Fetal Rights?

[theist]

 

As I said, the idea that the choice should remain with the woman is mostly a rhetorical move.

 

 

Babhru, I admit to being a simpleton. For me questions that ask for a yes or no answer are only understandable when answer with a yes or no. After that pages of explanations can follow. Maybe its a reactrion I am suffering from 8 years of Clinton speak. "...depends on what the definition of is is " I tend to sense it everywhere after that. No doubt a symptom of some form of paranoia or something.

 

I'll try again. This is a yes or no question.

 

Do you think the right to an abortion should be by law left solely in the hands of the woman who is pregnant?

[Guest guest]

"Brahmana means broadminded. Devotees and devotional service cannot be sterotyped. Don't you think there's room for an approach to this problem that's two or three degrees different from yours?"

 

Different approaches? Yes. But my approach may be the best one. Not saying anything is quiet complicity. Open tolerance is even worse.

 

You are dealing with people who whine about their own rights and accountability so they can murder. We know very well that when people's desires are strong enough, it totally eclipses the intelligence.

 

Your practice of winning them over has little effect as you yourself describe your experience with the issue.

 

Meanwhile, the death continues.

 

It takes empathy and other noble qualities to see the correct perspective on this. These baby killers are obviously amoral creatures.

 

If they can kill and risk their own health and reputation for this hideous act, chances are they don't care for your opinion much.

 

I see your point. I just don't take that tolerant stance on this issue. As you say, don't you think there's room for an approach to this problem that's two or three degrees different from yours?

[Guest guest]

 

In other words, take the same instance of rape, I do think that a woman can have an abortion when the child is clearly not wanted in the first place and please note the act of conceivement did not occur while trying to gain any pleasure.

 

... This is not Vedic understanding. This is another arguement for convenience.

 

I think the act of another shall never shatter one's life as it does in this instance. The life of the baby will be definitely shattered due to the "improper" birth that it takes, because in this case the mother will be definitely responsible for taking care of a child.

 

... What is so shattering? The act or rape or the killing of a baby?

 

... Are you a prophet or what? How can you say what the quality of a life not lived will be? There are many, many great souls who have taken obscure births.

 

... The act of infantcide is considerably worse than the act of rape by the way. So who's the bigger monster?

 

 

Also, the mother will have to work hard because she will be single. If the mother has no help what so ever, then the child will basically grow up to be another victim of this material world.

 

... Ignoring adoption or the many other possibilities and opportunities that "life" presents.

 

If we talk about Adoption, well, even adoption does not solve the pain and misery the mother will go through.

 

... Again, the mother's convenience is more important than universal laws or God's purpose or the life of an innocent.

 

... People who talk like this cannot have devotional service in mind. It is completely selfish.

 

Once the baby is born, it is natural to be attached to the baby thus making it even harder to give it up.

 

... Yes, and God forbid that should happen and you find that all that wailing for sin was just a diseased moment.

 

Furthermore, the very act will be a great sin, isn't abandoning a helpless child a sin?

 

... Yes. But there are greater and lesser sins.

 

How do you know if the child gets proper care in a orphanage? - This clearly leads to another sin of letting the very child go into ruin.

 

... At least the child is living and available to all the possibilities of life. I can't think of a more painful death than being ripped apart nor of a sadder closure to hope.

 

... These regurgitated arguments have been used as an excuse for reason before. But still people refuse to see the hypocrisy and shame of their own actions.

 

... I don't think this discourse really helps much. Perhaps what is needed is nature's justice to be aborted too. Too bad they only care for themselves and the moment. Because it is a myth that it affects only them. It affects all of us as society becomes surcharged with corruption.

 

Guess Guest

[theist]

Ever wonder how that soul became the resident of a womb destined to face abortion? Could it be because that soul was the doctor or pregnant woman in the past that aborted a child?

 

Human form is a very rare gift. From the human form Krsna can be realized. Wanted or unwanted. What we call a shame that the child was unwanted may be a factor in that soul's seeking Krsna, the true parent.

[I_love_krishna_]

In reply to:

________

Are you a prophet or what? How can you say what the quality of a life not lived will be? There are many, many great souls who have taken obscure births.

________

 

But please try to understand mine.

 

No, I am not a prophet and I do not mean to preach anything, sheesh I am only 16 years old give me a break! but I do say what I say on the basis of past events and on the basis of morality.

The most common reason for crime in our country is traced to illegitamate births. I do say that it is wrong for people to abort babies but not on the cost of leaving us in to a continuous cycle of destruction.

 

For us to stop most of the abortions , as I have said, is to transcend the base qualities of our bodies by overcoming the sexual potency in the society.

 

In the unfortunate cases of rape and incest, I do support abortion.

Please don't say I support babies being ripped out and stuff!. I don't!

 

Anyway, it is unfortunate for one to be placed in the womb of an aborting mother, but it is by my morals, much worser to have a life of less opportunity and alot of denial.

