Se7en

Coming across as a little condescending there Bent. I'd suggest that my opinion is also science based, I have some relevant bits of paper somewhere to support that assertion. I am not pushing 20 weeks as a hard line, but I confess I'm getting pretty uncomfortable at 28.The reasons need to be pretty significant for me to be comfortable at that point. My point on fathers having an opinion was aimed at the more extreme views from some on here who have put forward the position that it is entirely a female's rights and that men should shut up and bugger off. My partner was never forced to listen - but if she did not listen to my views, I probably wouldn't be using the descriptor "partner". (I see nothing incongruent in apologising and then trying to explain why you did the thing you apologised for. I'm sure I do it at times. But this part of the conversation is of no value to anyone)

Thank you - but your respect and sympathy are misplaced. But thanks for bringing it up as it gives me reason to opine further. The views I have expressed here are actual, not theoretical, for us both. We do believe that at a fetus is just a differentiated bunch of cells at the 12 to 15 week mark (which is as far as any of them progressed). So there was no more sense of a loss of a child than there is after a shag where you fail to become pregnant. We both have enough embriology knowledge for us to be comfortable that these views align with our overal morality. Of course I'm glossing over the reality a bit. We were lucky enough to have our first kid easily. One week of trying, 9 months later a healthy kid pops out. So when we were at about 6 weeks trying for the second, we had already started to anthropomorphis that bundle of cells, so were a bit upset when it didn't continue. But we worked through that emotionally and congnatively, so the subsequent miscarriages were not a big deal. Intrusive medical procedures for my partner of course, and as I mentioned before I did give the right to lifers a bit of a spray when we went for a D&C, but not that big a deal overall. And we ended up with 2 healthy kids who adored the 6 months we lived onboard our sailboat, so all good.

Hey - I was just giving my perspective as a third party. I get that he has a history of being a dick - but priors should only be used in sentancing, not in determining guilt. To me, in this instance, it appeared that he was trying to apologise. (And then bringing in further arguments and justifications which did muddle and devalue that position). I'm not arguing that I'm objectively right or wrong, just giving a persepctive. And of course I'm pretty much aligned with you on this topic. There should be no legal impediment on women at all. And a bunch of cells is just a bunch of cells until there is some self awareness developed. (Possibly at about age 20 for some males :-0 ) My views differ in that I think there are some moral issues that start to creep in after about 20 weeks, and that in a committed relationship the father should be able to express his opinion for consideration. No need for either the government or your favourite imaginary friend to be involved, but I'd hope that all parties consider what is right (rather than easy) in their circumstances.

This, and the previous apology is as conciliatory as I have seen on the internet. I think he sees the comment was out of line, admits it, and apologises. For that he deserves some credit. Its hard to own up to being a dickhead. However I still think his viewpoint is completely misguided and morally unconscionable. My partner and I went through a number of miscarriages, then finally had a daughter. I can honestly say I had no love for a differentiated bundle of cells until after I met her post birth. Up to that point there was no point being emotionally involved. Now... is another story. However, I did think I had the right to present my view to my partner on her choices while pregnant. And would have been very vocal in arguing against an abortion post the 18 week all clear. In the context of a long term committed relationship with a planned pregnancy, I do think the male should have some say. Not the final say perhaps, but at least 40:60.

I probably agree. I wish Shorten would fuck off there too.

Bob would have to go down as one of the great centrists of all time. Possibly second to Keating. Vale one of our great popularists.

If you were not fortunate enough to come out of a posh vagina, make sure you get into one. And if you were that fortunate, the advice stands

I'm embarrased that the average Australian is becoming as xenophobic as the average USAnian. It would be nice if we had some understanding that Rwanda is likely to be of different tribal ancestory than the south Sudanese we are all so scared off. I suspect that most folks too young to have watched Gorillas in the Mist would think that Rwanda is a flat desert. Government corruption across Africa is a tragedy with no easy solution - much of Africa is unfortunately beautiful country with a variety of shithouse governments. Immigration is a very tough issue. We simply do not have enough resources to accept everyone who would have a better life here than they currently have. Whilst it is a feel good guesture on the individual level, to some extent we need to leave the capable people in their countries to sort their own shit out. I have great admiration for a workmate in Nigeria who chooses to stay 'because someone has to make this country better"

I neither think Keating's policies were all bad, nor did my reading of macro economics stop with a book written in the 1930's. But I do think that any rose coloured reminising about the Hawke years social spending, should also remember that they were rapidly followed by Keating attempting to achieve a significant budget surplus and hence driving the 90s recession here harder than in other countries. I attribute little other than luck to Howard. But at least he didn't complete fuck up and blow through all the windfall gains. It was left to Rudd / Gillard to manage that. Seldom has so little been achieved with so much.

US interest rates were 8% in 1990 and rapidly falling to about 3% in 1992. Do you have a point, or was that just a pop quiz?

Was that just before the recession we had to have and 15% interest rates?

You didnt bother reading the ATO link I provided, did you. I was going to provide the example of a sole trader lawn mowing business, but I cant be bothered with you any more, and you are clearly in the majority in not bothering to understand. No big deal for me, I will carry dividend paying stocks in an industry fund, and chase capital growth in my SMSF. I just wish people were not dumb enough to believe Shorten when he says the change will save money. Anyone with enough invested to be affected will make the adjustments themselves, or have their accountant do so. No actual tax windfall will eventuate. And yes, shareholders frequently pay up when a company loses money, through a capital raise process. You either pay up, or your percentage equity goes down.

You keep saying that they have paid no tax, and ignoring that the company has paid it on their behalf. Consider it this way: A company can pay tax on behalf of its shareholders, and distribute fully franked dividends. OR, it can not pay that tax, and distribute those dividends unfranked. Assume someone had a holding that meant that their share of the dividends was worth $15k, and that was their total income for the year. In the case of the franked dividends, the company would pay 30% ($4.5k) to the government, and $11.5k to the shareholder. In the case of the unfranked dividend, the shareholder gets the $15k. See https://www.ato.gov.au/forms/you-and-your-shares-2013-14/?page=5 for verification from the ato. If the shareholder has no tax liabiliy, why shouldnt they get that money paid in tax back?

So a 16 YO who works over christmas, earns $6K of which $2k is withheld as tax, shouldn't get that tax back?

FFS not even Blackadder was this duplicitous. Where YOU live in Australia abortion is legal. As it is in the rest of the country, provided you explain to the Dr why it is you want an abortion. If you are too dumb to phrase it such that it impacts your mental health, then the Dr is duty bound to approve it anyway on the grounds that it would be inhumane to allow a child to be born to some one that stupid. I have helped people past the protesters in Vic beforenthe 150m exclusion zone. Your brand of shrill zealotry makes them respond in kind, and helps no one.