Sadly, the state parliament in Queensland, Australia, has voted 50-41 to legalise abortion. Abortion is now legal for any reason up to 22 weeks gestation, and at any stage provided two doctors can be found who agree it can be performed. As we have previously discussed, this gives Queensland some of the most liberal abortion laws in the world. It is a significant change in what was once regarded as a very conservative state. We must now wait to see what impact this has on abortion rates.
There’s three aspects of the reaction to this decision that I want to comment on.
Firstly, the cheering. According to this report, there was ‘loud cheers in the legislative assembly chamber’ when the vote succeeded. I suppose if you are convinced that a woman’s right to end the life of her child is crucial, then the vote is something to celebrate, but this should be tempered with sadness that firstly, many women are forced to make this decision, secondly that abortion is used worldwide to discriminate against women by sex selection, and finally, that abortion kills innocent human beings. Unless you think a fetus is a bunch of cells no more important than a fingernail (and hardly anyone does), that last fact should result in sober reflection. It is likely this decision will increase the numbers of abortions in Queensland. Cheering seems inappropriate for a decision that has such serious consequences.
Secondly, the references to the age of the previous laws. They have been variously referred to as ‘archaic’, needing ‘reform’ and being ‘119 years old’ in an attempt to cast them as hopelessly outdated. This was an important part of the campaign to remove them. And yet the vast majority of our criminal code is old. The age of legislation does not necessarily mean it needs to be jettisoned. Our 119 year old code also includes section 201, ‘Indecent treatment of children under 16’, section 219, ‘Taking child for immoral purposes’ and section 242, ‘Serious animal cruelty’. Are these also archaic? Traditionally, the law is meant to protect the most vulnerable members of society. In Queensland, this is no longer the case.
Finally, the references to abortion as ‘access to healthcare’. Abortion is not healthcare. The vast majority of the time it kills healthy human beings in a healthy mother, and provides no health benefits. It is expensive, and forces many healthcare providers to be complicit against their moral convictions, even if it is by referral. By almost any definition of healthcare, abortion does not qualify¹.
Of course, this setback does not mean pro-life supporters will give up. Laws have been changed, but they can be changed again. I’ve recently been reading William Hague’s excellent political biography of William Wilberforce, the anti-slavery campaigner. Wilberforce was a consumate politician who fought for 18 years against sometimes overwhelming odds to pass his bill abolishing the British slave trade, and then for the rest of his life to abolish slavery altogether. His opening speech to parliament in 1789 is regarded as ‘one of the greatest ever in an age of eloquence’. It’s an inspiring read, and lends hope after a such demoralising defeat for the pro-life cause this week.
1. Thanks to Calum Miller for this argument.
2 thoughts on “Abortion legalised in Queensland”
“that firstly, women are forced to make this decision,”
Are women really forced into abortion? Surely, in a relatively small percentage of cases, yes. But, the vast majority of elective abortions are performed because women want, of if you prefer, demand these. We cannot rid ourselves of abortion because of the demand side of the equation. Pro-lifers have proved largely ineffective as to reducing the demand for abortions.
“Of course, this setback does not mean pro-life supporters will give up. Laws have been changed, but they can be changed again.”
Sorry, to have to give a reality check here, but barring a major change in government institutions, as in a revolution, you do not see liberalized abortion laws changed anywhere in the world in the past several decades. Once legalized, abortion, sorry to say, becomes engrained in the fabric of society and is nearly impossible to eradicate.
“Are women really forced into abortion? ”
Yes, perhaps it would be better to say “some women are forced into abortion”.
“Sorry, to have to give a reality check here, but barring a major change in government institutions, as in a revolution, you do not see liberalized abortion laws changed anywhere in the world in the past several decades. ”
Several decades? William Wilberforce spent 45 years fighting to abolish slavery in the British Empire. And politics isn’t what it was. I’m not a Trump supporter for various reasons, but with his Supreme Court choice of Brett Kavanaugh, he’s weighted the court on the conservative side. It’s entirely possible that Roe vs Wade is eroded in the coming years.