Comments for Pellowe.com.au http://pellowe.com.au Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:26:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 Comment on Life Before Birth by Amin http://pellowe.com.au/2012/abortion-2/#comment-526 Amin Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:26:33 +0000 http://pellowe.com.au/?p=1137#comment-526 Pro-Choice, First, I’d like to tell you that I truly appreciate your visntiig this site and taking the time to consider a view different than your own – that is something that many in today’s culture are reluctant to do, and I am very grateful for your willingness to engage in discussion. Although I do not believe WhyProLife.com is affiliated with any particular religious point of view, the questions you pose do hold merit. Personally, I actually am Christian and would be happy to explain what I believe. The first point you raise actually relates to a much broader question that we all find ourselves pondering at some point in our lives – “Why do bad things happen to good people?” and similarly,” Why would God allow these bad things to happen?” In order to gain an understanding of this of what initially may seem to be irreconcilable, you have decided that there must be a good reason why bad things happen. In this view, an abortion must have been in the divine plan and have a deeper meaning than we can see. However, I would like to offer you an alternative view, which is this: God is not responsible for the evil in this world, humanity is. The responsibility to end evil lies with us. There is a divine plan in this world. From the very beginning, God has possessed the ability to control all of his creation and knowledge of what all his creation will do. However, this does not mean that he will intervene and control all of what we do. If he would, then we would be nothing more than mere puppets and life would have very little purpose. What defines our lives the most is not what happens to us as much as how we choose to respond to whatever it is that happens to us – whatever circumstances we face. As long as we live on Earth, ours will always be an imperfect existence in which we will likely encounter some form of suffering or hardship on a daily basis. Bad things will happen. As a Christian, I feel it is my duty to be a force for good on this Earth, take an active role in trying to help others, and pray that I may one day be considered worthy to enter a realm that is perfect, heaven. While it has never been my approach to use yelling in arguing a point as a few others in this thread have (the volume at which a statement is made cannot be thought to bear impact on its legitimacy), I can understand the sense of urgency in their statements. I will try to respond point by point to your arguments to explain why. You mentioned that an unborn baby is not alive. The abortion industry used to be fairly effective in persuading people that this was indeed the case – to this day, they make every effort to refer to preborn babies as mere uterine contents, products of conception, blobs of tissue, and other similar terms. Instead of letting women know that abortion ends an innocent life, they try to describe it with euphemisms, such as “terminating a pregnancy.” However, the only problem with this is that the facts tell an entirely different story. For example, according to a 1985 Senate report, “Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being – a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.” I would actually have to agree with the statement you made, which is that rights do not apply to a person who is not alive. However, this argument is not applicable to the discussion of the preborn, because science actually shows that preborn children are very much alive. There is a great deal of additional evidence I could give you that the preborn/unborn baby is human and alive –a preborn’s heart can start beating between 18-21 days after conception, development of organs begins during the fifth week of development, and the head and spinal column begin to form just a few weeks after that. However, all of these developmental facts are really beside the point. While they make the preborn’s personhood more apparent, the indisputable truth is that all of these preborn babies are at stages in life that is every bit as valid as any other stages in life. They may not yet be able to use their voice or be educated in the ways of the world, but they are just as alive as anyone else in the world. Whether a life is still inside the womb, several years from having been inside the womb, or many years from having been inside the womb, the individual deserves to have his or her life protected at every stage. You mentioned that a mother is not able to abort a child if the baby is only a month or two from its delivery date. While I wish this were true, Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton actually allow a baby to be aborted at any point in the pregnancy, for any reason (or no reason). Approximately 98% of abortions may be categorized as convenience abortions, abortions due to rape are extremely rare, and (thanks to modern medicine) situations where a pregnancy must be ended to save the life of the mother are practically not existent – we have found ways to protect the mother’s well-being without endangering the life of the preborn baby. I believe you mentioned something along the lines of that abortion is ultimately the choice of the woman, because it is her body. In response to this, I would say that no one (neither men nor women) should have the ability to do whatever they want with their bodies. Please let me explain… One of the greatest minds in philosophy, J.S. Mill, published a book entitled On Liberty, in which he advocated several key principles for society. One of his key ideas is the harm principle, which holds that individuals may act as they wish, as long as these actions do not harm others. When they do, we must intervene and provide protection to whoever is the target of that harm. Also, because no one lives in isolation, even harm that is thought to be done exclusively to oneself often results in harm to others as well – immediate family members perhaps, but also the community, and we do have an obligation. This general philosophy might seem familiar; it underlies much of the legal framework we see in America today. We often hear the phrases “My Body, My Choice” and “Pro-Choice: the radical idea that women have control of their bodies” uttered by those who are in favor of abortion. However, what those who hold these signs don’t seem to be aware of is that the pro-life movement is not out to take away any of their rights, nor deprive them of any of their freedoms. All individuals, both men and women, have every right to exercise their freedom, but society always has an obligation to intervene when harm is being brought to another life. This is the case in all areas of society, not just abortion, and it holds true for men and women alike. Especially given the great damage that abortion does to women (let alone the unborn life), society has both a personal and public obligation to discourage abortion in whatever ways it can. This actually brings me to another argument you made – that an abortion is relatively painless for both the baby and mother and the mother can resume life as normal the very next day. Unfortunately, this is rarely the case for the mother or the preborn child being aborted. It has been found that a preborn baby is capable of feeling pain by as early as 8 weeks. Many abortion clinic employees have actually been shocked when they first see an ultrasound of an abortion procedure – they see babies doing everything in their power to move away from the abortion instruments, only to find nowhere escape. Despite the pro-abortion rhetoric, the reality is that abortion can be incredibly painful for the baby. As for the woman, her pain can come in a great variety of forms – immediate physical complications, long-term problems, and psychological/emotional trauma. The reason why these women suffer from these problems is not because they are stupid, but because the information regarding risks is suppressed, they are lied to about the facts regarding their pregnancy and the abortion procedure, and they are often pressured (nearly 2/3 of the time, according to surveys) into getting an abortion by others who do not necessarily have their best interests in mind. The list of painful consequences to abortion are far too numerous to mention here, but they include an increased risk of breast cancer, depression, an inability to have children, post-traumatic stress disorder, and various anxiety disorders to name a few. Many women also find themselves in deep emotional pain over their abortion for the rest of their lives. In fact, much of the core of the pro-life movement is post-abortive women who have learned firsthand of the hardship of abortion and have dedicated the rest of their lives to trying to prevent other women from making the same mistake. - Mike Y. Pro-Choice, First, I’d like to tell you that I truly appreciate your visntiig this site and taking the time to consider a view different than your own – that is something that many in today’s culture are reluctant to do, and I am very grateful for your willingness to engage in discussion. Although I do not believe WhyProLife.com is affiliated with any particular religious point of view, the questions you pose do hold merit. Personally, I actually am Christian and would be happy to explain what I believe. The first point you raise actually relates to a much broader question that we all find ourselves pondering at some point in our lives – “Why do bad things happen to good people?” and similarly,” Why would God allow these bad things to happen?” In order to gain an understanding of this of what initially may seem to be irreconcilable, you have decided that there must be a good reason why bad things happen. In this view, an abortion must have been in the divine plan and have a deeper meaning than we can see. However, I would like to offer you an alternative view, which is this: God is not responsible for the evil in this world, humanity is. The responsibility to end evil lies with us. There is a divine plan in this world. From the very beginning, God has possessed the ability to control all of his creation and knowledge of what all his creation will do. However, this does not mean that he will intervene and control all of what we do. If he would, then we would be nothing more than mere puppets and life would have very little purpose. What defines our lives the most is not what happens to us as much as how we choose to respond to whatever it is that happens to us – whatever circumstances we face. As long as we live on Earth, ours will always be an imperfect existence in which we will likely encounter some form of suffering or hardship on a daily basis. Bad things will happen. As a Christian, I feel it is my duty to be a force for good on this Earth, take an active role in trying to help others, and pray that I may one day be considered worthy to enter a realm that is perfect, heaven. While it has never been my approach to use yelling in arguing a point as a few others in this thread have (the volume at which a statement is made cannot be thought to bear impact on its legitimacy), I can understand the sense of urgency in their statements. I will try to respond point by point to your arguments to explain why. You mentioned that an unborn baby is not alive. The abortion industry used to be fairly effective in persuading people that this was indeed the case – to this day, they make every effort to refer to preborn babies as mere uterine contents, products of conception, blobs of tissue, and other similar terms. Instead of letting women know that abortion ends an innocent life, they try to describe it with euphemisms, such as “terminating a pregnancy.” However, the only problem with this is that the facts tell an entirely different story. For example, according to a 1985 Senate report, “Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being – a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.” I would actually have to agree with the statement you made, which is that rights do not apply to a person who is not alive. However, this argument is not applicable to the discussion of the preborn, because science actually shows that preborn children are very much alive. There is a great deal of additional evidence I could give you that the preborn/unborn baby is human and alive –a preborn’s heart can start beating between 18-21 days after conception, development of organs begins during the fifth week of development, and the head and spinal column begin to form just a few weeks after that. However, all of these developmental facts are really beside the point. While they make the preborn’s personhood more apparent, the indisputable truth is that all of these preborn babies are at stages in life that is every bit as valid as any other stages in life. They may not yet be able to use their voice or be educated in the ways of the world, but they are just as alive as anyone else in the world. Whether a life is still inside the womb, several years from having been inside the womb, or many years from having been inside the womb, the individual deserves to have his or her life protected at every stage. You mentioned that a mother is not able to abort a child if the baby is only a month or two from its delivery date. While I wish this were true, Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton actually allow a baby to be aborted at any point in the pregnancy, for any reason (or no reason). Approximately 98% of abortions may be categorized as convenience abortions, abortions due to rape are extremely rare, and (thanks to modern medicine) situations where a pregnancy must be ended to save the life of the mother are practically not existent – we have found ways to protect the mother’s well-being without endangering the life of the preborn baby. I believe you mentioned something along the lines of that abortion is ultimately the choice of the woman, because it is her body. In response to this, I would say that no one (neither men nor women) should have the ability to do whatever they want with their bodies. Please let me explain… One of the greatest minds in philosophy, J.S. Mill, published a book entitled On Liberty, in which he advocated several key principles for society. One of his key ideas is the harm principle, which holds that individuals may act as they wish, as long as these actions do not harm others. When they do, we must intervene and provide protection to whoever is the target of that harm. Also, because no one lives in isolation, even harm that is thought to be done exclusively to oneself often results in harm to others as well – immediate family members perhaps, but also the community, and we do have an obligation. This general philosophy might seem familiar; it underlies much of the legal framework we see in America today. We often hear the phrases “My Body, My Choice” and “Pro-Choice: the radical idea that women have control of their bodies” uttered by those who are in favor of abortion. However, what those who hold these signs don’t seem to be aware of is that the pro-life movement is not out to take away any of their rights, nor deprive them of any of their freedoms. All individuals, both men and women, have every right to exercise their freedom, but society always has an obligation to intervene when harm is being brought to another life. This is the case in all areas of society, not just abortion, and it holds true for men and women alike. Especially given the great damage that abortion does to women (let alone the unborn life), society has both a personal and public obligation to discourage abortion in whatever ways it can. This actually brings me to another argument you made – that an abortion is relatively painless for both the baby and mother and the mother can resume life as normal the very next day. Unfortunately, this is rarely the case for the mother or the preborn child being aborted. It has been found that a preborn baby is capable of feeling pain by as early as 8 weeks. Many abortion clinic employees have actually been shocked when they first see an ultrasound of an abortion procedure – they see babies doing everything in their power to move away from the abortion instruments, only to find nowhere escape. Despite the pro-abortion rhetoric, the reality is that abortion can be incredibly painful for the baby. As for the woman, her pain can come in a great variety of forms – immediate physical complications, long-term problems, and psychological/emotional trauma. The reason why these women suffer from these problems is not because they are stupid, but because the information regarding risks is suppressed, they are lied to about the facts regarding their pregnancy and the abortion procedure, and they are often pressured (nearly 2/3 of the time, according to surveys) into getting an abortion by others who do not necessarily have their best interests in mind. The list of painful consequences to abortion are far too numerous to mention here, but they include an increased risk of breast cancer, depression, an inability to have children, post-traumatic stress disorder, and various anxiety disorders to name a few. Many women also find themselves in deep emotional pain over their abortion for the rest of their lives. In fact, much of the core of the pro-life movement is post-abortive women who have learned firsthand of the hardship of abortion and have dedicated the rest of their lives to trying to prevent other women from making the same mistake. – Mike Y.

