Abortion, Hitler, the United States, and some big questions.

[Thomas]

In the Mediterranean world at the time of Christ the disposal of unwanted children was so widespread as to pass without comment. There are letters from Roman soldiers to their wives saying '... if it's a boy, keep it, if it's a girl, drown it... ' and the common practice was simply to throw the child away, to deliver it and abandon it on the edge of town.

Infanticide was practiced in epic proportion ... it was not a moral issue, it was simply the way it was.

The Jews, however, with a radically different notion of personhood, did not practice infanticide, which made them (among a host of other bizarre ideas, like the notion of God being good) almost unique in that regard, and the Christians went one step further in taking it upon themselves to preserve all life, and regularly collected abandoned babies from the dumping grounds on the edges of town.

Today our methods of infanticide are more discreet, but the premise is the same. Whether we dispose of the foetus by clinical methods, or copy our forebears, deliver the child and leave it in the woods outside town, it's the same.

It rids us on an inconvenience.

The argument regarding when and at what point the foetus becomes an individual is immaterial - the point of the act is to stop a life, and not an abstract life but a particular person - a unique being in the eyes of God.

Likewise I am well aware of the arguments for exception - but I'm not talking about exceptions, I'm talking about the general principle.

It's the intention that counts, and the intention of the act is to stop a life in its tracks.

Thomas

[taijasi]

Originally Posted by Thomas

The argument regarding when and at what point the foetus becomes an individual is immaterial - the point of the act is to stop a life, and not an abstract life but a particular person - a unique being in the eyes of God.

Nothing of the sort! The argument is far from immaterial; it is critical!!!

If, as I suggest, there is at best, a vital soul present - and that, simply because it is shared with that of the mother - until the middle of gestation, then your argument above falls over flat. You will be limited to pointing out, as I and others have already done, that abortion is being used as birth control ... and most of us agree that this is a lamentable condition. But it is not the interruption of the Soul's chosen incarnation, IF my points are accurate. Let's not dismiss it with a wave of the hand, simply because it brings up an inconvenient set of circusmstances.

Originally Posted by Thomas

It's the intention that counts, and the intention of the act is to stop a life in its tracks.

Thomas

This intention, you must acknowledge, is simply to avoid conditions that are often unfavorable for the (potential) child, for the family or mother in question, or for those (state agencies, etc.) who would be required to support the baby, if it were allowed to continue development and be born.

You make it sound as if abortion is practiced with intent to murder, no different than murder in the 3rd degree! It is this kind of distortion of the facts which confuses the issue in general, and returns us to the absurd notion that abortion is comparable to the executions of the Nazis, or in Stalinist Russia.

Let's stick to the facts regarding abortion, if we are too uncomfortable considering the evidence of clairvoyants and sages. Specifically, abortion is used to try and prevent one irresponsible act, from snowballing into an entire lifetime full of such acts, and to prevent a child from having to grow up in circumstances where s/he is unappreciated or underprivileged ... in a variety of ways.

Often, though not always, abortion is simply a way to get rid of the baby and prevent embarrassment, shame, or purely personal/selfish inconvenience. Usually, however, even in such circumstances, this leads to feelings of guilt and remorse - lasting even an entire lifetime! The presence of such feelings in an abortive woman or couple, does not prove that a Soul has been denied incarnation, or had its potential physical expression prematurely terminated. It says much more about the conscience of those having the abortion.

And that's what I think we should be focussing on, along with the question of education vs. abortion as birth control.

Namaskar,

taijasi

[Quahom1]

And God said "I knew you before you were stitched together in the womb". Nuff said.

[Dor]

Originally Posted by taijasi

Perhaps it would also help, if we truly knew the facts concerning human development. How difficult, it will be, to convince a large number of people that most abortions are techinically NOT murder, until our technology has become more refined. Esoteric studies by clairvoyants, confirmed over, and over, and over again (as true SCIENCE requires), show that the Soul attaches itself to the developing fetus at almost exactly the mid-point of the gestation period. So up until the middle of the 2nd trimester, or at 4 1/2 months of development, we have an organism, but not an ensouled being. There is obviously a lifeforce present, yet we could probably safely say that the fetus is still a "part" of a woman's body, if we wanted to quibble.

When did clairvoyants become true SCIENCE?

It has human DNA and is alive.
If you cannot determine at what point the life becomes human, then should you risk killing it at all since it may very well be human?

[manephelien]

I'm unabashedly pro-choice, although I don't like the idea of late-term abortions.

Personally, I wouldn't have an abortion unless my own life was in danger, and even then I'd probably feel guilty about it for a very long time. However, I don't presume to make that choice for other women. Face facts, whether abortions are legal or illegal, pregnancies will be terminated. If you move them underground, more women will suffer severe health problems as a consequence.

As long as a fetus can't survive on its own, even in modern pediatric ICU wards, it's a fetus, not a child, and in my opinion is fair game for elimination if necessary. However, abortions should always be the last resort, when all other options have been investigated.

