Was the NZ abortion law changed to meet a UN sustainable goal? by JoBloggz

Snuck through under the radar: Horrific NZ Abortion Amendment Act.

Thanks to JoBloggz for sharing this blog

While the rest of the world’s governments are dealing with Covid-19, the NZ government pushed through the Abortion Amendment Act a priority.  It’s an extreme abortion bill that there’s no public mandate for – you’ll see why in a minute.

It didn’t need to be changed – as the law stands, women can get abortions up to 20 weeks, and it’s easy to get in NZ – it’s pretty much ‘abortion on demand.’

The changes are horrific:

• Abortion up to birth
• No pain relief as the fetus is being dismembered
• No life saving treatment for a baby born alive. Yes, infanticide is now legal.

I believe our abortion laws were liberalised in keeping with the demands of the UN.  It’s right here on their ‘Sustainable Developments Page,’ as part of Agenda 2030.  Population control is a UN development goal and Jacinda Adern wants to tick all the boxes she can while she’s in power.

Source: UN Sustainable Development Goals – Access to legal abortion services needed, to prevent 47,000 women dying each year – UN rights experts

In accordance with this, the NZ government stated they wanted to “remove abortion from the Crimes Act,” so I read the Act, and I found that abortion is only a crime when it’s procured illegally, as in a backstreet abortion.  (Section 183 – 187A of the Criminal Act for procurement.)

Currently, this law stands to protect NZ women from unregistered abortionists – but the government has now removed this protection because the tightening of the definition of ‘health practitioner’ to doctor, midwife or obstetric nurse (to avoid unsafe abortions) was defeated in the second reading of the bill.

So now, it’s legal to go to a back-street abortionist.  Is this fulfilling the requirement?  Will Jacinda get a big fat tick on her sustainable development report card from the UN for this?  If the UN was involved, was this a suitable goal for New Zealand?

A sane society would offer a choice to women.  Women could be sheltered, paid to give birth, and have the child adopted out – but because there’s no statutory definition of fetuses or embryos as “unborn children” within New Zealand law, the evil people in power have mandated it’s okay to rip a live human fetus apart or leave a baby to die in a bucket.

I never thought I’d see the day when a NZ government would hold human life in such contempt.

Calves have more protection.  On 1st June 2015, a new law came into effect stopping farmers from inducing cows and killing the calf who wouldn’t survive being born too early.  This practice was considered “inhumane and cruel” by the MP’s promoting the change.  Unborn calves are now protected from this.

Also, the Whanganui River, the river that flows through my old home town, has been made “a legal person.”  That philosophy is fits right in with ‘Gaia,’ but having children does not.

The contempt extends to the NZ public.

The public outcry has been ignored by the government and media.  90.6 of the submissions were ignored by the parliamentary select committee.  Demonstrations which filled the streets were ignored and under-reported.  When the public clapped in the public gallery after MP Agnes Loheni opposed the bill,  the speaker of the house threatened to have them removed.
“National MP Agnes Loheni is staunchly against the bill and was quick to point out 91.6 percent of the submissions opposed the bill.  She said she was not scaremongering because there was plenty to be alarmed about, and diminishing the life of an unborn baby to the point they were no longer called babies meant humanity had been lost.

“Late-term surgical abortions are nothing short of barbaric,” she said.  “There is nothing kind in it – a truly progressive society protects the rights of all its members down to the smallest and most vulnerable, the unborn child.”

There was huge applause from the public gallery following her speech – prompting Speaker Trevor Mallard to threaten removal if it happened again.”

In desperation, another demonstration against the Abortion Legislation Bill was held at Parliament at the same time as the bill’s second reading, and this time it used graphic visual images.

“Out of respect for post-abortive woman, the pro-life movement has generally resisted using graphic visual photos of aborted babies in public places,” organiser Gina Sunderland said.

”But that’s all about to change.”

But Ardern, who supports the bill, said she was personally against the use of such images.

Jacinda and her baby Neve. What would her baby’s name have been if she’d been terminated – “Never?”

“I just think that’s not a way to share the legitimate views that other people will have,” Ardern said.

Jacinda Ardern opposed to ‘graphic’ abortion law rally at Parliament

Leighton Baker of New Conservative stated that when Government ministers proclaim discomfort at being shown images of what they are seek to legitimise, it proves that they are disconnected from reality and society.

There certainly is a disconnect.

Links

Here’s a handy summary of the amendments to the abortion bill that were all defeated on the second reading.  They show the real agenda of the pro-abortion lot.   Key amendments voted on were:
* requirement for abortion procedures post-20 week to ensure that fetus does not feel pain (as per the Animal Welfare Act which requires vets to ensure that animals don’t feel pain) – DEFEATED
* tightening of definition of ‘health practitioner’ to doctor, midwife or obstetric nurse (to avoid unsafe abortions) – DEFEATED
* abortions post-20 weeks only for extreme circumstances – DEFEATED
* keeping conscientious objection standards the same as they currently are (the bill currently weakens the protections) – DEFEATED
* restricting employment discrimination on grounds of conscience – DEFEATED
* cultural considerations to be considered consistent with the Treaty of Waitangi (woman’s wellbeing protected by recognising her whakapapa and the whanaungatanga responsibilities of her family, whanau, hapu, iwi, and family group) – DEFEATED
* annual reporting of abortion statistics (bill only requires reporting for 18 months after passing!) – DEFEATED

Also, 80 New Zealand MPs voted down the amendment of National MP Simon O’Connor which clarified that a qualified health practitioner who performed an abortion that results in the birth of a child after an attempted abortion has a duty to provide the child with appropriate medical care and treatment, no different than the duty owed to provide medical care and treatment to any other child born.  It was DEFEATED.
Source: Another atrocious day in Parliament, Family First

How’s this for gender-bending crap?  Other proposed amendments, in Green MP Jan Logie’s name, would scrap the 20-week legal test altogether or replace “woman” in the bill with “pregnant woman or other pregnant person.”  The 20 week limit was scrapped but they decided not to include a “pregnant man” in the definition.

Infanticide:  What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.

Opinion shaping: here’s an example of the poor quality of reporting on the issue in NZ – Abortion no longer a crime in New Zealand as law change passes final reading in Parliament.

NZ PM rushes world’s most extreme abortion legislation into law while country distracted with pandemic

Jo-Blogs

NZ

Hi, I live in beautiful New Zealand. I write, I blog, I work, and in my time off I enjoy the great outdoors. I am the mother of two grown children and inheritor of their cats. I work in IT with my husband and son.