"New Zealand's Taleban"?

A very interesting column from Chris Trotter in today's Dominion Post:

It was exactly 30 years ago, in 1978, that the women of New Zealand finally won the right to a safe, legal abortion.

It had taken many years of bitter political struggle to overcome the resistance of those who saw motherhood as a woman's destiny, rather than a woman's choice.

To the young, confident woman of 21st-century New Zealand, that slogan, "A woman's right to choose", probably seems as antique as the militant suffragettes' cry of "Votes for Women". Nothing more than a quaint relic of a less enlightened age; something from the past.

But the young, confident woman of the 21st century would be wrong.

Read on... and the end...

The Ken Orrs of Right to Life New Zealand and the Bob McCoskries of Family First have caught the whiff of a massive right-wing victory in November. They fervently believe that, after nine long years, their hour is at hand.

Five months out from the election, they're certainly not saying, "Oh bother, New Zealand is about to elect a socially conservative millionaire prime minister and a right-wing majority to the House of Representatives, there goes all hope of getting any of our cherished religious principles recognised by an MMP parliament."

All that stands between them, and the anti-abortionists' long- delayed revenge, are the young, confident women of 21st-century New Zealand – and their brothers – who still believe in a woman's right to choose.

Comments

[anon]

The column is not interesting. It is ludicrous. John Key will ban abortion. Yeah right.

[Bryan Spondre]

Dear oh dear. What do lefties always assume (wrongly) that those of us who know that small government is good government are also morally conservative ? In 9 years Labour has done three things right 1) legalised prostitution ( it's a great way for a young woman to pay her way through University without ending up with huge student debt) 2) legalised gay marriage (why shouldn't gay people be miserable too) 3) signed a FTA with China ( only an poll driven idiot would ignore the worlds most rapidly growing economy & our Foreign Minister position on China proves that). Apart from that the obesity epidemic that really needs fighting is the obese size of government under Labour.

[Idiot/Savant]

Bryan: Unfortunately, National's voting record speaks for itself on this issue. When 23 of 27 MPs vote to restrict abortion rights and force kids to have kids, then I'd say that those wanting a more liberal regime would probably be better to vote for a party whose MPs actually supports one.

That's not to say there ar eno liberals in National. But they seem to very much be in the minority. And if they don't want to be tarred by their association with medievalists like Bill English and Judith Collins, they should probably be a lot more vocal about their views. After all, it's not exactly a bad thing if the public knows what you think - is it?

[Clint Heine]

I/S. Speculate all you like. Shows how little you know about the right. You surely live up to your name each and every day. Going to allow comments on your blog one day?

[Clint Heine]

Jordan. A blog pretending to be Sonny Thomas has come to my blog stating you have seconded his challenge to fight Whale Oil. Whats going on there? Your silence is interesting!

[unaha-closp]

I/S it is a bad thing if your public doesn't think the same way you do. Jordan should probably shut up about this right now. One of the most conservative religious electoral groups is the Pacific Island population and they generally vote Labour. If the Labour candidate for Hunua appears on national TV (and not just his blog) equating anti-abortionists with the Taliban this might cost a few votes.

[gazzaj]

Just some stats to add some perspective...

There were 17,934 abortions in NZ in 2006, and 59,193 live births. That's 3.3 births for every abortion.

98.9% were performed on the grounds of "risk to mental health" - which is the only legitimate reason vague enough to allow women to choose.

Over 6,000 of the women - more than 1 in 3 - had already had at least one. 291 women had had at least 4 previous abortions.

Now I'm totally pro-choice, think it's a personal decision that shouldn't be legislated against in any way, and personally reckon the law should be changed to call a spade a spade and allow abortion by choice. But I can also see why people might have a problem with the rates it has reached. And when politicians talk about doing something to reduce those rates, it's more than a little paranoid to assume their goal is a return to an outright ban.

I mean, can you really see John Key taking an unpopular stance on a heated issue that doesn't involve the economy? There's no way.

Also in terms of MP's voting records - I assume that I/S's 23 of 27 refers to the amendment that would have required parents to be advised if their 15 year old daughter had an abortion. Again, I'd disagree, but it ain't exactly the Taliban... or even "forcing kids to have kids".

Finally, seeing as it's a conscience issue anyway, it makes no difference whether the next government is led by National, as long as we don't all vote in ultra-conservative MPs in each electorate.

Sounds a lot like pre-election scare-mongering to me...

[Fairfacts Media]

There are righties on the pro-choice side and I am one.
But it doesn't help when Trotter turns it into a left-right issue.
Or we see pro-choice campaigners using petty personal abuse and vulgarity like as seen on a You Tube video, which I have blogged about tonight.
Calm and reasoned debate is needed and the pro-choice side should win through.
www.nominister.blogspot has more.

[stan]

A great site that has had tens of thousands of hits since feb 2008.
Obviously an opinion maker given recent poll results
very best
stan
www.dontvotelabourcartoons.com