Abortion?
-
How is this relevant? Can you support this using The Reading?
It is a logical answer.
So you are taking your ego/yourself (your nafs - very ironic considering the nature of this topic) as a source of law instead of God? Thats shirk. And very arrogant. One could even go as far as saying youre a denier. Also, you need to get out of the religion vs science paradigm. The Reading does not prescribe a sect/religion in the traditional sense. Also it is very ironic that you are advocating logic.
No, it is not ironic. And my "ego" (person) is capable of laying forth logically consistent sayings and I am authoritative enough to tell whatever I like, even if people do not follow it and what I am saying is sanctioned by what you call God. You say I am arrogant and well it could very well be that you perceive me as such, it is easy to call a confident person that.
Quran, the interpretation you advocate, does "prescribe a sect/religion in the traditional sense". It has no credibility whatsoever.
More conjecture on your part. Support this using The Reading.
It is not conjecture if it is how it would happen. Your interpretation of Quran does not say it, but that I do not care about, it has no credibility.
Proof using The Reading or is this your personal conjecture?
Your interpretation has no proof against it either. Sexual intercourse is intended to procreate as a result, the drive is to make individuals want to do the activity. That is logic.
Ok so modern soldiers defending themselves against oppression shouldnt wear bullet proof vests and use guns - they should use swords. Got it! Alas, this is more conjecture on your part. Proof from The Reading that sex isnt allowed except for procreation?
Man was not designed to fight wars either nor use swords.
I did not say sex is not allowed, I said it is driven by the instinct for procreation.
Are you attritbuting your lies to God saying that condoms are forbidden when such a prohibition is nowhere to be found in The Reading?
I did not say condoms are forbidden, I said they are a human invention and not something which "God" stands for and mating is performed for procreation by a perspective of nature. That you use something like condoms is because you dodge the natural going of things and thus only chase pleasure and that is just vanity of you and to please your own instinct. That is also what I said. I did not say anything about prohibitions, prohibitions are a typical Pagan religion idea, e.g. Islam.
Come back when you have evidence and use logic. Besides that, you do not understand the nature of "nafs," which is crucial in understanding this topic.
I am using more logic than you are, you are not even interpreting my writings correctly, so how can you come here and talk about logic and I clearly see that you are expressing yourself with a dose of emotions and that suppresses the ability of logic.
I do understand "Nafs" perfectly well, more than you understand it with your pathetic little medieval interpretation of a book which holds so much more intelligent information.
-
One could even go as far as saying youre a denier.
Yes, I am a denier of your cult.
And in my perspective of things the Nafs is allowed to grow for as much as it can, that is plainly speaking enabling the mind to grow as a result. To be indulged in activities you defend here in vain means that you "supercharge" the body's instinct and it prevents mental growth. Of course the instinct is so much more than just the sex drive.
- Hierarchy
- Possession
- Vanity
- Obsession
- Preservation (of self)
- Domination
- Lust (sex drive)
- Greed
- Falsehood
- Jealousy
Everything which counteracts the above will make a Nafs grow including chasing after mating for pleasure.
Nothing is prohibited, but there is approved/goodly behavior prescribed and one should not only do the least to uphold approved behavior but go to the bottom of what is required.
Be well
Qarael Amenuel -
Peace Noon.
This is your understanding of abortion?
This is abosolituly about abortion i.e. Intentionally murdering of the unborn and why not answer any questions posted earlier?Does abortion not also mean getting rid of a "dead foetus" inside the womb?Why not? What is the difference between miscarriage and abortion?
I understand that there are many "abortions" i.e reasons for mums who abort an unborn child.
Here, you need to give verses specifically dealing with abortion and the consequences from Qoran,and to my knowledge of what you posted ,you were putting your own context and coming up with/implying-according to my understanding of them verses- that"abortion( whatever the reason!!!) is murder?
I disagree with you.
GOD bless you.
Peace.. -
The whole exercise of "antiabortionnists" (as if there were anybody who liked abortion) is precisely that brand somebody as murderer. Is is not to save zygotes, embryos or fetuses. Not at all. They do not give a damns about that as I have pointed out several times, because to fight that fight there are many other means far morw useful than brnading anybody "murderer".
It is another contorted and twisted way to get back at women as such women, because the rancour they feel for the ability and trust from God to give life. They are conscious of it or not, but they sidestep any objection you put at to them and go ALWAYS back to the murder fetiche. They do nothing to save anybody, they are peddling a commodity which is an outright attack on women.
They reflect the Iblees nature of humans who, like Iblees, want somebody to postrate to them, in real court or in an imaginary court where those they want to submit to their Iblees nature appear for murder.
They won't settle for less.
Nobody is trying to find out what could be done to avoid abortion, but to have somebody appear for it and be branded murderer for it. Which can only, or at least always be women.
They disguise it, but that is the point of the whole exercise. I have never seen any "antiabortioninst" mourning for a zygote, for an embryo or for a fetus, be it that it was a miscarriege or a sought for abortion.
Again, iblees and hypocrisy at its best.
And may I remind that here Man of Faith celebrated his mother not having aborted of him. I joined him and celebrated that we all are here because millions upon millions of mothers brourght us to this world, some of those mothers may have even have aborted of other conceptions, but the important thing is not all the mothers have done for us to be here, it is that if they dare not bring into de world another creature which the "antiabortionnists" anyway are not going to bear nor deliver nor care for nor bring it up nor do anything else for it, can brand those mothers murderers.
That is the Iblees quality and the meanness of the whole "antiabortionnist" cabal. ?How dare those clay creatures women use their powers as they see fit and not submit to them, be it in brothels be it to bring into the world what they are ordered to? They are not theirs (of the women) nor of God, they are theirs (the Iblees men's)
That is the whole question, not any tender feelings for zygotes, which they also call children.
Salaam
-
I am not a supporter of either side. Just as you decide to eat meat or not, and thus support butchering an animal, the abortion of a baby is similar since the consciousness of a baby has not reached a level where there is much difference between the slaughtered animal and the baby. Many of you ought to quit eating your meat then.
Yet I find it irresponsible to end up where you have to abort a pregnancy and you have not been sound. To choose to abort then is your comfort, but you may be in a situation where a delivered baby may cause private problems and then abortion is a better option than letting the baby grow up in an insecure environment where it has to suffer because your life is in turmoil. Then the more logical option is to abort, and the to be upcoming soul of the baby is just reset into another body.
Everything is about what is the most logical thing to do and not what is perceived right or wrong by people including their perception of what their God wants. God has no emotion or needs so it does not matter anyway, and you did not destroy a life depriving them of an opportunity for redemption, for so fragile, unplanned and unfair the world is not.
Be well
Qarael Amenuel -
but you may be in a situation where a delivered baby may cause private problems and then abortion is a better option than letting the baby grow up in an insecure environment where it has to suffer because your life is in turmoil. Then the more logical option is to abort, and the to be upcoming soul of the baby is just reset into another body.
Way to trivialize ending a life...."the soul is just gonna be reset somewhere else" lol
Do you think a woman being pregnant has the right to question whether or not she should deliver a baby considering outside factors like maybe an economical crisis, a war, hunger ?
As far as I'm concerned, these questions need to be asked before getting pregnant. and how many kids were born in war and other terrible consequences ? Were they better off to not live at all ?If there is a sparkle of life right where it should be (in a womb), it should be delivered because that is what it means, generally. When a woman is pregnant we think of a new life, we do not think of a new death, and we do not think of how bad life can turn out for that child (and we do not really think of a miscarriage or some other accidents). We do not think if the child will be a good child with a good life. Life just happens. Someone else kept saying here that "an unborn child is better than a child in an orphanage" and that is completely not right to say.
We do not have the right to fast-forward into the child's life. We cannot question whether the child should be given the right to live or not, specially if all the signs are there for a new life, and that is (generally) what a pregnant woman means.
If there is some "abort mission" button somewhere that I'm not aware of, I don't know, but generally for me all I can see is if there is a pregnant woman there is a new life. That's a reason enough to let it be delivered. Inspite of the unfavorable outside factors or the woman completely changing her mind. Therefore marriage is a sacred bond, and religions were restricting men/women interactions, perhaps in order not to fall into this shit storm of "I got pregnant but I don't want it".
-
One of the main issues on the table is whether getting pregnant is a trivial matter or not.
If it is a trivial matter then ending a pregnancy should also be a trivial matter.
If it is not then there is a problem.If, for some reasons, men and women were given their sexual organs to reproduce. And for some reason men and women engaged in such reproduction acts. And for some reason the woman got pregnant. What went wrong ? Or should we say what went right ?
And if for some reason, men and women ignored all of what they did and started arguing whether the baby should be delivered or not, how is that possible ? do they have the right to do so ? Of course they can do whatever they want, or maybe the state where they live gave them the right to do so, but is it a truthful thing to do ? To ignore everything you've done and argue whether the baby in a womb (which is supposed to deliver a baby) should even deliver it ?