 

but that depends on karma, we have no control over that! so that seems to be the end of it.

 

Oh my god, I have been on this forum for like more than 2 hours, I will stop now. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

 

 

[livingentity]

 

Once the baby is born, it is natural to be attached to the baby thus making it even harder to give it up.

 

Furthermore, the very act will be a great sin, isn't abandoning a helpless child a sin?

 

How do you know if the child gets proper care in a orphanage? - This clearly leads to another sin of letting the very child go into ruin.

 

 

[Guest guest]

I agree with you Theist.

 

But I may add that we have to deal with people according to what they do.

 

Understanding reincarnation and karma is great for philosophical understanding of the world, but you cannot apply justice that way. You cannot blame someone for something they may have done in a previous birth ... see, you deserved that or it wouldn't have happened ... or let murder and such pass with the knowledge that nature will dispense justice. These thngs may be true.

 

But people have to see that justice is being served or they take instead the corruption as evidence.

 

Guess Guest

[Guest guest]

Isn't this your argument? Ditto that.

 

"Please don't say I support babies being ripped out and stuff!. I don't!"

 

... Oh, just sometimes when you play God.

 

Anyway, it is unfortunate for one to be placed in the womb of an aborting mother, but it is by my morals, much worser to have a life of less opportunity and alot of denial.

 

... So someone else's morals is to rape you. So what's the difference? If you can decide your own morals without any higher authority, so can a rapist. So why are your opinions preferrable?

 

... I can't really speak for Theist, but I'm going to presume to. This is a very good example why talking doesn't work Babhru. I_love_krishna is simply parroting a response. No understanding, no logic, no empathy... just me, me, me!

 

If people can't empathize in the most elemental way, what hope is there for finer issues like God and purpose?

 

The law should be there to force people to desist from criminal behavior.

[stonehearted]

Guess (?): As you say, don't you think there's room for an approach to this problem that's two or three degrees different from yours?

 

Exactly, and that's my point. I make no compromise on the principle. Never have, never will. As I've said, I've been publicly active on this issue since 1974--stuff printed in newspapers, demonstrated in public, spoken to more people than I can count. But I approach it from the perspective of soul (as Siddha did in Jan '77 at the state capital). And your speculation that there has been little effect is mistaken. No quiet complicity on my part, ever. In fact, I've helped some women I've worked with decide not to get abortions. I'm not tolerant of the act, but I am tolerant of the failings of others. Love the sinner, but not the sin. My writing and speaking on this and other issues caused Siddhasvarupananda to ask me to move from the Big Island to Maui in 1976 to help with Independents for Godly Government's campaigns.

 

These baby killers are poor, misled fools. If we can give them a perspective that will broaden their understanding of the world, we will have done something. If we only convince them that we are sure we're better than they are, we will have failed to touch them at all.

 

I'm not saying my approach is better than yours. I'm only saying that it works to some degree over the long run. What have you accomplished in this regard?

[stonehearted]

Guess: This is a very good example why talking doesn't work Babhru. I_love_krishna is simply parroting a response. No understanding, no logic, no empathy... just me, me, me!

 

Yep, I saw that. And I believe I responded firmly. Did you see me give her any slack?

[stonehearted]

Billspeak or Bushspeak, it's all BS. (The fact that no WMD's have been found is proof that they're there? Gimme a break!)

 

your question: Do you think the right to an abortion should be by law left solely in the hands of the woman who is pregnant?

 

Nope, I never said such a thing. She should consult with everyone who can help her make the best (right) decision. The ultimate decision is hers, and she has to live with the consequences. The better her understanding of those consequences, the more likely she will be to make the right decision.

 

Abortion is wrong. I've said it before just this plainly. What more complicated is how to communicate that to those completely under the influence of propaganda that has them convinced their purpose is to exploit the resources of the material world. That's my interest.

[Guest guest]

this has happened within some 200 years in india.

 

a young women had unwaned pragnency, possibly due to rape.

 

one night she went out of the village to jump in a well end her life. nearby was a hut of a sadhu (sorry i forgot his name).

 

sadhu: O bai, why you want to commit suicide? plese do not.

 

bai: i cannot live in shame. a person has raped me

and i am pragnent and unmarried.

 

sadhu: please do not kill your self and the child. tell the people that it is my child. i am the father. it is my sin.

 

so she saved herself and told such to people.

 

the case went to court by the people against the sadhu.

 

in the trial, finally the sadhu took off his dhoti

and showed that he had no penis or he was castrated,

and was not able to impragnate any one. he just wanted the lady and the child to live.

he ever cared her and the child.

 

such is the vedic culture.

 

finally the right criminal was caught.

 

compare this with the christian bishops.

 

jai sri krishna!

 

[Guest guest]

Babhru,

 

You have alot to accomplish in little time with an audience, much like a preacher. There is limited time and dialogue. Not even the courts can get it right.

