by peaceloveharmony 44 Replies latest jw friends
I don't really feel up to it right now, so I won't share all of my personal thoughts on abortion (too much pain). I will share soon though. My only thing right now is, what about the man. If a woman has consentual sexual relations with a man, with the understanding that a child may come out of their acts, shouldnt that man have a say in all decisions regarding the child he was half involved in creating?
Think carefully, your opinion may be different if this was your child we are talking about.
If we're talking Rape or some such issue, no opposition here, though even then the baby is not at fault, and the few rape victims I've talked to who became pregnant and had the baby don't regret it at all. When we get into the issue of partial birth abortions, etc I should hope that these would be IMPOSSIBLE to get.
Ahhhh. The fundamentalists are speaking with unbeatable logic. If it's only a little bit murder it's ok. It's like Job - as long as incest doesn't become a regular habit, not to bother.
Please, Yerusalyim. I see that bigboi says the US needs more sex-education. I guess nobody disagrees in that. When he says "no more abortions" he's suddenly the one that knows best for the woman what to do.
What if the situation is a bit less than favourable? Maybe the woman has no job, nowhere to live, and no money. Should she have a child just to make some damned religious fanatics happy?
Honestly. The ones that always feel they know everything best for everyone else is a collection of sorry asses, I'm afraid. It doesn't help if some says it's a "stupid mistake after a stupid mistake". Having a child in certain situations might be an even bigger mistake. And those morons that seem to believe that normal women use abortion instead of condoms are simply too stupid.
Why don't you say what you really mean: No sex before marriage - and if you do - you should suffer for it! And we don't give a damn if a child has to suffer as well!
I get sick!
Yakki Da
Kent
"The only difference between God and Adolf Hitler is that God is more proficient at genocide."
Daily News On The Watchtower and the Jehovah's Witnesses:
http://watchtower.observer.org
Have any of you ever been involved directy with an abortion? I know it is personal, but it seems so many of you have strong convictions on this subject. If you feel so strongly, I was wondering if you have any personal experience to back up your claims.
open_mind,
My only thing right now is, what about the man. If a woman has consentual sexual relations with a man, with the understanding that a child may come out of their acts, shouldnt that man have a say in all decisions regarding the child he was half involved in creating?
So, you essentially say that a man has a right to use an unwilling woman's body to spread his own genes? I can surely understand the frustration of a man who has his offspring terminated by the woman, but given the fact that it resides inside the mother's body, extending the rights to this fetus to the man would effectively make her a childbearing slave for the man, going through a nine month period of discomfort (and her body might never be the same again) and eventually a painful birth. Totally unacceptable.
If you give the woman your sperm cells, open_mind, I think she has the right to decide what to do with them.
- Jan
--
Faith, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel. [Ambrose Bierce, The Devil´s Dictionary, 1911]
So, you essentially say that a man has a right to use an unwilling woman's body to spread his own genes?
That wasn't my point.
If a woman has consentual sexual relations with a man, with the understanding that a child may come out of their acts, shouldn't that man have a say in all decisions regarding the child he was half involved in creating?
open_mind,
If a woman has consentual sexual relations with a man, with the understanding that a child may come out of their acts, shouldn't that man have a say in all decisions regarding the child he was half involved in creating?
What do you mean "understanding"? That he understood it so? Or do you mean a binding legal contract?
I think there are some limits to what one should be able to do legal transactions about. I can't see how an obligation to carry an unwanted child for 9 months and give birth to it should be legally binding for a woman. It is like a legal obligation to have sex; even in many countries where prostitution is legal, you cannot legally bind someone to have sex with you in the future. A pregnancy is such a huge thing that it should be entirely possible and permittable for a woman to change her mind. Circumstances may have changed, health issues may come up.
It is notable that abortion opponents are generally men. On this, I think I will take the feelings of those who are equipped with a womb far more seriously than the religious sentiments of those who read old books. Men simply never experience things with their bodies that can be compared to pregnancy or childbirth. "Of what one cannot speak, one must be silent." as Wittgenstein almost put it.