]]> Comment on Welfare & Tax: Getting the Balance Better? by Mustafa http://pellowe.com.au/2012/welfare-tax-getting-the-balance-better/#comment-525 Mustafa Thu, 26 Apr 2012 11:09:05 +0000 http://pellowe.com.au/?p=1124#comment-525 Good question Lou.Is it right that the reduitrsbition of wealth is through the tax system?We have more and more people who feel that the government owes them something for nothing. No wonder our productivity is a disaster. Good question Lou.Is it right that the reduitrsbition of wealth is through the tax system?We have more and more people who feel that the government owes them something for nothing. No wonder our productivity is a disaster.

]]> Comment on Questions Vs Answers by Dave Pellowe http://pellowe.com.au/2010/questions/#comment-5 Dave Pellowe Sun, 26 Dec 2010 22:27:35 +0000 http://pellowe.com.au/?p=1#comment-5 Another value to the Jewish perspective of Life as a circle and not a line, is that not only do we never arrive (in this life), but we never permanently fail, unless we stop moving forward or this life ends without relationship with the One True God. And so when we fall, we shouldn't see it as a failure, but a lesson on how to do better next time when we get to practice the knowledge we just acquired. :-) DJP Another value to the Jewish perspective of Life as a circle and not a line, is that not only do we never arrive (in this life), but we never permanently fail, unless we stop moving forward or this life ends without relationship with the One True God.