I wish abortions were unnecessary. I wish there was an injection you could give pre-pubescent kids which would render both sexes infertile, until reversed in adulthood when couples are willing and able to welcome a new baby into the world. Until then, banning abortion will just lead to more women dying unnecessarily after shoddy back-street procedures. Do I value the life of a teenager or grown woman more than a bunch of cells which could potentially develop into a human being? You betcha!

[Dor]

Originally Posted by manephelien

Do I value the life of a teenager or grown woman more than a bunch of cells which could potentially develop into a human being? You betcha!

So who decides when a human being becomes valuable.....you?
Of course are you going to decide when they become unvaluable again?

Originally Posted by manephelien

As long as a fetus can't survive on its own, even in modern pediatric ICU wards, it's a fetus, not a child

Well actually if I leave for a while, my 4 yr old would not survive on his own so I can actually just not count him yet right?

[Dor]

Oh yeah by the way.

Welcome to CR manephelien.

[kiwimac]

The needs of the Actual human being, the one that is pregnant must count over the needs of the potential human being, the foetus.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by kiwimac

The needs of the Actual human being, the one that is pregnant must count over the needs of the potential human being, the foetus.

Apparently as of today at 10:01 AM, the Supreme Court of the United States disagreed. They will hear a second case concerning Partial Birth Abortion.

The response from the ACLU and affiliates was blistering, waylaid, and conceding (they lost the case). However, in their press release, the ACLU also compared the majority of Americans who agreed with the Supreme Court's ruling as the same as Iranian Ayatholla's (fanatical religious dictators). There is definitely a disconnect and a division between Americans, with little gray area.

[kiwimac]

With the US's continuing drift to the right, is such a decision really so surprising?

Kiwimac

[manephelien]

Originally Posted by Dor

So who decides when a human being becomes valuable.....you?
Of course are you going to decide when they become unvaluable again?


Well actually if I leave for a while, my 4 yr old would not survive on his own so I can actually just not count him yet right?

No, I didn't mean that and I didn't say that. Of course a four year old child is a human being, so is a newborn baby, and killing either on purpose is homicide. A 12-week fetus cannot survive unless it is attached to the mother by the umbilical cord. The smallest babies to survive have been born at about 25 weeks, weighing a pound. In many parts of Scandinavia, abortions are very easily obtainable during the first trimester, after that, basically only if the mother's life is in danger, or if the fetus is unviable. Such as was the case with my aunt, she needed an abortion when the ultasound scan showed that the fetus she was carrying didn't have a full cranium, just some bones in the face. Passage through the birth canal would have killed this baby, and the first knock on the head would have killed him or her too, if the birth had been by c-section.

I don't support partial birth abortions, and would have no qualms banning them after, say, 20 weeks. A woman should know by then whether she wants the baby or not, and any medical conditions should in most cases be evident by then as well. Perhaps some medical reasons might be found, but they would have to be very exceptional.

Besides, I think that only the woman involved and her doctors should have any say in abortions. As long as men can't carry children to term, they have absolutely no say in the matter. The woman will have to live with her decision, no matter which it is, for the rest of her life. That said, a father should be given the option of resigning all his current and future rights to a baby, entitling him to opt out of child support payments.

Thanks for the welcome, Dor. I think we may have several very interesting discussions.

[wil]

Interesting concept on the four year olds...when my wife was doing her thesis for American Decorative Arts she did it on the changes in children's furniture over the years.

Not to very long ago children didn't get a lot of furniture...we didn't know how long they were going to live. Mothers were told don't get attached to them, up till five-six years old, this was risky times for kids...and often they did not make it. So they were really just a pain until they could start fending for themselves and be useful around the house in doing chores. Then of course when they got old enough you could farm them out, or put them to work in your fields, or sell them as indentured servants, and get some of your investment back.

Abortion then was truly rude, (I think Partial Birth Abortion definitely deserves its time in court.)

So largely this discussion is due to our economic and medical growth in this nation and the world. Kids normally live, and we treat them completely differently...but its only been a hundred years....

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by kiwimac

With the US's continuing drift to the right, is such a decision really so surprising?

Kiwimac

Maybe it is because we are sick of the thought of over 10,000,000 dead babies. Maybe, it is because the US is continuing to drift away from the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s, to the right of left (not right of center). I don't know.

In the political world here, there is no real center, but in the real world where people live, there is.

[Dor]

Originally Posted by manephelien

Besides, I think that only the woman involved and her doctors should have any say in abortions. As long as men can't carry children to term, they have absolutely no say in the matter.

Sorry I have to disagree with that also. Trust me as a man who had no say so in the act, 21yrs later I still wonder what my son would be like. So do not think it ever just effects the woman thats completely wrong.

[manephelien]

Maybe I haven't given men enough credit, and I count it as a credit to you that you still wonder what your son would have been like. So I admit I was a bit too harsh in saying "absolutely no say," but I still think that the woman should have the final say. So a guy can voice his opinion, but it's not his choice to make.