What are your views on abortion?

[echarcha]

When I came to the USA some 3 plus years ago, I did not know that abortion was a major political and social issue.

There are pro and anti abortion groups quite active here.

In India, especially in Mumbai, I used to see bill boards near railway stations and in the local train compartments advertising abortion for as low as 100 rupees.


What are your views on abortion?

Also vote on the poll above.

(Please... its a shame to add this footnote, but please lets have some serious discussion)

[smellyfinger]

Echarcha,

qualify abortion .. at what point ?? what reason ?? etc ..

It is not a black/white issue. Lots of gray areas..

[echarcha]

I dont know much about when abortion is possible. I mean medically is it safe after the first, second, third or foruth month. Or whether it can be done after 6 months...

I wanted to know about your views on this and any related information.

[Big-G]

It's dicey. A part of me says that it should be allowed, as the woman should have a choice whether she wants to bear a child or not. But at the same time, the realisation does not evade me that, it is nothing but murder. Snuffing out a life even before it has had a chance to see the world. I have read about experiments where it has been proved that a developed feutus goes through a lot of pain during the time of abortion. It infacts emits shrieks of pain. There was a documentary about this too, titled "the Silent Cry".

Would like to hear the female's views.

[smellyfinger]

The question is really this .. when is the unborn baby/foetus eligible for normal human rights. At the time of conception, 5 months (considered term) , or at birth ??

Abortion, except in cases of threat to mother, is considered dangerous (and even illegal) after 5 months.

Here is where the 2 extreme viewpoints come into play. The pro life people want to tell you that as soon as conception occurs, even the embryo has the same rights as you and me.

The pro choice people want you to believe that the baby only gets rights at birth.

The happy (?) medium is 5 months.

IMO, abortion should be legal. But for a reason. I do not support recreational abortion. However, rape victims, pregnant teens, high risk pregnancies etc should be given the right to choose before the baby is 5 months.

It is, obviously, a hot button issue, especially in the US, where the church pulls in one direction, the constitution in another, and crazy people blow up doctors.

Now, the question is, should we condone abortion for other reasons .. e.g sex of child, working mom (not ready for children), poverty, family size etc...

[kameena]

well
Like smelly said Abortion isnt a black or white issue. Recent research prooves that foetuses start emitting brainwaves after 5 months. That means it is feeling pain. So a part of me says that abortion after 5 months should be banned unless there is risk to the mothers life in the event of pregnancy going upto its term.

But there is a big unsaid part to it. What if the kid is born to a poor family or a family which is not willing to take care of the kid (Single moms, druggee moms, very poor family). In developed countries like US where there is a well developed foster parent network available, abortion shouldnt be encouraged for those reasons.

But in India if the child is born he will face a living hell anyway. So I feel the child instead of living as a street urchin, ends up being a dead foetus.

I agree with the democrats' idea of a woman's right to choose but then that should not give everyone the license to get abortion.

Sutradhar, the poll has very few options. So, I didn't cast my ballot. I believe in newspaper size ballot paper (just kidding!!)

[tantric_yogi]

Strictly a women's issue.

Poor things. The decisions women have to take.
Depending on situation if they do they suffer mentally all their life and if they don't then too they suffer.

I respect women enough to leave the subject and decision totally up to them.

Father if willing to take responcibility has right to offer his thoughts but not the pressure...

Senorita what ya think...

[nandini]

if it is a medical necesity of course there is no confusion that it should be allowed , if it's a kid born out of involuntary sex even then the woman should be allowed to abort it , if the woman can't bring up the child because of ecenomic reasons then also abortion is better tehn a kid born on the steer or an addition to an orphanage
but if u talk about absolutely on an emotional level killing a child is killing a child is killing a child:(

[Netra]

Hi, I am very much pro-choice meaning that it is for the woman to decide whether she wants to have the baby or not. After all, she is the one who is going to bring him/her up.

What I am against is aborting a fetus because it happens to be female.

[zaman]

hai charchans.
I think this is a moral crime. There is no one allow to killed a human.

