Unfit for duty

When a federal Health minister and his parliamentary secretary are unable to see past their belief-systems to scientific data it is time for them to go.

This is the case for Tony Abbott and Christopher Pyne.  Both are unable to accept that the abortion law stands and Australian women, the men who support them and many medical practitioners are asking for the ban on RU 486 to be lifted. 

These belief-based men – men who have little regard for science which does not support their anti-choice agenda – Tony Abbott, Christopher Pyne, Ron Boswell, Barnaby Joyce, Steven Fielding, Alex Hawke, Fred Nile, Peter Slipper, Alan Cadman, Joe Hockey and Brian Harradine just cling together like a sinister sticky, dusty, paternalistic web of oppression of a the uterus.  Curiously, not one of these men have a uterus.    

I also advise on IR issues  

 

Comments spamproofed by Akismet

Trackback disabled until further notice.


16 Responses to “Unfit for duty”

  1. weezil Says:

    When women are able to pass laws on how to operate my penis, I’ll begin to believe that men’s opinions of uterus operation are relevant- but not before.

    I’m still waiting on that magic elbow pill, you know.

  2. JahTeh Says:

    Women are more likely to pass laws to disable it rather than operate it Weez.
    Our lovely Health Minister is on record as: wanting to limit IVF for women, especially lesbians.
    Wanting to cut Medicare for abortions.
    Not letting the abortion pill in because it’s bad for us.
    Now there are women in Melbourne who desperately need Herceptin for a particular form of cancer but no they can’t get it on Medicare.
    In a civilised society this man would be indicted for crimes against women.

  3. Brownie Says:

    oh those puckered lips! how on earth do the anti-gay christians look at a picture like that and not think the subject was really in touch with his feminine side?
    over at womensforumaustralia.blogspot I have gone berserk on this issue today

  4. Kate Says:

    All I could manage to say was “bastards!” so kudos to you Suki for putting this so eloquently and clearly.

  5. weezil Says:

    Check this out: Tony the Abbott did not seek full advice as to the safety & efficacy of RU486, upon which he is presently basing his recent ridiculous statements to the press.

    Tony, I got news for you. Women who want to control their own bodies don’t exactly need your protection. Unless you’re invited in to the OB/GYN’s surgery, why don’t you just piss off?

  6. weezil Says:

    JahTeh Says:
    November 16th, 2005 at 9:50 am

    Women are more likely to pass laws to disable it rather than operate it Weez.

    JT, None of the women I know are in favour of disabled penises. I must not get out enough. ;)

  7. joe2 Says:

    Isn’t the monk a wombat?
    If only he would leave.
    Probably,rejected by the Jesuit stormtroopers and still trying to annoy everyone. Mortein or swat.

  8. marcel Says:

    Curiously, not one pro-abortion lobbyist was denied the right to be born. Just like with slavery, all the supporters of it were free. I would say all politicians contributing to the deaths of unborn children are unfit for duty. Did you know, onto the science part of this debate that you seem preoccupied with, a baby killed by abortion invariably has a beating heart? When there is a heart beat I’d say that is a pretty solid sign of life.

    All I’d like to know is this, Suki, at what stage do you become uncomfortable with ‘termination’? 10 weeks gesation, 22 weeks, 35 weeks, a month after birth, five years? When does this ‘choice’ become a ‘child’? When does abortion become flat out killing in your mind? I’d be interested to know. (This comment may well be deleted if it probes your conscience too much.)

  9. Suki Says:

    marcel you just keep missing the point don’t you. No one’s uterus is the least bit interested in what you think. OOPs poor marcel…all uterus-ly challenged.

    It always was and always will be a woman’s body and a woman’s choice.
    Further to that, your disapproval/approval of my thoughts on where life begins are also inconsequential.

    Go socially engineer your own bits and keep fucking away from bits that don’t belong to you.

  10. JahTeh Says:

    I think we’d keep yours operating Weez, there seems to be good lefty genes there:)

  11. Pavlov's Cat Says:

    Hey Marcel, since you’re so self-righteous about other people’s consciences and so determined to mind other people’s business, how does your own conscience feel about all those unwanted children your heart’s bleeding for, and for the abuse, neglect and poverty they are all too likely to face — given how many of them will be abandoned by their biological fathers before they’re even born?

    Volunteering to look after them, are you?

    I’ll answer your question. When does it become killing in my mind? When the foetus, if born, can or could take an independent breath. No sooner. But I bet you didn’t really want a straight answer to your question challenge, did you.

  12. weezil Says:

    PC, Marcel should walk the talk. If he’s opposed to abortion, he should do his part… and shag more men.

  13. Ed Says:

    Curiously, not one of these men have a uterus.

    Nor a brain, I suggest.

  14. Suki Says:

    Meanwhile Ed, those of us who have both a brain and a uterus are frequently excluded from the discussion that clearly would benefit from both!

  15. Ed Says:

    Yeah, but, you know. They’re only doing what’s best for you etc. etc.

    Seriously, though. If a Minister has business interests that involve matters of their portfolio it’s called a conflict of interest and they must remove the conflict. I honestly think that religious beliefs are a conflict of interest for Ministers whose responsibilities involve matters such as abortion. So the choice is clear: Tony Abbott can renounce God or get the fuck out of the health portfolio.

  16. Suki Says:

    Beautifully put!

Leave a Reply