In support of CYFSWATCH NZ and the right of Free Speech. First visit to Watching CYFSWATCH NZ? Visit our home page. Please visit our e/group at

For Sue Bradford, its Ok to kill a baby in the womb, but just don’t smack it once its outside the womb.

Posted by watchingcyfswatchnewzealand on March 21, 2007

As posted on CYFSWATCH NZ

Sunday, March 4, 2007 am31 7:12 AM in CYFSWATCH Media

Smacking vs Abortion

I see Jim Hopkins in today’s Herald ( &objectid=10425293  ) has picked up on the thread that’s been developing in Investigate’s letter pages and on Leighton Smith’s radio show yesterday: that it is ethically inconsistent to approve of the ultimate violence against an unborn baby, yet disapprove of a lesser “violence” against a born baby.

I use the word “baby” in the smacking context because Sue Bradford keeps calling the “victims” of smacking, “our babies”.

You can read the full column online, but the nub of it follows:

By any measure, aborting an unborn baby is more violent – certainly in terms of consequence – than smacking the hand of a baby that hasn’t been aborted.

However, the fact that abortion is a violent act hasn’t persuaded our parliamentarians to proscribe it.

Regrettably, the argument goes, there are circumstances where abortion is justified.

Moreover, the state has no place decreeing the outcome of this most intimate dilemma. It is, say our legislators, a woman’s right to choose.

This is a shibboleth of our times which you challenge at your peril.

But the presence of Sue Bradford’s bill requires it to be challenged. Because it is utterly inconsistent to assert that the decision to do a violent thing before a baby is born is a matter of personal choice, but the decision to do a less violent thing after a baby is born is something over which we should have no choice at all.

If it’s not okay to beat or smack a baby then it cannot be okay to abort it.

But if aborting a baby before it is born is a matter of choice for half the human race, then a consistent politician must – however reluctantly – give all parents the same right to choose.

Either that or ban both. It has to be one or the other.

But if Sue Bradford’s bill passes, abortion will be the only act of reasonable force which anyone caring for our babies can choose to perform. Everything else will be illegal.

This untenable double standard is something we all need to confront.

But since Ms Bradford has obliged her colleagues to search their consciences now, it is they who must confront it first.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: