Victoria’s Royal Commission’s Inquiry into DomesticViolence is very important and timely and this societal
violence needs to be stopped. Far too many children are
being murdered. Too many women. Too many men. There
is too much violence. Everywhere we turn there is one
more murder. One more stabbing. One more violent
assault. The home, the suburbs, the streets, schools, are
now a war zone.
We live in a society that is so comfortable we have it so
easy. So why so much violence? And always I go back to
loss of respect for life.
Yes indeed we have it easy. We have all the commodities
but at the cost of respect for another and above all for life.
Slowly respect for life has been eroded and this loss ofrespect began with the loss of respect for the life of the
Those who cannot defend themselves. Abortion hasbecome “normal.” Abortion means killing another. A little
one and if we can kill a little one then as Mother Teresa
would say “if a mother can kill her own child what is left for
me to kill you and you to kill me, there is nothing between.”
Over one generation we have gone from abortion fordifficulties to abortion on demand to abortion to full term,
to infanticide. In less than 30 years. We are talking legal
death of birthed babies!!! (allowing aborted babies bornalive to die without assistance).We are talking about mothers
taking their viable babies knowing that they would be
killed in a cruel way. We are talking about fathers taking
their sons or daughters to be killed intentionally.
And then we ask the Royal Commissioners to investigatedomestic/family violence. I wonder if the Commissioners
would ever think that an abortion could be the very start of
violence between previously happy couples.
I wonder if the Commissioners would consider that the violence
experienced by a child in an abortion is a similar or
replicated version of violence committed during murder of
an adult. Or do they think it’s different?
We now know that there are psychological sequelae toabortion. The woman experiences life long after effects
whilst the male is also affected but differently, generally
through his sense of impotence in the matter.
For the male who is affected it is often the sense of helplessness
at being unable to do anything to protect his child and this anger is
then turned inwards to self‐punish, by you guessed it, fighting, aggression.
Prior to the birth of the baby the father has absolutely norights in respect of the child. He cannot do anything to
protect the life of his child and if the mother of that child
does not want to keep, or give birth to that child then there
is no one who can prevent the abortion from happening.
No‐one, including the state, because the state haspurchased into the argument by legislating that the life of
that new individual whilst in utero is a nonentity, and
therefore dependent upon the whim of the host body.
Legislation has not decreed that the relationship betweenwoman and infant is symbiotic but at the same time the
infant is independent and deserving of the utmost respect.
It has in fact decreed that the life or death of that infant is
dependent upon the vagaries of the stronger of the two parties.
The violence we are daily fed through all forms of media issymptomatic of the “just below the surface” violence within
the community. There is a tension, which must be released
and will not evaporate without leaving in its wake a disaster.
Just as we see a tension beneath the psychology of some
men and women after abortion. A tension which explodes
into violence. Both self‐harming and other harming
Perhaps an explanation (mine) of the response to abortionmay shed some light on this episode. Since the onset of the
culture of the “pill” and “me‐ism” (sexual revolution) the
woman has progressively taken control of her fertility and
her body. And indeed to be able to understand her body
and to guard and protect her body as inviolate is a good thing.
However, this is not what has happened. The woman hasdemanded control over her body in as far as her fertility is
concerned, and has removed from her husband/partner
any rights and responsibility towards an act which has
esulted in a conception.
This, whilst ostensibly “good” as far as some men andwomen are concerned, has ultimately failed all.
Today, whether he chooses or not, a man can walk away
from his responsibility towards a child he has engendered.
Conversely should he choose not to walk away from theresponsibility it can be forcibly wrenched from him so that
he cannot do anything to change the situation.
The removal of responsibility has not spelled equal rights,as has been suggested, but indeed unequal suffering. The
woman suffers lifelong anguish. Yes it’s real. It happens
even for those who blithely believe that it hasn’t affected
them. The man suffers loss of something of his essence, of
his fatherhood, of his fathering. Of his manhood. He forgets
how to be man.
For the woman, in her very being there is a rupture unlikeany other. There is a grief quite unlike any other. The kind
of wrenching grief which is the result of guilt. The kind of
grief which is the result of the intent behind the loss. The
kind of grief which says, powerlessness, hopelessness,
utter despair. That is the kind of grief which abortion
leaves in its wake and is the legacy for the woman and man
(either short term or long term) who have acceded to the
For the state and nation which has decreed that the killingof its future citizens is lawful, there is to be other losses
which cannot ever be recouped. For this state or nation the
beginning of its end is in sight. Citizens begin their life as
zygotes, embryos, foetuses, babies, young ones,
adolescents, youth, and mature citizens.
A nation to be successful, progressive, depends on its citizens.
A nation needs to be able to sustain itself and to replace itself.
The birth of each child in every nation should be a celebration
and an acknowledgement that a future is assured because
our children are born. Abortion says otherwise. It says
death. And again as Mother Teresa would say “it is the
greatest destroyer of peace.”