contrast of life and death was so powerful that it had to be made.

      Post a Reply
      • Mate I think I speak for anyone reading this story when I say you did it more than justice. This is the kind of story that will swing the hearts and minds of some who do support abortion.

  16. Bern, another excellent article. God Bless you Dan and Jenna for your courageous decision.

    Post a Reply
  17. I just sent off a message to Vic Police and I am very glad they did a good job this year.

    Post a Reply
    • They did a great job from what I’ve heard and we should make a special effort of letting them know. Thank you for doing so.

      Post a Reply
    • I hope someone makes a complaint to Victoria Police about the offensive conduct of the bloke who was inciting to murder!

      Post a Reply
  18. A disgusting banner about “dead babies”. What an idiot. Never-the-less, people should be free to march with whatever stupid banners and signs they want, as long as they are not genuinely inciting threats to people’s lives and property, or presenting genuine threats to the country. In this case, I don’t think this banner could be classed as that. This pro-abortion protester has done his cause more harm than good!

    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