-
In 4.1 God orders us ittaqw Allah... wa ittaqw a arham. En 4.34 He imposes on men to be qawwamoon for women, to take care of them, support them.
If those who follow Qur'an do not realise that the only way for them to treat well what could be a future new born is to treat well the woman who would bring it to life, then all blabber about poor zygotes, fetuses or embryos is sheer hypocrisy. You cannot get to the result of conception before birth except through the woman, and you can only be good to them being good to the woman.
Any other way is not condoned by God nor enjoined nor useful.
Male can think as much as they want and should do so how to behave to lead a pure and respectful life and consort with as much knowledge as possible of the person they are consorting with and then follow 4.1 and 4.34, beyond that thre is nothing they can do concerning the fruit of conception. Whatever they have contracted with the woman they consort with and divorce if there is no agreement on what the duties of each are.
In factit isperfectly useless to sermon ad nauseam on abortion while the whole morality of the society is en shambles. It is an exercisa in futility and again an exercise in hypocrisy. You cannot have good fruit from a bad tree. If society is filthy, what do you expect? Loads of miracles precisely from the most battered part of that society.
There are hundreds of thousands of women kept in brothels in civilised Europe not to speak in the countries where civilised men go for sex tourism, or plain tourism but counting on sex.
Do you expect no abortions from that kind of set up? Those same who use the brothels and travel are the same men we meet in the streets or at work or anywhere. They are not in the brothels or on tourism and then come out or back and turn into another person. They are the same. So again ?what do you expect?
You are starting the house from the roof.
Fantasy is a great thing, but we should distinguish what is fantasy from what is not fantasy.
Ittaqw Allah wa ittaqw al arham... just think about it.
Salaam
Salaam
-
Peace Noon.
This is your understanding of abortion?
This is abosolituly about abortion i.e. Intentionally murdering of the unborn and why not answer any questions posted earlier?Does abortion not also mean getting rid of a "dead foetus" inside the womb?Why not? What is the difference between miscarriage and abortion?
peace good logic,
Miscarriage result of accident etc., not intentional.
Abortion the deliberate termination/killing of baby.
E.g. Edip Y?ksel tells less than 6 month?s pregnant woman OK to punch her 19 times in the stomach.Now your turn, (4) simple yes/no questions were posted earlier; can please stay on topic and answer?
...
Let?s stay on topic in context; who does "him" referring to and was "he" born yet?1922 so carry she him so withdrew she with him place of remote of 1923 so approaches her the pains of childbirth to trunk the date palm said (f) O wish I dead before this and be I ignored forgotten of
Likewise in context whom does walad/child refer to and was he born yet?
347 said (f) lord whence being to me walad/child and not touched me human said like such the god created what willed when decree directive of so merely speaketh to it be so being
Likewise in Arabic what phrases means to get a woman pregnant according to Lane?
He made her to be the mother of children.
He made the girl to be the mother of a child.
He rendered her pregnant; got her with child.A child, son, daughter, youngling, or young one; and children, sons, daughters, offspring, young, or younglings; of any kind
Likewise do unborn inherit e.g. man leaves pregnant wife gender unknown until birth?
46 and test ye of the bereaved until when reach they of the marriage so if perceive you among them rational of so deliver ye of to them wealth theirs
410 indeed the ones eating wealth the bereaved injustice of merely eating in interior body theirs fire of
411 instructed you the god in awldikum/children yours
412 so if be for you walad/child so to them the eight -
Am I hearing this right?
Women should look into all aspects before they get pregnant to make sure every pregnancy delivers a baby in safe and pristine condition?
No going back from which moment?
In fact why stop there?
Why not go back to the other cause,yes men!!! Or the woman just decides when to get pregnant and she says "B" and it is?!!!!The men get away with it scot free!I mean why not go back to when the "fluid" is still in the man? Surely it is murder to dispose of that fluid recklessly?
I repeat again you have to trust mothers! In fact you need to respect and trust mothers. Yes respect women,treat them right support them with pregnancies ,look after them,then normality will follow by instinct.
If you ask me, the majority of problem women have are linked to men . May be the other way around occasionally.
But I think I am expecting too much of certain men?
GOD bless.
Peace. -
Brother Noon.
The verses you quoted,according to my understanding of Qoran,have nothing to do with forced "abortion". I use the word -forced- as in all situations,there are exceptions.Apart from that,I have answered all your points in my last post.
