comment of the month
In response to some kind words uttered by the man who is now the new Catholic Pope, I did a short post on abortion yesterday. I got the usual dig in about the unwelcome opinions of white, middle class men on this topic. Unfortunately for me and my barbed comments, a (presumably) white, middle class man has come along to give his own opinion on the subject, which perfectly sums up exactly how I feel regarding the rest of it, without me having to do any of the thinking or attempted expression. So, in the interests of giving my favourite comment of the month a wider airing, here’s Rautakyy:
We may recognize the seriousness of the issue, without demanding black and white morals. If the Christians who call themselves pro-life are such, why are they not demanding more sexual education to schools, as it seems to be the best way to lessen the number of unwanted pregnancies and abortions. All abortions, the legal medical ones and the coathanger desperation type of abortions as well.
All moral reasons against legal and professionally made abortion before half way through the pregnancy, I have ever run into, are religious and dogmatic in nature. However, I have never run into the Bible passage, that even remotely refers to this issue. It is a fine example how religions as authoritarian self serving constructs are twisting the social morals of human societies.
If the alledged creator god is so much against abortion, why does it not clearly state that in the holy book? And why does that same god cause innumerable amounts of misscarriages? It makes no sense, and it also works as a perfect example how the science is on a constant collision course with this iron age information based cultural movement.
The fetus has no neural capacity to have any personality during the early pregnancy and only very slowly does it even develope. There is no magical point of entry for a human individual other than the birth, but the developement has begun before that. And even the newborn baby is not fully developed human being, but that does not mean we are unable to identify when the human fetus starts to have enough neural capacity to be recognized as an individual being. Should that individual have same legal rights as the moter or even more as some people seem to be demanding? Of course not. A child does not have the same legal rights as an adult in any culture.
Does one not smell the fish when religious leadership (men wearing skirts) are against anything remotely referring to sexual liberation of women? Of anything, that might remove women from subservient position as the reproductive organ to produce more tithe payers? Do they not reveal their ideal, that women should be confined to homes as the property of their husbands and fathers?
And people, both women and men, who have lived protected lives, where they have never faced a particular type of hardship are, oh, so eager to condemn other people in completely different situations. Most often people who have had it worse, because it seems to give some peace of conscience how one has so well of oneself in comparrison to other people. The subconscious seems to appease guilt by inserting this selfrighteous thought, that any harm that happens to other people has to be their own fault.
It is obvious, that to a woman, who is not a total psychopat, abortion is a big issue. Even the knowledge of ending a potential human being from developing into it’s full potential is a big question. But it is her decision. And there is no scientific evidence, that a soul was inserted into a fetus at the point of conception. That is superstition, wether an individual believes it is so or not. No laws should be based on superstition, but only on actual verifiable information. And no one religion or other cult should have a right to define how people who are not adherents of that particular sect may conduct their lives.
Sorry about the long comment, but even though I am a man, I am capable of compassion and empathy to the women who have to make that choise. So, it makes me angry, that there are people who try to make that allready very difficult situation even more difficult to them.
Brilliant. Raut i would hope you post this over on the guys blog: http://quinersdiner.com/2013/03/16/hard-words-from-the-new-pope/
Keep this reply handy. I have a feeling this debate is going to keep re-surfacing considering the frocked man’s position on it.
LikeLike
Thank you. I am flattered. I actually am white, but see myself as proletarian, rather than middle class. I also think, that our social backround, or economical standing should not restrict our thoughts and vision any more than our gender, reproductive organs, or perplexion for that matter. I believe you agree with me on this.
However, as this is the world of the white male, it is easier for one to come out with any opinions, in comparrison to the rest of the people. That also makes it more of a responsibility of ours to stand in defence of the opressed and in defiance against those who would opress.
LikeLike
As ever, I wholeheartedly agree. Thanks again.
LikeLike
Hmm. Deep. Leaving the whole God issue out of the question here: That’s fine. We’ll start discriminating based on helplessness, and on dependency, and on the amount of “personality” a human being has.
Following this logic, a Down syndrome has less right to live than a normal person. And the village idiot should definitely be done away with, such as in Hitler’s times, because he constitutes a burden to society and in fact to himself.
