I know this is a dangerous topic to tread on. Somehow, was discussing about this with my friend yesterday and felt like penning my views today.
Who has the right to take life, if not Him? This is what the purists feel on this issue. They are right in a way. While some "modern thinking" people include the woman's decision to abort the foetus as a progression in thinking, manifestation of free-will, I find it difficult to support them on this issue. If the copulation was by mutual consent, then they have no right to abort the baby.
But then, I do support abortion in some unfortunate cases. When a young girl is raped and gets pregnant, she has to bear the truama of the unfortunate incident and the stigma of the society. In such case, an abortion would be the best option provided the mother's health is not at risk. And there are also cases, where the baby is known to be deformed or not entirely healthy before its birth - its life would only be troublesome and difficult for it and its parents. So, a sanity check on the status of the baby is acceptable, but not sex-determination.
These are my views and I do apologise if I have offended anyone. This is as sensitive an issue as Euthanasia and opinions would obviously differ.
Who has the right to take life, if not Him? This is what the purists feel on this issue. They are right in a way. While some "modern thinking" people include the woman's decision to abort the foetus as a progression in thinking, manifestation of free-will, I find it difficult to support them on this issue. If the copulation was by mutual consent, then they have no right to abort the baby.
But then, I do support abortion in some unfortunate cases. When a young girl is raped and gets pregnant, she has to bear the truama of the unfortunate incident and the stigma of the society. In such case, an abortion would be the best option provided the mother's health is not at risk. And there are also cases, where the baby is known to be deformed or not entirely healthy before its birth - its life would only be troublesome and difficult for it and its parents. So, a sanity check on the status of the baby is acceptable, but not sex-determination.
These are my views and I do apologise if I have offended anyone. This is as sensitive an issue as Euthanasia and opinions would obviously differ.
3 comments:
I don't think you need to be wary of the offence you might cause, because - yours is a perfectly valid viewpoint.
I liked your statement -
If the copulation was by mutual consent, then they have no right to abort the baby
It is time we begin to talk about responsibilities on an equal footing as women's reproductive rights. Though no anti-feminist, I hate to think of women who think a foetus is just a mass of cancerous flesh on their bodies - which can be thrown away at will - and fooling themselves that they have exercised an enormous choice - and have progressed a few notches up in the ladder of civilization.
And I don't apologise for holding that view...
Unwanted children are very harmful to the society. They end up as adults with pent up frustations, hatred of the society and invariably turn into anti-social elements. All this happens only because the woman is forced to give birth to a child whom she didnt want in the first place.
I totally agree with the parent's rights to not give birth to a child if they feel that they DONT want her. coz any children not born out of love never end up being any good...
Woodworm: Well said! I completely agree with you. Very succintly put.
Anonyomous: Interesting viewpoint. Somehow, this seems to be favouring the reversibility of an irreversible process. Children should not be born out of lust. They are the symbols of love. It is the responsibility of the adults to ensure that lust and sex for fun doesnt give way to this.
It is not ethical to blame such children if they turn anti-social.
Post a Comment