More Points on the Abortion debate

Protests Politics and Media

The overwhelming feeling I have had for the past week or so is that the abortion rights side of the debate, as ever, does not wish to give any oxygen or space of any kind to the pro-life movement.

In my earlier post I mentioned that the abortion debate is not going away any time soon despite efforts to close it down. Some of the American media comments I have read on the USA Supreme Court decision point out that USA’s change was driven in many ways by a previous judge on the court. The late Antonin Scalia from as far back as 1989 was laying the groundwork in a number of dissents against abortion cases. In New Zealand we do not have any prominent public figures able to promote the pro-life cause. Christian church leaders have seemingly remained mute or have been frozen out of the media.  

Abortion rights advocates in 2020 here in New Zealand were given the absolute freedom they had sought – a system of no questions asked and open access to all comers. Plus, a no cost abortion procedure. What more could they have asked for? That is the puzzle. Why protest when the absolute rights were achieved in 2020?   

In the street protests mounted by abortion rights supporters, following the USA Supreme Court decision, we saw and heard all of the usual slogans and battle cries. Mostly of the “My Body My Choice” variety. One read as “Abortion Is Healthcare”. To which I can reply only that “Abortion Is Not Childcare”. Some of the overseas photos included regular anti-religious themes. I believe an underlying anti-religious position is what drives the abortion rights movement more than anything else - in the USA and New Zealand.

Much of the media coverage has gone all out to promote abortion on demand, and to dilute and even denigrate opposing views. I haven’t yet found an official newspaper editorial on the issue. The task of reinforcing the party line, that is the Media’s party line, has been left to columnists and reporters in general.

Grant Robinson (Dominion Post) and Matthew Hooton (NZ Herald) made a lot of reattaching the “abortion is murder” label to Christopher Luxon. Last year sometime Luxon was reported as saying abortion was tantamount to murder. This is their (Robinson, Hooton, et al) method of denying what abortion really is and accusing the pro-life movement of indulging in hysteria.

I am not wanting to let Luxon off the hook however. He tells us National party policy will be to leave the abortion regime untouched. So much for National party member’s conscience votes. Nobody heard from National about that position before the abortion bill vote in 2020. How would Luxon have voted had he been an MP earlier in 2020? Don’t forget that Luxon forced Simon O'Connor to withdraw a social media post supporting the USA Supreme Court decision.  

 Viability and the meaning of Abortion

The viability argument is used ad infinitum and ad nauseam by abortion rights proponents. In most jurisdictions the legal viability or survival threshold for birth is set at 22 or 24 weeks. New Zealand’s threshold is 20 weeks. The best and only argument against this is that for the unborn child to reach those thresholds a state of viability must have existed throughout. Simple case: the child must have been viable throughout to reach and continue beyond the threshold, any threshold. Viability is achieved immediately upon conception from which point life has begun – confirmed by very early heartbeats.

Another simple fundamental case. Viability is a formation and growth continuum. Test the argument with any home or market gardener. Put down a row of seed potatoes, carrots, peas etc. and what do you get? Growth and viability. The plant life continuum begins immediately at the point of the seed reacting with the soil - the fertilising and producing agent in other words.

The Pro-Life movement by virtue of its name would hold and maintain that the word abortion has a single definition - the ending of a life. Dictionary definition of abortion: deliberate termination of a pregnancy.

From the outset the child is a living part of its mother. How can we say that any part of any live human is not alive? The child forming in the uterus is immediately a living part. Pregnancy is not usually regarded as a disease. Dictionary definitions of pregnant: having a child developing in the uterus, and, full of meaning and significance.

Here I would point out that yes some abortions (induced miscarriages to use another term) can be justified, or become a choice, in cases of rape and/or childhood/teenage pregnancy. Some, repeat some, women and families are able to cope with and accept a child where those circumstances arise. In the rare cases of tubal pregnancies it will certainly be required. Incest is a horrible subject to have to consider but abortion, if miscarriage did not occur naturally, would have to be a remedy.

Abortion and Social Effects

Early in 2020 I made a lengthy submission to the Abortion Select Committee. Below is part of that submission contending that abortion has a continuous impact on New Zealand’s population replacement rate:

Abortion over the past 40 years has had a major effect on New Zealand’s fertility rate. The point was made in my first written submission that had there been zero abortions since 1977, New Zealand would now have a population of well over 5 million, maybe up to 5.6 or 5.7 million. Over recent years statistics reveal that a near average 20% of all pregnancies have ended in abortion. The effect of abortion on the replacement fertility rate is significant and has been standing in plain sight in the statistics through all of that time.

I would recommend that the committee asks for further work to be completed on the effect abortion is having on the replacement fertility rate – in order to convince today’s parliament there is an urgent need to substantially reduce the number of abortions. Please note, this submission does not hold that abortion is the sole factor contributing to a declining fertility rate and the current population decline. 

In terms of population decline considerable damage has been done and is ongoing - social and economic damage combined. It is worth noting that in each of the past six years (2012-2018) the natural increase has fallen below the total deaths in each year. It will require at least two generations to “turn the ship around” – that is from the 1977 starting point. The pro-abortion lobbies and various legislators are certainly not blameless for their part in having brought New Zealand to this point. 

In short, we have an urgent need for an abortion prevention programme, accompanied by, for want of a better term, a maternity encouragement programme.

  

The numbers I have relied on, commencing 1952, were drawn from a Wikipedia site which I feel we should have confidence in. A quick scan of the NZ Stats site seems to confirm the numbers.

Wiki ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_New_Zealand

I have a graph to portray the numbers. Gremlins and beasties somewhere are preventing an upload to this posting.

Will try another method later.

Updating the submission data. At 2018 the fertility rate was 1.71 declining to 1.64 in 2021. My point remains that abortion has been a major factor in the decline.