Abortion in Australia - No right to survive. The Death Cult Part 2a

A new word has emerged into popularity for the unthinking, moronic members of the death cult who are trying to convince otherwise normal humans that there is something wrong with reproducing in order to continue the species. This article, Is having babies unethical? from somebody else’s ABC (it’s certainly not ours) is typical. It uses the word, ‘anti-natalist’ in order to lend legitimacy to those who want us to just stop having babies already!

I hadn’t heard this word before and did some research with the help of ChatGPT. It seems that the Philosopher, Schopenhauer, may have been the first one to use it though that isn’t confirmed. But it wasn’t until about the mid-2000s that this word really came into its own with the publication of the book, Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming Into Existence. It seems there are a group of people who state they would have preferred never to have been born and kind of wish the same for you and me. Who knew?

For those of us, who I have to believe are still in the majority, this idea is total madness. But when it actually comes from the government (the ABC is the propaganda arm of Labor), it goes from being insane to being totally evil and democidal. It fits right in with the push for abortion in Australia, which, to the best of my knowledge, is stronger than anywhere else in the world - including China.

The history of abortion in Australia

In terms of Western democracies, Australia was fairly late to the ‘party’ in decriminalising abortion.

Since States nominally have the power over healthcare, state-based legislation to decriminalise abortion came in after 1998. Please see the table and explanatory notes below:

We moved quickly from requiring evidence of harm to the mother or a pregnancy caused by incest or rape - very rare circumstances which generally required more than 1 doctor’s approval to move forward with an abortion - to allowing on-demand abortion up to 24-weeks’ gestation (and potentially later), to actually paying women a bonus if they abort a baby that is at least 20-weeks old (more on that in part 2b). Progress?

Are babies that are ‘viable’ being aborted and murdered?

As you can see from the table above, babies up to 24 weeks’ gestation can be aborted in many states of Australia and 22 weeks in others. Except in the case of severe foetal abnormality, the table below shows what the chances are that these infants could have survived being aborted.

So even though between 5% and 55% of these babies - in the absence of foetal abnormality - could survive the abortion, they are generally not allowed to do so.

Post-gestational abortion - a euphemism for infanticide

Let’s say a woman who is 23 weeks pregnant has an abortion and the infant survives. In Australia, is there a legal requirement by the hospital or staff to save that baby’s life? The short answer is NO.

In November, 2022, Senators Matt Canava, Ralph Babet and Alex Antic introduced a Private Members’ Bill to Federal Parliament called the Human Rights (Children Born Alive Protection) Bill 2022. The proposed bill stated that:

The bill: clarifies that children born alive are persons; requires health practitioners to provide medical care, treatment and statistics on children born alive as a result of terminations; and provides that the mother of a child born alive is not liable to prosecution for an offence in respect of that child.

The fact that legislation should be required in order to confirm that a baby which is old enough to survive outside of the womb is incredible to me!

This Bill, which is not only common sense, but straight-out morality to anyone who is thinking, lapsed at the end of Parliament in January 2025. The fact that it wasn’t passed by Parliament is evidence of how despicable the majority of our elected representatives actually are.

Medical ethics - an oxymoron

Backing up the democidal Parliamentarians who refused to vote on this legislation is an article published in the incorrectly-named Journal of Medical Ethics which consistently publishes the most unethical articles.

Entitled After birth abortion: Why should the baby live?, I would like to share just a couple of the truly gob-smacking quotes from this piece that is a eugenicist’s dream.

“Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.”

“Euthanasia in infants has been proposed by philosophers for children with severe abnormalities whose lives can be expected to be not worth living and who are experiencing unbearable suffering. Also medical professionals have recognised the need for guidelines about cases in which death seems to be in the best interest of the child.”

These attempts to justify infanticide are sickening and the fact that the authors felt it was somehow acceptable to publish them in a scientific journal is emblematic of the way in which the elite (government, scientific, medical and academic) have justified the incursions into our human rights over the last couple of decades.

It appears that we learned nothing from the Nazis and Stalinists other than how to be better and more effective Nazis and Stalinists.

Leaving them to die

According to many reports from nurses and other staff in hospitals, in the event that a baby is born alive after an abortion, they are left in a room by themselves until they are dead, however long that takes.

Would you trust these people with the health or wellbeing of your children? Or of yourself?

If you have a weak stomach, I recommend that you stop reading now. Because this information is absolutely sickening.

In the next installment of this series (Episode 2b), we will discuss more about how babies are aborted as well as the Australian incentives to choose an abortion - but only if the baby is 20 weeks’ gestation or more.

I would love your input into this series - am I going too far in the details or not far enough? Please let me know.

Informed Choice is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.