How far would you like to take this argument? A boss should have more rights than an employee, based on power and “a stronger personality”. Someone with a Mensa IQ should have more rights than a street sweeper. According to this formula, one could start denying less bright children the right to education, for instance. Carry this line far enough, and you’re back in Roman times.
LikeLike
Hi Gipsika! Thanks for stopping by and commenting. I’m sure Raut will get back to you with more clarity than I can, but I thought I could pick up on a bit of it anyway. I don’t see that you actually responded to any points that he made (beyond the ‘rule’ aspect in the comment below). You seem to have started a new line based on an imagined discrimination against helplessness. You make reference to a ‘human being’ at the outset, which is one of the main differences in perception – not many people actually agree when an embryo or fetus actually is a human being. I personally would call it a potential human being, and, similarly, could pull my argument back in a ridiculous fashion like you have and say “how far would you take this argument?” Every egg I lose every month – is it a potential human being or a human being? When the egg is fertilised – is it a human being or a potential human being? When blastocyst is implanted – is it human being or a potential human being? When the fetus cannot survive out the womb – is it a potential human being or human being? Everyone has a different opinion.
Desperate women have abortions in horrific circumstances if it is not legal – no law will stop pregnancies being terminated. However you feel about when the human being is formed, you have to agree your opinion is not absolute. This is something that needs to be left up to the individual, and judging the desperation of another woman’s circumstances should not be our place.
LikeLike
Ok I see I did come across rather confusing. My reference to “human being” is something that is (or is becoming) a member of our species. No, the unfertilized ova you lose are not human beings; they only have half a set of circumstances. I mean, genes. LOL. Once fertilized, however, the zygote is a human being in the making. It can be implanted into a surrogate mother or a childless woman who would love to have a baby. It can even be grown in a “bottle” if rumours are to be believed.
No. I’m not judging another woman’s desperation. But it is too easy. Read an article recently that gave some statistics of British teenagers… they use abortion as a contraceptive tool, and by the time some are 15 they already had 7 abortions! At some point one feels like throwing up, reading this kind of thing.
I have a friend who went for such an option – a lot was at stake; most of all she was afraid that her being pregnant would cause her father to have a heart-attack and die. She was studying and didn’t want to drop out. In such a case, she had to choose between the life of her baby (and she could never conceive again, btw), and that of her father. But the trauma of having aborted her own child never left her. For some, it’s no worse than having a mole removed; for some, it’s deep psychological trauma.
I also used to work in a genetics lab, and here is a really unsettling fact.
Babies born as early as 32 weeks can survive and turn into healthy individuals; sometimes with light to heavy damage, but sometimes completely unscathed. So from the 7th month onward, a foetus can actually be regarded as a baby, except for its womb status. After the 12th week in fact all the tissues are fully differentiated into what they ought to be and all the baby has to do is grow and mature.
But if that baby of yours tests positive for Down syndrome, the medical community strongly advises you to abort – and everyone and their brother spit on you if you don’t! And if the diagnosis is only made at 32 weeks, or even as late as 38 weeks (regarded as full-term), and the foetus is thriving and threatening to be born – what do they do? They inject KCL into the baby’s heart. That gives the unborn a heart-attack, and it dies – presumably painfully. And then it is “removed” from the womb.
And sometimes – regrettably – a lab makes a wrong diagnosis. Human error. And a baby that was planned and wanted, and is healthy, is killed by KCL injection into the heart, and aborted – only to be analyzed and … OOPS. Sorry.
These are just some extra facts into the discussion. I don’t think all of these are really common knowledge.
LikeLike
“a human being in the making. It can … it can …” Yes, a potential human being. You may differentiate between half the genetic code and full genetic code. Others differentiate between no actual human body parts and viable outside the womb. And others, as you have pointed out, are happy to consider it still just a potential human being at whatever stage, as long as it resides within the body of the mother. I understand what I believe myself but I have illusions that there is a time that everyone can agree on.