- Jan
--
Faith, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel. [Ambrose Bierce, The Devil´s Dictionary, 1911]
Hi Jan,
lol,yeah you're right. Activism vs Fanatacism...activists dont have the detructive boogeyman on their side . It's an appeal to reason,rational thinking,and the fact that whatever anybody feels about abortion,it's not their place to impose their conscience on a woman.
Whatever my feelings are about abortion do not supercede that a woman has the right to choose.It's between her,her conscience and the health care provider. That's what Roe vs Wade is about-the womans RIGHT to PRIVACY regarding her decision. And I dont feel 'why' she has it is anybodys business either. Again that's imposing ones conscience and its limitatins on others,thus taking her freedom to choose away. hugs,Tina
Here's a short text I wrote about abortion to H2O:
First, even a Bible-believer will find that the Bible is totally silent on this subject. In fact, the only applicable text can be found in Exodus 21:22; the fact that this text undermines anti-abortion religionists was so emberrassing that fundie-sponsored translations like the NIV had to change the text.
It is a fact that non-Christians are much less likely to condone the taking of human life than Christians. In the U.S., for example, anti-abortionists are almost always pro-Capital punishment (while those, Christian or not, who are anti-capital pubishment are most often pro-choice). They are also the first to call to arms and war when the opportunity arises. So the argument about the sacredness of life is inconststent at best, hypocritical at worst.
Thus, the difference between pro-choice and anti-abortion is not about whether human life is worth preserving. It is a question about a crucial fact: Is a human first-trimester embryo a human being with human rights? Those who are pro-choice say, backed by scientific and ethical arguments, it is not.
Sure, an embryo has the potential to become human, but so has a sperm or egg cell. Such an embryo has no capacity for thought, thinking, planning, feelings or pain. Its mother certainly has.
Religionists are often well aware of these facts. They also know that calling abortion "murder" and other emotional terms is simply begging the question, since their opponents will argue you cannot murder what does not really live. If they want to argue abortion wrong, they will first explain why a lump of cells with the sentient qualities of a worm is more worthy of life than, say, the bull served in your local McDonald's.
Why, then, are many religionists opposed to abortion? Well, it cannot be divine revelation. Most make no claim to such. Neither is it the absolute sacredness of life, since monotheists belong to the religious tradition that keeps human life least sacred. One need not know much about the history of Christianity and the other monotheistic religions to see the answer: At every step when human freedom, and especially women's freedom, has been on the line, the religionists have ardently stood solidly behind total opposition to any extension of human rights. Like they supported slavery to the bitter end, they opposed women's right to vote, to having any rights in their churches (still do), to own their own property, to divorce their men when they are abusive, and of course they oppose the right for a woman to control her own body.
When religionists, having this history, and still opposing female rights and any basic rights for gay people, try to take the moral high ground in the question about abortion, we know it's sheer and rank hypocrisy.
- Jan
--
Faith, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel. [Ambrose Bierce, The Devil´s Dictionary, 1911]
"Of what one cannot speak, one must be silent." as Wittgenstein almost put it.
Do you have experience then?
What if you and your wife decided to have a child. She became pregnant. It was understood that both of you desired this. Remember, you are married to this woman. A bond until death. Her health is fine, but two months down the road she decides she doesn't want a child right now. Much to your opposition, she goes, while you are at work, and has an abortion. You don't feel you should have any say in this? Two people were involved in the decision to produce the child. Two people were involved in producing the child. Legally, two people would be responsible for the child, if born, for the next 17-18 years. Why then should one person (in this scenario) have the right to terminate the life of the child?
Hi Harmony,
I haven't made up my mind about wether I have the right to tell and force my beliefs upon anyone concerning abortion.
From a personla viewpoint, i believe it is unquestionably WRONG. I had an abortion many years ago. It's painful to live with still. I was not raped. I had the abortion because the guy I was dating decided he liked someone else and broke up with me. All the sudden reality hit home. At first I was delited that I was going to have a baby and then when I realized prince charming was a frog and I was going to have to go on welfare, I felt suicidal. I had a cocaine addiction and was an emotional mess. Looking back on it, abortion was a tidy way of getting myself out of a bad situation I had put myself into. BUT the GUILT is always there. Education wasn't the key for me. I had been on the pill and stopped. I knew how to avoid pregnancy. Perhaps education on NOT BEING self centered and selfish would be more appropriate. jurs