And so when we fall, we shouldn’t see it as a failure, but a lesson on how to do better next time when we get to practice the knowledge we just acquired.

:-) DJP

]]> Comment on Bank fees – out with the old, in with the new! by Dave Pellowe http://pellowe.com.au/2010/bank-fees/#comment-3 Dave Pellowe Tue, 26 Oct 2010 22:14:54 +0000 http://pellowe.com.au/?p=84#comment-3 Who gives a service provider the right to penalise service users, when there are no costs or negative impacts on the service provider? I don't work for NAB, but I do advocate great service and offers, and oppose price gouging. From NAB's site, "Almost all of your Internet Banking is free of charge..." Read the full details here (if you're interested, or if you run a major bank)! http://www.nab.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/nab/nab/home/personal_finance/12/2/5 Who gives a service provider the right to penalise service users, when there are no costs or negative impacts on the service provider?

I don’t work for NAB, but I do advocate great service and offers, and oppose price gouging. From NAB’s site, “Almost all of your Internet Banking is free of charge…” Read the full details here (if you’re interested, or if you run a major bank)!

http://www.nab.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/nab/nab/home/personal_finance/12/2/5

]]> Comment on Bank fees – out with the old, in with the new! by levorosz http://pellowe.com.au/2010/bank-fees/#comment-2 levorosz Tue, 26 Oct 2010 05:04:23 +0000 http://pellowe.com.au/?p=84#comment-2 Agree that from a consumer perspective, there appears to be disconnect between the crime and the punishment (what crime I hear you say). It's an electronic version of presenting a cheque with no funds sitting behind it...very bad. From a bank's perspective, I guess it's a way to discourage such practice going on...not very customer focussed though. I think most allow up to 6pm for you to place sufficient funds into the account prior to the rejection. Most value transfers don't occur till night-time, so the balance checking occurs then. Scheduled payments would appear to happen instantly as it would happen when the processing is occurring. I suspect that just like at the ATM, you have the choice of overdrawing your account at an interest rate (overdrawn account), the same should apply for your transaction account in electronic transfers. Perhaps it would be a great service for you to specify a maximum overdrawing limit (say $100) that you would be happy to pay interest for for the period of time it takes for you to fix up your account. In saying that, the overdrawing is up to a bank's discretion based upon how valued you are as a customer and your account conduct. This amount is an unknown and should never be relied upon. To do so, the only way is to pay for the "privileged" of a personal overdraft. Yes I do work for NAB and am very proud of these small steps that we're doing as an organisation to provide fair value. Definitely plenty more to do but a step in the right direction. On the flip-side, just have enough money in the account, or better yet, have a smart notification system when it appears you may not have enough cash in the account and request a backup source (banks need to do this). Full of ideas here!! Paypal do something similar with a backup source funds. My three cents Agree that from a consumer perspective, there appears to be disconnect between the crime and the punishment (what crime I hear you say). It’s an electronic version of presenting a cheque with no funds sitting behind it…very bad.

From a bank’s perspective, I guess it’s a way to discourage such practice going on…not very customer focussed though.

I think most allow up to 6pm for you to place sufficient funds into the account prior to the rejection. Most value transfers don’t occur till night-time, so the balance checking occurs then.

Scheduled payments would appear to happen instantly as it would happen when the processing is occurring.

I suspect that just like at the ATM, you have the choice of overdrawing your account at an interest rate (overdrawn account), the same should apply for your transaction account in electronic transfers. Perhaps it would be a great service for you to specify a maximum overdrawing limit (say $100) that you would be happy to pay interest for for the period of time it takes for you to fix up your account.

In saying that, the overdrawing is up to a bank’s discretion based upon how valued you are as a customer and your account conduct. This amount is an unknown and should never be relied upon. To do so, the only way is to pay for the “privileged” of a personal overdraft.

Yes I do work for NAB and am very proud of these small steps that we’re doing as an organisation to provide fair value. Definitely plenty more to do but a step in the right direction.

On the flip-side, just have enough money in the account, or better yet, have a smart notification system when it appears you may not have enough cash in the account and request a backup source (banks need to do this). Full of ideas here!!

Paypal do something similar with a backup source funds.

My three cents

]]>