Abortion
-
Peace "lobster",
The Quran according to the following verse allows abortion upto a certain time
Then we developed the drop into a hanging (embryo), then developed the hanging (embryo) into a bite-size (fetus), then created the bite-size (fetus) into bones, then covered the bones with flesh. Then we produce a new creature(i.e. human with nafs whose murder is a sin). Most blessed is GOD, the best Creator.
Thus only once these stages have been completed which according to current knowledge and estimates is after three months of pregnancy, abortion is no longer allowed. This is also the case in the west and it is correct. Before that there is plenty of time to abort and more than enough time to even collect stem cells from the embryo for research. GOD Bless!Dear Jonny_K
you seem to be some doctor + traditional mullah who is issueing so freely killing certificate of a human life.
Would you please let me know when the primitive heart of the embryo starts beating ?? -
peace
Quranic verses will not work for me unless backed up by evidence. You cannot say that something is right or wrong "because God says so" (which is what you have done). That is argument is flawed for several obvious reasons which I will not get into.
But just to refute your argument, the quran doesn't mention WHEN "we produce a new creature." All we know is that it is after the stage when it is covered in bones and flesh.
There really isn't any clear line between a mere fetus and what you would call a human being. The only thing that's different is that the fetus at that stage is in a more advanced stage of development (more mature).
Humans aren't actually fully mature until their late teens or their twenties. You can say that we aren't actually humans until that stage.
Or how about using puberty to define when someone becomes human?
So you first have to define what that "creature" is, and what exactly you mean by "human." There has to be a scientific definition that everyone must agree on, otherwise your argument means nothing at all.And besides, you completely missed the point of my post.
I am not looking for an absolute rule for or against abortion (there are no absolute rules in morality). And I am also not arguing that abortion is right or wrong.
My point is that if we let women decide whether they want to keep their unborn baby or not, the world will be a healthier, happier place. I think that all the research and statistics back me up on that, and I doubt that you can refute it.
If you have evidence that legalized abortion leads to a worse society, then please present it. Or at least evidence that abortion and poverty, crime, drug use etc are not related (which I highly doubt).
If you cannot, then....well, we'll get to that later. -
Dear Jonny_K
you seem to be some doctor + traditional mullah who is issueing so freely killing certificate of a human life.
Would you please let me know when the primitive heart of the embryo starts beating ??A beating heart does not equal life. There are "creatures" that do not have a human heart.
And there are babies born without most of their brains, without any consciousness...are they alive?
There is no fixed stage which seperates "human" from "non-human." And there is no fixed state where one becomes a "human." There's a lot of gray. -
Peace "lobster",
A beating heart does not equal life. There are "creatures" that do not have a human heart.
And there are babies born without most of their brains, without any consciousness...are they alive?
There is no fixed stage which seperates "human" from "non-human." And there is no fixed state where one becomes a "human." There's a lot of gray.JK- Agreed there is grey but at that stage it becomes risky and risk should be avoided especially when human life is at stake whilst before three months theres certainty that no sign of consciousness is there. I hope you get this. Also the heart does posess a small neural network of its own. It has been noticed through reserach that people who have had a heart tranplant actually adopt certain personalities of the donator. Scientists explain this because the cells communicate with each other and since the hearts em pulse is 100 times stronger than brain waves the info is easily distributed to all parts of the body. Thus killing an embryo which has reached heart beating stage is extremely risky. GOD Bless!
-
A beating heart does not equal life. There are "creatures" that do not have a human heart.
And there are babies born without most of their brains, without any consciousness...are they alive?
There is no fixed stage which seperates "human" from "non-human." And there is no fixed state where one becomes a "human." There's a lot of gray.What are signs of life and when does the embryo achieve them ?
-
Peace "lobster",
JK- Agreed there is grey but at that stage it becomes risky and risk should be avoided especially when human life is at stake whilst before three months theres certainty that no sign of consciousness is there. I hope you get this. Also the heart does posess a small neural network of its own. It has been noticed through reserach that people who have had a heart tranplant actually adopt certain personalities of the donator. Scientists explain this because the cells communicate with each other and since the hearts em pulse is 100 times stronger than brain waves the info is easily distributed to all parts of the body. Thus killing an embryo which has reached heart beating stage is extremely risky. GOD Bless!
Why is it risky? what do you mean by "risk," exactly?
What are signs of life and when does the embryo achieve them ?
That's a question that has many answers and no answer.
And this is starting to drift off topic so please remember the point of my post and stick to that. I don't want to discuss when an embryo become a life or the health risks of abortion.
-
Why is it risky? what do you mean by "risk," exactly?
That's a question that has many answers and no answer.And this is starting to drift off topic so please remember the point of my post and stick to that. I don't want to discuss when an embryo become a life or the health risks of abortion.
Not off topic.You people want to kill a life.One should be clear when it becomes from a lifeless thing to a living creature.Scietifically
1Life has to be defined
2Then ,it should be ascertained when that life appears in that embryo.
Quran clearly condemns killing any "nafs". -
- Please define 'you people' (Who specifically)
If you believe every single member of FM, then you are sadly mistaken.
Those are who are trying to issue the Quranic certificate to kill a human life in utero.
-
Those are who are trying to issue the Quranic certificate to kill a human life in utero.
Salaam
In my understanding there is absolutely no Quranic certificate to kill a human life in utero; no matter what. We would be punished severely if we sanction something obviously wrong.In this temporary life much injustice occurs and criminals often get away with crimes, but they will be caught in the next stage of this life.
If we could correct all the injustice here, there would be no need for the day of judgement.peace
farida -
Not off topic.You people want to kill a life.One should be clear when it becomes from a lifeless thing to a living creature.Scietifically
1Life has to be defined
2Then ,it should be ascertained when that life appears in that embryo.
Quran clearly condemns killing any "nafs".It is off topic when you reply to my post (in a thread that I revived) and say nothing at all relevant to what I said.
-
peace Farida
Salaam
In my understanding there is absolutely no Quranic certificate to kill a human life in utero; no matter what. We would be punished severely if we sanction something obviously wrong.Why is it obviously wrong? Who made that decision?
This is exactly what I was talking about on the other thread. Because Jonny K believes abortion after a certain stage is allowed, he finds evidence of it in the quran. You think abortion is not allowed at all, so the quran contains no certificate to kill human life in utero.
Anyway, back to the topic, I am challenging the idea that abortion is "obviously wrong."
You have to have a reason to believe it is wrong, what is it?
I think the right thing to do is leaving it up to the mother because that has better consequences overall for humanity.In this temporary life much injustice occurs and criminals often get away with crimes, but they will be caught in the next stage of this life.
If we could correct all the injustice here, there would be no need for the day of judgement.I don't get what that has to do with abortion?
-
peace FaridaWhy is it obviously wrong? Who made that decision?
This is exactly what I was talking about on the other thread. Because Jonny K believes abortion after a certain stage is allowed, he finds evidence of it in the quran. You think abortion is not allowed at all, so the quran contains no certificate to kill human life in utero.
Anyway, back to the topic,
You have to have a reason to believe it is wrong, what is it?
?Peace Lobster
I think the right thing to do is leaving it up to the mother because that has better consequences overall for humanity.I don't get what that has to do with abortion
No!! Being a woman and a mother I have no right to discontinue life that Allah(swt) has created in the womb. A pregnant woman is not responsible for herself only; three are involved the mother the foetus and the father.
The mother and the father can speak or fight for their rights but the foetus, a creation of God, has a right too, even though it?s not yet able to speak up for itself. And since rights of the foetus depend on those outside the womb, they have a duty to protect the rights of the unborn.Who made that decision.....?
Allah(swt) made life sacred and thus it was He that made the decision to create and on He can decide when to terminate JHis creation.
Why is it obviously wrong
This is why it is obviously wrong Humanity is flushed down the toilet, just because some women think it?s their right to decide, whether or not to do so. Expulsion of an embryo are carried out at a very high rate at least half of the pregnancies are unplanned 89% are aborted at under 13 weeks 68% under 10 weeks; in 2006 a total of 193700 abortions, a rise of 3,9% since 2005, were recorded. The rise in teenage pregnancy is envisaged at 10 to 14% and sadly the majority is likely to be from the ethnic minorities, due to a lack of information on contraceptives. Majority are aborting because that is easy way out for their lack of care.
See UK statistics below and tell me how many had justifiable reason to do so?
In 2006, for women resident in England and Wales
? the total number of abortions was 193,700, compared with 186,400 in 2005, a rise of 3.9%
? the age-standardised abortion rate was 18.3 per 1,000 resident women aged 15-44, compared with 17.8 in 2005
? the abortion rate was highest at 35 per 1,000, for women age 19.
? the under-16 abortion rate was 3.9 and the under-18 rate was 18.2 per 1,000 women, both higher than in 2005
? 87% of abortions were funded by the NHS; of these, just over half (55%) took place in the independent sector under NHS contract
? 89% of abortions were carried out at under 13 weeks gestation; 68% were at under 10 weeks
? medical abortions accounted for 30% of the total compared with 24% in 2005
? 2,000 abortions (1%) were under ground E, risk that the child would be born handicapped
Non-residents
in 2006 there were 7,400 abortions for non-residents carried out in hospitals and clinics in England and Wales (7,900 in 2005)I am challenging the idea that abortion is "obviously wrong."
I challenge you to convince me what is so right about abortion
peace
farida -
peace Farida.
I challenge you to convince me what is so right about abortion
I'm not sure I can but I'll try.
The mother is completely in charge of the fetus. It's up to her to take care of it. If she doesn't want to, there's nothing we can do. A dead fetus is better than a mistreated fetus which will turn into either a handicapped or abused child or both. If the father can convince her to keep it until he can take it off her hands, that works too.
Also, just to make it clear, I don't think abortion is necessarily a good thing, it's not something I would encourage. I think it is necessary.
If a teenage girl gets pregnant and is forced to have the child, are we saving a life or destroying several? Will the mother be happy? the father? the child?
Plus, I'm sure there are ways to get abortion illegally. If a woman really wants an abortion, she can probably get one. If we make abortion legal, at least we can make sure that women don't have to go to dangerous lengths to get what they want.
Of course there will be unnecessary abortions, if it is legal. But there will also be unnecessary births. Society pays the price for unwanted children. High abortion rates have been linked to lower crime rates. Society would be better off if all those unwanted children were never born.
But then I was thinking about this (the last point), and I realized that society would be better off if we killed all the poor or all the drug users or something like that. Or if we allowed only certain people to have kids. I'm not sure about this (I'll have to think about it a bit more) but I think you can always violate the rights of a few to make everyone else happy.
We can make a law that permits parents to kill their own children. How is that any different from killing a fetus?
The difference between a fetus and a born child is that the latter is not dependent upon the mother for survival. That is why we cannot give it the same rights we would give to an actual living human being.So here is my revised understanding, abortion should be allowed (without exception) until the point where the fetus can survive without it's mother. If the mother changes her mind at that stage, there's no point in killing the fetus if we can keep it alive and then put it up for adoption.
We should do all we can to make sure people are well educated so that they make good decisions, and make sure there's a place to go for kids who are abandoned by their parents. Apart from that, I doubt there's much we can do. -
Peace all,
I am not looking for an absolute rule for or against abortion (there are no absolute rules in morality). And I am also not arguing that abortion is right or wrong.
My point is that if we let women decide whether they want to keep their unborn baby or not, the world will be a healthier, happier place. I think that all the research and statistics back me up on that, and I doubt that you can refute it.
because
I think the right thing to do is leaving it up to the motherMe thinks abortion should be legal and whether or not God approves it He will be the one to judge the perpetrator.
agree
Me too
peace
-
peace
Jankren's argument isn't a very good one, or it needs further explanation.
This is what I understood of his post
abortion is bad, but we should let people do it and let god judge them.
or
we can't decide whether abortion is good or bad so we'll let god decide it.The thing is, people do a lot of other bad things that we HAVE outlawed, and for good reason.
You would never say, let people murder others and let god be the judge. What's different about abortion?
And we CAN judge good or bad actions, and take measures to prevent bad actions and punish the perpetrators. We have to decide whether abortion is good or bad, or in what circumstances is it okay?
It's our moral responsibility to think about this issue and try to reach a conclusion. We cannot just leave every difficult decision up to god and hope for the best. -
What are we arguing about? Whether abortion is bad?
Of course it is bad. A happy contented and comfortable woman would hate it. And even uncontented also hates it. It is bad for her. The point is not that, the point is that we are taking the question by the wrong end. We break the dam and then we want the water to stop by itself and not flood everything. And since it doesn't we go and beat up the first person we catch and who couldn't run quick enough to avoit the water, which obviously in this case is the woman.
If we do not want abortion, we must catch the thing earlier. And if we are not capable or willing to catch the thing earlier, then getting very virtuous and lecturing the most most beatable link in the chain may make us feel good, but doesn't arrange a damn thing and is eminently bully, hypocritical and coward. There are much better, fairer, righteous and effective ways of avoiding floods and abortion than getting after the woman. Of course everybody can get easily rid of unwanted, unintended babies and nothing happens, but the woman oh? that one we can catch, let's beat hell out of her.
Of course, I am not lecturing or criticising anybody in this forum, since as far as I know, everybody here is in agreement about the respect each owes to his or her own body and other peoples bodies and to God's commandaments and therefore I am not assuming any moral blemish in this virtual circle of friends. I am just talking on the general context.
As to being abortion a killing, I really don't believe so for the first weeks or months at least. If it is so then when? in the first minute? the first minute of what? I don't think even that getting into that serves any practical purpose. Aborting is something against one's own nature anyway and only is done if the alternative is more unassumable.
I said in another occasion that womens lib should have been less of women's lib and more of men reining in (themselves, of course) and doing away with the double moral by making both sexes moral and not both inmoral. Seems that bringing people to goodness is always more difficult or unwanted than the opposite. So we have abortions as we have so many other things, but abortion is a symptom not the disease.
As conclusion, if we just watch this end result, I say that I agree with Jankren, and that nobody can complain of women not being good guardians and givers of life. Is not everybody complaining that we are too many on earth and that we should have fewer children and so on? So please, people, if women need something, it is not guards or judges, but, may be, partners.
Salaam
-
we can't decide whether abortion is good or bad so we'll let god decide it.
That is what I have in mind.
Anyway, if I was to born to a rape victim or an unprepared mother who would shortly put me in the orphanage after my birth, I would rather be aborted.