I’m sorry to hear about your friend’s experience with abortion. It’s a difficult decision for young people, especially when their families have such conservative expectations. That’s why better education and sex education in particular is vital. I think all kids should know exactly what their options are, from every angle. And also anyone who has an abortion should be aware of exactly what they are terminating, so they don’t have a regretful awakening later in life. I have also spoken to people who have regretted having children, and even say this in front of the children, so there’s not much you can do about damaging and nonconstructive changes of opinion later in life. You can only hope that people have the tools to make sensible decisions.
It’s very interesting to read about what happens in a genetics lab. I think any information that helps people make informed decisions is useful. But I also think when it comes to the legality of abortion all the emotionally charged diversions in the world won’t convince me that it’s not a necessary right of every woman. I’m currently in a third world country where abortion is illegal and yet the rate of abortion is double that of the USA – and 20% of maternal deaths come from botched illegal abortions.
The only way to cut the number of abortions happening in the world is by providing decent sex education and free or low-cost birth control. And this is undoubtedly what the pro-life groups should be concentrating their efforts on, if they do actually care about people.
LikeLike
Yes… they should also give women the option of going for a full sterilization if they want, at any age, and then give them a bodyguard. My brother worked in a “bush clinic” during his medical studies; one of the services they provided was, aside from education and contraception, free sterilizations for women who wanted them.
There were women who came for the injections… there was one who even came for a scheduled sterilization. She set the date, and the next day she was back to cancel it again – her husband had beaten her. He wanted more children (she already had a few).
If you’re talking 3rd world and aggressive patriarchal cultures, there is a whole gamut of things that need to be cracked there first. Offering abortion is not the answer; it just aggravates the abuse. Men will have their way with the women, often without consent (in civilized places, known as “rape”), and if they want babies, they’ll beat her black and blue if she dares to prevent that in any visible way including abortion. If they don’t want babies, they’ll still rape the girl and if she gets pregnant, tell her coolly to get an abortion. (Btw that trick, failure to take responsibility, and informing the girl that she should get an abortion or he will leave her, is also used in “civilized” places. Happened to two people I know. Abortion is yet another way in which women can be abused.)
If you’re talking 3rd world countries: In some primary schools here the children are fully sexually active and when they talk of a “relationship”, that’s what they mean. Some as young as 9. And in fact some even conceive that young, and guess what… have an abortion. Life’s cheap in the 3rd world. They’ll also kill you for $5 in your wallet.
LikeLike
You’re like a talking pamphlet of pro-‘life’ urban myths. I’m not doubting that you worked in a genetics labs and saw lots of errors that led to unnecessary abortions, or that you have a friend who had an abortion when young and now regrets it, or that your brother worked dishing out sterilisations in *one* area of the third world (suggestion – be careful about insulting generalisations – the world is a big and varied place, including the third world slice of it). Perhaps these painful personal experiences have helped blinker your vision, so you can eagerly devour and dish out more pamphlet-based emotionally charged diversions to scare people into thinking abortion is never a valid option.
Please try and think logically about this. All the potential pamphlet situations you mention are obviously unpleasant, for everyone on both sides of the argument. And everyone would agree that working to change the attitudes that lead to pregnant 9 year olds and women being raped, is of utmost importance. But removing abortion as a safe and legal option doesn’t not stop women getting raped, or children sexually experimenting. You know these are much bigger issues.
You are entitled to your opinion about when life begins and you should make your own personal judgements about your body based on that judgement. I find it odd that when so many women disagree with your opinion on this matter, you still think the opinion of people like you is the ‘correct’ one. Leave people to make their own choices about what is best for their lives. And if you want to seriously help cut down on the numbers of unwanted pregnancies in the world, campaign for universal access to free condoms and non-judgemental sex education that gives people the tools to make their own decisions.
LikeLike
LOL and how much hands-on experience do you have performing abortions or dissecting foetuses? Which “third world” part of the world do you live in, that you find South Africa’s primary school sex situation not quite believable? And did I ever say I opposed an abortion resulting from a rape?
LikeLike
Be careful to call hands-on experience of other people “pamphlet”. I suspect all you have is rhetoric and no real experience.
LikeLike
But btw there IS a place in the Bible where it says that abortion is against God’s laws (if that is your set of beliefs): “Thou shalt not kill.”
LikeLike