[Netra]

Zaman bhai, if no one is allowed to kill humans, why are militants killing human beings? What is the punishment for a Kafir according to Islam? He should be killed, shouldn't he? What is the punishment for people who go against the laws of Koran? Why is the death sentence hanging on Salman Rushdie's head?

[Netra]

I have noticed something which is quite common: most of the Americans who are anti-abortion are pro-death sentence. I wonder if religious beliefs have something to do with this!

[zaman]

Welllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Netra.
This is not the topic of this thread. I think that there must be a line between the acts of Indian Army and Mujahadeen. You always speak on Kashmir, but unfortunately you have not enough information about Kashmir.

Netra this must be cleared that Kashmiries are fighting for their right of selfdetermination. The right witch is for every human.

I should use one sentence.

Kashmiries are fighting for peace.

Because it's the Quran who thaught us that fight with crueal nation or people for the people who are forced and being exploited by the them.

I always talked for life.

[Netra]

Ok Zaman bhai forget about Kashmir. What about the killing order for Salman Rushdie and what about stoning to death of women who commit adultry (sleep with other men)? And what about hundreds of people who are beheaded in Saudi Arabia under the Shariah law? Are these people not human beings?

[tantric_yogi]

Netra wasting your time
this aurangia has one track mind

[Senorita]

Abortion is essentially terminating the life of a tiny being who unfortunately doesn't have any say in the matter.

The general consensus here seems to tilt in the favour of women being the sole decision-taker in this respect which maybe underscores the notion that women as mothers are the sole proprietors (that's putting it rather crudely) of the baby in the womb. How about the man who too was involved in the act - apart from the 'responsibility' stuff shouldn't he be given the chance to voice his opinion?

Maybe I'm heading the cold rational pragmatic way and ignoring the sensitive related issues but this thing essentially boils down to the following - the decision to whether or not go in for abortion ought to concern only the man and woman involved (no court or some social organisation stuff etc). Holding this surmise to be true there could be the following 3 permutations in this case -

1. Man is 'right' / Woman is 'right'
2. Man is 'wrong' / Woman is 'right' or vice versa
3. Man is 'wrong' / Woman is 'wrong'

'Right' here means that each has a moral right to decide the fate of their unborn offspring.
'Wrong' indicates otherwise.

There could be so many variations to the events leading up to this imbroglio like some outlined by Nandini. Every case ought to merit individual analysis and thought.

Let's consider three hypothetical situations (Infact they are very real - happen every day of the week!!)

1. A normal happy married young couple finds that the stork's gonna pay em a visit . Normally this news should make em rejoice but let's say the husband wants to have the baby whereas the woman feels it's too early because they have been married only for a year and need to know each other more or that she isn't mentally
prepared to take up the onerous task of motherhood or that her career prospects might be jeopardised blah blah blah!!! too much imp shouldn't be given to the gender of the parent opting for abortion in this example. It could be the male for example who perhaps
might feel that given their present financial condition it might be worthwhile to go in for parenthood at a later stage.
What do you do when faced with a dilemma like this?
Whose decision would ultimately prevail?
Keep also in mind that in a situation like this both male and female are 'right'

2. Here's where the concept of 'Philandering'/casual or careless sex comes in. Both woman and man are driven by the sole thought that a baby would slow em down whtever their pursuits might be. Here both are 'wrong'
but the baby ultimately wouldn't see the light of the day.
What would you think of such an abortion?
Would it be okay coz it had the stamp of both parents' approval or would you cosider it an immoral heinous crime committed against the defeseless child (I use such strong words because this is the kind of sentiments this event evokes in certain sections of the society).

3. Then again when one partner is 'right' and the other 'wrong' who makes the decision ultimately? Again would the abortion be moral in this case if it were opted for by the 'right' parent?

[aryaputra]

I know that I maybe going too far(or too back) with this line of argument but isn't male masturbation possibly doing the same thing like abortion?

poor little sperm has a right to fertilize and we males, just for our own little pleasure, sacrifice that little one's birthright to fertilize.

Isn't this the first step of abortion?

just because we cannot hear them shriek doesn't justify the murder of a whole bunch of sperms(millions of 'em). Right?

So my point is where does the buck stop?

5/4/3/2/1 month foetus or ........

[echarcha]

Many times there is an unwanted pregnancy. By unwanted I mean that many couples, in the heat of the moment and passion, start a pregnancy which they realise will be problemtaic as per social norms and other factors - especially for the child. The child - if born this way - will be picked up on as a bastard by society.

In such cases where the child will not have a normal upbringing with proper role of loving parents, the child would die a thousand deaths daily in society.

Atleast in India, people are not so very open to the fact that children born from out of wedlock have an equal right to live with honour. In such cases, it is best to not let a child grow up with shame and pain inflicted by society.

But the parents are also to blame the most - they should not have the right to bring a child into this world if they cannot raise him/her. The parents are to blame more than anyone else.

The other case is medical reasons. Many times, the woman can have medical complications and it becomes unsafe for her as well as the child. In such cases, doctors recommend abortion. Such abortions which endanger the life of the mother or the foetus or both, should be allowed.

Okay, I know, many will find my views medieval. But the facts are undeniable. Except big metores and a few upcoming cities in India, the mentality of people has not changed. A child born out of wedlock is still considered as a bastard and a child born out of sin! Till recently they always requried you to fillin your father's name on the school application form. I remember that in Maharashtra there is a famous doctor who started a movement to stop this system. He was born to a "tamasha dancer" out of wedlock. He decided to put his mother's name only. Maharshtra government then agreed and now school forms dont require a father's name only. Mother's name is also enough. This is a good progressive step.

So, in the context of our Indian society and public mentality, if the people cannot raise a child as a normal child with a legitimate father and mother to give a name, then its best to not let such a child come into the world and ruin its life for all times.

[tantric_yogi]

Originally posted by aryaputra
poor little sperm has a right to fertilize and we males, just for our own little pleasure, sacrifice that little one's birthright to fertilize.Isn't this the first step of abortion?
just because we cannot hear them shriek doesn't justify the murder of a whole bunch of sperms(millions of 'em). Right?




Arya I fully agree. :D I hope now you see the reasons behind my tantric sex thread which recommended "no ejaculation without reception".
Every time Arya, you masturbate, every time Arya, you use condom you are committing murder of tens of millions of "lil fellas". Today after you are finished put them under micro (no not oven I meant scope). Arya, you will be so saddened to see the plight of them "lil fellas". They are so lost. wriggling around like homeless biharis from Bangladesh. Keep looking. After three hours they will start to grsp for air and just before final byebyes they will look up to you through microscope and ask you:"why, why, why did you not listen to tantricyogi and practice retentiopn.".
Who is going to talk on their behalf?
I don't wish to make light of abortion issue but that should not make "lil fellas" issue any less important! :D

[Big-G]

They are so lost. wriggling around like homeless biharis from Bangladesh.

Biharis from Bangladesh ???
:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

[Netra]

Seno, I still think it should be the mother who decides because it will be she who will be carrying it to term and she who will be looking after the baby afterwards. If the man wants to have the baby, is he going to give up his job to look after him/her?

And a fetus is in no way a baby. Killing a new born is a heinous crime, but aborting a 12-week fetus is not. I agree with Kameena that abortion after 5 months should be banned unless the mother's life is at risk.

[zaman]

Originally posted by Netra
Ok Zaman bhai forget about Kashmir. What about the killing order for Salman Rushdie and what about stoning to death of women who commit adultry (sleep with other men)? And what about hundreds of people who are beheaded in Saudi Arabia under the Shariah law? Are these people not human beings?
hai Netra.
First of all sorrey for my late response. Netra you are talking about some Islamic Laws witch are forever and for every Muslim. You are asking about Salman Rushdie, Netra can you tell me,"why you destroied the Babri Mosque". Netra in every religion there are some values are witch are most prior for that religion. Now i think you must have know about Salman Rushdie. What he said about Islam and Prophet.
Well you are talking on aboartion. Now please tell me if there is any way in Hinduesam or aney religion .
Quout: women who commit adultry (sleep with other men)?
You are talking about Saudi Arabia and Sharia Law. Please tell me what are you about concern Islamic Sharia or Muslims.
Can you cary on this topic on this thread.

[Netra]

Zaman bahi, we are talking about killing people, not about destroying masjids or mosques. When the Hindus destroyed the Babri mosque, they did not kill anybody. But when terrorists plant bombs, they kill a lot of innocent people. They kill people just because they do not want to convert to your religion.

I am not saying Hinduism is good or bad. I am just saying that when you say it is not right to kill humans, you are killing them anyway under the name of Islam. Salman Rushdie might have made a mistake, but doesn't mean you have to kill him.

Hinduism does not tell you to kill a woman if she sleeps with other men. Islam does.

[zaman]

Hinduism does not tell you to kill a woman if she sleeps with other men. Islam does. [/B][/QUOTE]
what i was triying to tell you that you are on a mistake. I have gave you a refrence of Babri Masjid the act of peace loving nation Hindu. Your point is about Mujahideen in Kashmir. I have tell you already,"their fight is not against aney nation of people". They are fighting for their peace, peaceful life, right of living freely. Now please tell me, if a person wanted to live according to his own ideas, should you arrested him like your government has in Kashmir.
Now you are tring to prove taht Kashmir Mujahdeen are involve in killing of Pundets and also Sikhs and also Muslims "who are against the freedum movement".
There are dozens of human right orgnizations who are working in the field. Have you read their reports.
Now abortion, is this a legul act in aney civilized society. You have written about freedum of the women to choose aney person to make shour that she want to pregment or aney fear of pregment ( i realy do not want to write these words ). Do you mean it in your replay.

[Netra]

I didn't understand your last sentence. Could you please write in Urdu/Hindi?

Thanks

Netra

[zaman]

Leave it.
just replay witch you have understand.

[Netra]

I had said forget Kashmir. It was discussed on another thread. Here we are discussing abortion and taking human lives. You have yet to come up with an explanation as to why a woman who has committed adultry should be killed since you yourself said earlier that nobody had the right to kill humans.

[zaman]

Netra.
Please tell what are you mean to say.

Hinduism does not tell you to kill a woman if she sleeps with other men. Islam does.

What do you mean to say a woman sleeps with other men.
I will explation, what you want to me.

[Netra]

What I mean is if a woman has been unfaithful to her husband, Islam says to stone her to death. Hinduism does not say this. If Hinduism had said to kill such a woman, I would criticise Hinduism also. I am not a religious person, so I am not defending any religion.

[zaman]

You are saing taht this is an horable act, to kill a woman,who is involving this kind of act.
Know please what are the meaning of punishment for criminal in civilized laws.

[nandini]

Originally posted by zaman
You are saing taht this is an horable act, to kill a woman,who is involving this kind of act.
Know please what are the meaning of punishment for criminal in civilized laws.


zaman bhai there is punishment according to the Islamic law for women who sleep with a ,man who is not her husband and that according to netra is a horrible act....
there is no such law acc to hindu law but the law which is there for adultry in hindu law is even worse 1000 times more stupid
are you listening gandesh??????? and BIG GIGOLO and gang

[zaman]

Sorry Netra.
I did not read them. What law says in Hindu religion about all this.
An act of witch is not allowed in aney religion and society ( sex without getting married ), and also abortion rather for a married cupple or a unmarried woman.

[Netra]

Zaman bhai, that is what I am trying to say. There is no law in Hinduism about such things.

I am going for lunch now. Speak to you more when I come back.

Netra

[ManOfLaMancha]

Having nothing to do, I was going through these old posts about abortion and was reminded of this joke:

How many right-to-lifers does it take to change a light bulb?
Two. One to screw it in and the other to say that life started the moment screwing began.

:D

I am fine by abortion but who cares; the topic has probably gone stale by now.