 

My statements alluding to effects are over the whole picture, not just your experience. It was not a personal comment on your activities, but a sociological observation.

 

Prabhupada also made many statements that were downright insulting, as you are now saying about what you really think of the abortion position.

 

Some people will see shooting from the hip effective, others will get results from romancing the stone. I'm not saying one is necessarily better than the other in theory. In practice, I say tell these people they are killing children and tell them with law and punishment.

 

If you can bring them willingly around with discourse, then that is the best way. If not, then maybe they should be forced to see the suffering they cause others.

 

This process is simple and honest. It is also Vedic.

 

Theist has been asking you for a yes or no response, but still you skirt the issue. There is alot being said everywhere, but unsupported with knowledge or wisdom... mostly just heresay... and dodging.

 

I find "it works to some degree over the long run" a poor, unfounded response.

[Guest guest]

Babhru, now you sound like many people in the abortion issue, both pro-life or pro-choice who say it's right to choose (under subjective circumstances tailored to the individual woman).

 

I must say I thought more of you - till now. You are wrong.

 

It is not a theistic position to presume individual authority over life and death. God sets the standards. We need to know what they are.

 

Guess Guest

[I_love_krishna_]

well.. you can't let it live.

and suffer the unnecessary humiliation and disgrace that comes from the public.

 

It comes not only to the child but also to the mother.

 

If you can change the society thats great, but only a higher power can completely change the society at will.

 

We can't do it, even if we try to then it will take ages... but it is possible... but for the present situation however, I think getting it out from its wretched state before it can feel any pain is the best way- if it is accomplished because of an unpleasant situation only.

 

This is like the karna incident. He lived and what did he accomplish?- humiliation.

 

thats all.

 

 

[theist]

Guess guest,

 

I agree we can't formulate law based on what we think an individuals karma is. None of us can decipher that complexity. What I was meaning is that by forcibly stopping a woman from the emotional and selfish mistake of commtting an abortion we also save her the karma of the act, which I believe would cause her to experience a similar fate in a womb herself.

 

So having a clear strict law against abortion is good for the fetus AND the pregnant woman.

 

Babhru I will take you position as still pro-choice. I am through wasting time asking you the same question over and over.

[livingentity]

 

well.. you can't let it live.

 

 

Please stop! Think about what you are saying.

[livingentity]

 

I think getting it out from its wretched state before it can feel any pain is the best way-

 

 

If this is your theory then all of us should be killed in the womb. We are all in a wretched state!

[theist]

Well guest that was an interesting story. What it has to do with Christian bishops I do not know.

 

I see in that story an indictment of the society at large. Why should a victim have to carry the shame for being raped. or the child who is taken that birth? Shame goes to the criminal who committed the raped. Maybe if the society had been supportive of the woman she never would have thought of the well in the first place.

 

Even if some young girl is having loose sex with everyman in town still we should support her in her pregnancy for the child's sake. Let the properly appointed deva's do the judging.

 

Suicide, like abortion, is just not a proper option.

[livingentity]

I am in shock that there are people here that feel this way about human life and call themselves devotees.

 

This is disgusting and not at all what I would expect to read here.

 

 

[theist]

I love krsna is sixteen and showing the effects of feminist programing. It is the prevailing viewpoint sadly. "Might be some pain so better to kill" is mayavada theory not compassion. Finger hurts so cut off the arm. She is young and is thinking this over which is a sign of hope.

 

Death is not a solution i_l_k. We may be able to come up with some extreme examples, but the VAST majority of situations demand that life be honored.

[theist]

Me too LE. Only I knew it was out there. The thought that abortion is even considered a choice by bhaktas is very discouraging.

[theist]

 

The Supreme Personality of Godhead does not allow anyone to act against the stringent laws of material nature; therefore illicit sex is punished life after life. Illicit sex creates pregnancies, and these unwanted pregnancies lead to abortion. Those involved become implicated in these sins, so much so that they are punished in the same way the next life. Thus in the next life they also enter the womb of a mother and are killed in the same way. -SB 5.14.9

 

 

So if we are held accountable for what we say and how we advise others, it might be a good idea to advise people to act in accordance with the will of the Supreme Lord, and we should make are societies laws reflect His will as far as possible.

[livingentity]

if children are not developing compassion for other living beings. It is just going to get worse with each generation if they are not properly educated in such matters.

 

 

 

 

[stonehearted]

I didn't say it's right to choose or that any choice is right; I said the choice will ultimately be made by the woman in any case, law or no law. I suggested taht each should seek the best counsel they could find (wh would ideally give the proper advice), and if they make the wrong choice they would have to accept the consequences. We all make our own choices in all instances, and we all live with the consequences. In fact, I have written as plainly as possible that abortion is wrong and the exceptions that even pro-life conservative politicians accept--rape and incest--give me the creeps. How much plainer can I make it?

 

I think stick and carrot are both needed; I tend to carry carrots more than sticks. Last semsester I helped one of my studesnts realize she should not abort her child.