Tasmania

PROLIFE FACTS BULLETIN NUMBER 157

November 27, 2013 by Admin Leave a Comment

PROLIFE FACTS BULLETIN NUMBER 157 NOV 26th 2013

Recently Pope Francis spoke in horror of the so many “legal human sacrifices” taking place around the world. He was referring to the increasing tide of abortion. “Thou shalt not kill” is one of the Ten Commandments yet Tasmania last week passed a law taking abortion out of the crimes act and treating it as a health issue, effectively abortion on demand up to the moment of birth. The Minister of Health Michelle O’Byrne boasted that the new law brings Tasmania into the 21st century and helped remove the stigma of abortion. Freedom of conscience is not allowed, a doctor faces being struck off if he or she refuses to provide the name and contact details of the abortionist. A counsellor who refuses to be complicit in the death of the preborn child faces conviction and a fine of A$4,525. Freedom of assembly is not allowed. Nobody is allowed within 150 meters of an abortion clinic to pray, offer assistance or counselling. Such a breach of the new law earns conviction and a fine of up to A$9,750, or imprisonment for up to 12 months.

Right to Life Comment: Now Tasmania has legalized murder of the unborn up to birth. What is more, dissent itself, now seems to be being criminalised. Think carefully about Pope Francis’ description of the tide of killing now sweeping the world, ‘legal human sacrifices’.

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil. Isaiah 5:20

Tasmania Declares War against Women and the Unborn A Wakeup Call for New Zealand

November 24, 2013 by Admin Leave a Comment

Violation of Conscience Rights Enacted

Media Release 24th November 2013

The Tasmanian Upper House has declared war on the women of Tasmania by inflicting on them the most anti-woman abortion legislation on the planet.

Women are no longer safe from having their child in their womb killed during the whole nine months of their pregnancy. The law has now effectively declared that the State of Tasmania has no interest in protecting the life of her child as a future citizen or in protecting her health and welfare. Abortion has been taken out of the Crimes Act and is now treated as a health issue. It is no longer a crime to kill an unborn child. Abortion is provided on request up to 16 weeks gestation with no reason whatsoever required. After 16 weeks and up to birth, the unborn child may be killed, if two doctors believe that “continuing the pregnancy involves greater risk of injury to the physical or mental health of the woman than if the pregnancy was terminated.” There is now effectively abortion on demand up to birth, according to a legal expert.

[Read more…]

If it’s that bad – why haven’t the Dutch and the Belgian’s changed their laws?

October 13, 2013 by Admin 1 Comment

The following post is by Paul Russell of Hope Australia on his blog at the Noeuthanasia.org.au website. Paul Russell presents compelling arguments as to why the introduction of euthanasia in Tasmania (the so called ‘Voluntary Assisted Dying Bill’) would set an extremely dangerous precedent. Right to Life highly recommends reading the full post.

Recently Tasmanian Premier Lara Giddings MP, in response to a tweet from a colleague about the problems with euthanasia in jurisdictions where it is legal replied: “Interesting that democracies from Oregon to Switzerland with Voluntary Assisted Dying have not gone back and overturned their laws – why?”

That’s a very worthwhile question. Note well, of course, that none of the jurisdictions where either assisted suicide or euthanasia is legal call it ‘voluntary assisted dying’, but we get the point.

The aphorism that ‘what is legal is moral’ springs immediately to mind. Morality here refers to the reality of the law; that our laws do legislate for morality and, like it or not, judgments are made by politicians every day that have some connection to the ‘right or the wrong’ of an issue. The euthanasia debate is no different with both sides arguing from a perspective that includes an appeal to morals at some level.

Those who support and campaign for euthanasia clearly believe that there is a ‘good end’ (no pun intended) or, in other words, a benefit to society. Benefits or ‘goods’ have a moral character. ‘What is legal is moral’ refers to the effect that any Positive Law has on the understanding of the issue legislated for in the minds and hearts of citizens’ overtime.

I’m reminded of a comment Philip Nitschke made at one of the debates we’ve had in respect to the Dutch where he said that he felt that they were quite wedded to their euthanasia legislation. And I think he’s right. But, like the Premier, it makes sense to ask, why?

[Read more…]