Letters to the Editor, October 17, 2018

TODAY’S LETTERS: Readers have their say on the abortion reform Bill, the royal couple’s visit and Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s religious beliefs.

THANK you for presenting the arguments regarding the abortion Bill which the State Parliament is to vote on (C-M, Oct 16).

I commend Dr David van Gend for his explanation.

He sets out the reasons and I agree completely with him.

Why anyone would want to give a female the right to terminate a life simply because she had a bit of fun is beyond me?

The reason for the change by the Premier is simply because she thinks it will bring in votes. She is mistaken.

Certainly, there are circumstances in which termination is necessary, but they are few.

A.J. Macnaughton, Clayfield

IT APPEARS columnist Peter Gleeson thinks it is OK and moral for the pro-life and choose life mobs to harass women asking for advice at a clinic.

He equates this vile action by these screaming men and women to the unionists protesting at building sites.

Women are no longer chattels of their husbands or second-class citizens, so why are they not allowed to seek medical information without fear of being abused?

A safe zone is needed, regardless of the outcome from any advice offered to those seeking it.

Jill Tucker, Waterford West

PETER Gleeson is correct in saying that Jacki Trad’s abortion Bill is ideologically driven and not related to health in any way.

The best way of countering this sort of thing is a massive campaign at the next election against all those MPs who voted for this horrible Bill, recommending that they are placed last in the order of preference.

This will bring in MPs who care about the real issues facing the electorate.

Gavan Duffy, Edens Landing

SOMEHOW the Bill to legalise abortion is being portrayed as allowing something that previously did not happen.

Women have sought to end pregnancies for hundreds of years, for most of that time without the support of the men who fathered the unwanted child.

Many women in previous centuries did not survive the coathanger or other methods employed.

I see many men voicing their opinions, but men did nothing for hundreds of years to help these desperate women. In many cases the young women were despised and their lives ruined.

In the 1960s, some male doctors became brave enough to offer women a safe place where they could terminate their pregnancies quietly and without recrimination, but it was still illegal.

The majority of women do not regret having a termination.

Women who arrive at a clinic should not be harassed, especially by males who can have no idea what they would have gone through before making their decision.

This Bill will remove some stigmas, and the many doctors who do not agree with abortion will just have to refer their patients to others, as it always has been.

A termination just because of the sex of the foetus should not be allowed, but it may be a case of stopping a terrible hereditary disease from being passed on, so nothing is black and white.

The figures show very few terminations after 20 weeks, but perhaps amendments can be considered that make this more scrutinised than a couple of ticks.

Ann Clark, Grange

ABORTION is one of many issues with which I struggle.

My religion prohibits abortion and that works for me.

However, I also firmly believe in the separation of church and state.

From that perspective, and as a feminist, I think it should be legal.

On the other hand, when we talk of a woman’s right to choose we forget that we are asking a medical professional to back that right.

And if a doctor does not agree with abortion for whatever reason, doesn’t that doctor have a right to say “I’m sorry but it is my right to say no, I will not be involved”?

I come back to Hillary Clinton’s famous words that abortion should “safe, legal and rare”.

I believe, as a society, we could do better to ensure women are not put in the position of having to choose.

Shani Doig, Coorparoo

**********

BIRTH OF A REPUBLIC

NEWS of the pending first royal birth to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex (C-M, Oct 16) will no doubt be a cause for much celebration, and rightly so.

Nevertheless, there is some irony in the announcement being made while Harry and Meghan are in Australia.

Their child will join a queue to become Australia’s Head of State. That is something no Australian child can aspire to.

It is time for an Australian prime minister to put the republic back on the political agenda. No PM has done this since Paul Keating.

John Howard stopped the republic by backing a process for an unpopular model.

It is time Scott Morrison followed Keating’s lead.

The royal birth will become part of a renewed push for a republic.

David Muir, chair, Real Republic Australia, Indooroopilly

WELL done to Meghan and Harry, but this is no time for resting on their laurels.

The young royals’ popularity and their splendid fecundity may yet frustrate the tiresome republicans’ designs.

Terry Birchley, Bundaberg

THE arrival of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their surprise package is a welcome relief from the ongoing drought and wild weather.

Australia has embraced the newlyweds and shares their joy of an addition to the royal family.

This royal couple are a breath of fresh air. May their action-packed visit be happy and memorable.

Helen Holdey, Brighton

WHAT is so fabulous about royalty?

I don’t get it. It’s the lifestyles of the rich and famous. There is nothing particularly heroic about it.

Ordinary people face more heroic challenges in their lives because they don’t usually have a privileged status.

Royals are an easily packaged and marketable cultural commodity.

I suppose they are decorative now, but not that long ago many were simply a bunch of tyrants.

Here they are again to impress and then blow through before the mystique starts to wear thin. Enjoy the show while it lasts.

Justin White, Bardon

************

MORRISON PROVES HE’S TRUE TO HIS BELIEFS

IT SEEMS, according to columnist Paul Williams (C-M, Oct 16), that one cannot be a “deeply conservative Pentecostal churchgoer” and a “knockabout, plain-speaking Aussie everyman”.

Is our Prime Minister expected to walk around in sack cloth and ashes just because he’s a Christian?

Was not Jesus someone who was able to talk to everyone, putting them at their ease? And was he not a genuine man of the people?

It’s also absurd to expect someone who has a strong faith to just switch off that side of their lives when they are at work.

Scott Morrison would have been a hypocrite if he had not voted against gay marriage. But he did not try to stuff his opinions down our throats.

I have a strong faith, albeit not as conservative as Morrison’s, and I endeavour to live by that every day because it’s a part of who I am.

Don’t we want a PM who, for a change, follows the important message, “But first unto thyself be true”.

Carol da Costa-Roque, Annerley

PAUL Williams is correct.

The litmus test for Scott Morrison is indeed approaching on religion and its role in schools concerning sexual identity of students and teachers.

The real and deep religious views of our Prime Minister will be brought into the spotlight when the Ruddock report into religious freedom in Australia is released.

Labor is clearly trying to make this issue into a moral one, and the Prime Minister has deftly managed to deflect the argument so far.

However, as Williams highlighted, “religious faith can cloud public policy” and “is that the reason Morrison is only now arriving at the very obvious conclusion that it should be illegal for any school to expel any student on the basis of their sexual identity?”

This issue that pits religious dogma against that of public acceptance of the rights of young people to express their sexuality could be the real first test for Morrison in a growing secular society.

Paul Henderson, Wynnum

PAUL Williams’ column on Scott Morrison was the most partisan piece I have ever read.

That Morrison has a number of facets to his character is to be commended.

Balancing these facets is for Morrison to determine, not political commentators.

Most people have several aspects and contradictions in their makeup. That makes them interesting.

Bill Whitney, Graceville

**********

Join the conversation. Send your letters to couriermail.com.au/letters or email to [e-mail]