David van Gend
Dr David van Gend is a Toowoomba GP who had an opinion piece published in The Courier Mail this week responding to calls to liberalise abortion in Queensland.
First published in The Courier Mail, 13th December 2011
Denial of baby’s life will destroy
“The law in this State”, in the words of Judge Fred McGuire “has not abdicated its responsibility as guardian of the silent innocence of the unborn”.
I have held a baby born at 23 weeks at the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, and there is nothing more innocent. If somebody attempted to assault her, I would have defended her. Yet there are calls for changes to our abortion law to allow babies even older than these ‘premmies’ to be lethally assaulted, no questions asked.
Victoria has had such a law since 2008, a barbaric law which judges a 23 week baby to be a child when sleeping in the hospital nursery, but mere human waste when sleeping in the womb, free to be killed for any or no reason.
Leading human rights lawyer Frank Brennan called this Victorian legislation “totalitarian”, not only for allowing cruel late-term abortions “on demand” but for its threat of prosecution for any doctor who conscientiously objects.
Yet there is pressure mounting for similar brutal legislation to be introduced in Queensland.
In the Courier Mail (Viewpoint December 6) University of Queensland professors Nick Fisk and Heather Douglas call for law reform and falsely claimed the historical purpose of our abortion laws was solely to prevent harm to women.
In truth the moral status of the baby was central to the development of common law, with a key judgement in a 1938 case stating:
“The law of the land has always held that human life is sacred and the protection the law gives to human life it extends also to the unborn child in the womb. The unborn child in the womb must not be destroyed unless the destruction of the child is for preserving the still more precious life of the mother.”
Queensland law has always permitted abortion to preserve the mother’s life. As Judge McGuire concluded in his 1986 ruling, such law is “a humane doctrine devised for humanitarian purposes, but it cannot be made the excuse for every inconvenient conception.”
Yet there are many voices demanding unrestricted abortion even for “inconvenient conception”. For these people it is as if the baby does not exist, as if there is no tiny beating heart (already there at only 5 weeks of pregnancy) which is stopped by the violence of abortion. The only crime, they say, is the crime of interfering with a woman’s absolute right to decide if she is ready to be a mother.
But a woman is already a mother, for better for worse, when she is first “with child”, and there is no right to take a life which is not ours to take. Consenting adults who conceive have a duty of care to their baby which nothing can set aside. The law must uphold that duty, and uphold the fundamental prohibition against intentional killing.
Perhaps passing laws that deny the baby’s existence is the only coping mechanism for a society that already takes the life of every fourth baby before birth. But it is a denial and delusion that is destroying us, turning us hard and cold where we should be most tender.
The existing law defends “the silent innocence of the unborn”, and forces us adults to find solutions to our sexual and social predicaments that do not involve killing our offspring.
Well written article. Cant agree more. Wished that the law-makers will read this and start to protect the unborn. Thank you for publishing it for us.
Dr David had spoke the clear fact.
Abortion is killing a person, tragically that person (Baby) can’t defend himself!
Good to you David and all who are standing for sacred lives.
God bless you all.
A well written article. It would appear the social changes in our society have produced irresponsible promiscuity which has in turn increased the number of ‘unwanted’ pregnancies and hence the horrific number of babies being killed in the womb. With the advances in birth control available unwanted pregnancies can easily be avoided. The ease of an abortion only makes promiscuity more acceptable with no thought of the consequences.
We are such a selfish community – ‘me and my wants’ is always paramount. David is absolutely right in pointing out how our selfishness makes us even harder and colder than ever when it comes to the issue of abortion. We need to take stock of ourselves and get a better understanding of our sexual nature, a theology of sex and the body.
There is an argument now put forward by the pro-abortion lobby that why does the mother have to host a child who is seen as a parasite living within the mother whom the mother does not have to host. The abortion lobbyist have gone beyond all reasonable logical argument.
…and people continue to ridicule arguments about slippery slopes. As Dr van Gend has explained, abortion was originally allowed to protect women’s lives, but now we allow it and claim a ‘right’ to it , for any and every reason. We need to reject the new and deceptive language being used by pro-aborts about ‘reproductive rights’ and the like.
Thanks ACL and David for your work.
The feminist movement ,especially the ALP’s Emily List female policiticans including Premier Anna Bligh will push hard to “liberalise” Queensland and bring it up to date with the rest of the world. Victoria has the worst abortion laws in the entire world with laws in place to prosecute parents/anyone who intervenes with the abortion industry. Trust me this will be a fight and we need to stand up to this insidious evil. To date 1.2 billion babies have been aborted world wide( recorded ones) with 120,000 abortions performed every day worldwide.
I just want to cry!!
Thank you for a well written article. I agree whole-heartedly with you and want to protect Queensland from the barbaric laws that are present in Victoria. Thank you for standing up for these innocent children.
Good on you, Dr van Gend, for standing up for those with no voice! In my opinion, abortion is murder – premeditated, cruel and selfish and an abhorrent evil in God’s sight. The image of an aborted foetus is horrible and yet Queensland wants to liberalise this crime, just because it might be popular amongst those who cannot control themselves. This cannot be allowed
To Dr David VVan Gend: You are a hero! We need very many people like to you champion the unborn.
Young women should be taught that if they are raped, provided they get to a major hospital earlier than 17 hours after the rape they could have a dilatation and curettage before conception happens. Then a conception is prevented and without killing a baby. Thus some abortions could be prevented.
I think that this should be a topic taught to young women in High School about their “responsibility to the unborn and their responsibility to behave in a manner that should not lead to the destruction of their baby because it is “inconvenient”. Instead they are taught about their rights. They will live to regret their actions every time they see a young baby playing with its mother.
It is a much better choice to enjoy being a young girl and getting on with your education than risk having this terrible choice to make. Any baby you conceive is already a family member and a grandchild. No young man is worth this choice.
In Australia we need to make up the population with our own children rather than risk being outnumbered by races who come here with the express intention to outbreed us. Please don’t listen to left wing feminists such as are members of Emily’s list and whose wish is to destroy rather than nuture.
Is it possible to buy unborn babies, since they are not counted as human? If every woman who approached an abortion clinic was offered several thousand dollars to have the child for adoptive parents, would this be legal? Humans cannot be sold under law, but while not counted as human, why not? People who are so stupid as to consider a baby an “inconvenience” would quickly change their tune if offered cash. Many adoptive parents pay much more to get through adoptive programs. Legally, I dont think the babies can be “bought”, but money could be offered monthly for NOT getting an abortion, and then the mother could be asked if she wanted to volunteer baby for adoption after baby is born. If this is a workable plan, donations could go into a pool for this sort of program.
Excellent idea, Dan. Of course, if presented bluntly, the idea of selling ‘pre-human’ babies would stir up outrage among those desperately trying to deceive themselves. However, some mothers would wake up and avoid killing their children. The gentler option of supporting them through to adoption may be more readily accepted. You are definitely turning the ‘slippery slope’ into a more positive direction.
P.S. Look up http://www.thebabesproject.com and click ‘the big idea’. These are women setting up houses and adoption options for the unexpectedly pregnant. They accept donations and other appropriate support.