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
Brother Noon.
The verses you quoted,according to my understanding of Qoran,have nothing to do with forced "abortion". I use the word -forced- as in all situations,there are exceptions.Apart from that,I have answered all your points in my last post.
GOD bless you.
Peace.brother good logic, please answer the 4 questions posted YES/NO for the 4th time?
-
Brother Noon,I do not agree with your take on the verses.
I explained my position.
That should answer your 4 questions.
If you have any verses on consequences of "abortion" in Qoran list them,then we can continue the conversation.
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
Brother Noon,I do not agree with your take on the verses.
I explained my position.
That should answer your 4 questions.brother good logic, simple Yes/No please -- why are you afraid to answer (this goes for everyone)?
- who does "him" refer to and do you agree a woman/anyone can kill/abort him at anytime during pregnancy?
1922 so carry she him so withdrew she with him place of remote of 1923 so approaches her the pains of childbirth to trunk the date palm said (f) O wish I dead before this and be I ignored forgotten of
- who does walad/child refer to and was he born yet -- yes or no?
347 said (f) lord whence being to me walad/child and not touched me human said like such the god created what willed when decree directive of so merely speaketh to it be so being
- do these phrases in Arabic mean to get a woman pregnant -- yes or no?
He made her to be the mother of children.
He made the girl to be the mother of a child.
He rendered her pregnant; got her with child.A child, son, daughter, youngling, or young one; and children, sons, daughters, offspring, young, or younglings; of any kind
- do unborn children inherit e.g. man leaves pregnant wife -- yes or no?
46 and test ye of the bereaved until when reach they of the marriage so if perceive you among them rational of so deliver ye of to them wealth theirs ....410 indeed the ones eating wealth the bereaved injustice of merely eating in interior body theirs fire of ...411 instructed you the god in awldikum/children yours...412 so if be for you walad/child so to them the eight
Waiting patiently for answers -- anyone please?
-
- who does "him" refer to and do you agree a woman/anyone can kill/abort him at anytime during pregnancy?
1922 so carry she him so withdrew she with him place of remote of 1923 so approaches her the pains of childbirth to trunk the date palm said (f) O wish I dead before this and be I ignored forgotten of
- who does walad/child refer to and was he born yet -- yes or no?
347 said (f) lord whence being to me walad/child and not touched me human said like such the god created what willed when decree directive of so merely speaketh to it be so being
- do these phrases in Arabic mean to get a woman pregnant -- yes or no?
He made her to be the mother of children.
He made the girl to be the mother of a child.
He rendered her pregnant; got her with child.A child, son, daughter, youngling, or young one; and children, sons, daughters, offspring, young, or younglings; of any kind
- do unborn children inherit e.g. man leaves pregnant wife -- yes or no?
46 and test ye of the bereaved until when reach they of the marriage so if perceive you among them rational of so deliver ye of to them wealth theirs ....410 indeed the ones eating wealth the bereaved injustice of merely eating in interior body theirs fire of ...411 instructed you the god in awldikum/children yours...412 so if be for you walad/child so to them the eight
Waiting patiently for answers -- anyone please?
These verses have zero of injunction towards or overall anything related to abortion. First quote is about a story of a woman who beared a child, from immaculate conception. I am however unsure if it is speaking of John or someone else in chapter 19 verse 22.
The second one is clearly about Mary and her exprience of immaculate conception.
Immaculate conception has nothing to do with what is discussed in a thread. This topic is about abortion and surely no one has a second thought on wether or not immaculate conception is subject to abortion, because it is clearly God's command and will, according to the verses. The topic is about abortion which results from an actual intercourse, not immaculate conception.
Therefore, I am not sure what Noon is trying to accomplish by repeating the same meaningless questions.
I also have a theory why Qur'an does not state crystal clear on abortion, because if it did, we would also know exceptionally about the issue of nafs/soul/ruh etc. But we do not know, these are quite vague not only in Qur'an but the scriptures. This is somethign a man can achieve from yaers of contemplation. That is why we are not told "do not kill an unborn for it has a soul in it and a path".
-
Therefore, I am not sure what Noon is trying to accomplish by repeating the same meaningless questions.
Only to point out who cannot comprehend simple definition of child.
1731 and not thou slay ye of awldakum/children yours
-
Only to point out who cannot comprehend simple definition of child.
1731 and not thou slay ye of awldakum/children yours
Good point. Like I said, all these pro- or anti abortion debates are actually just seeking an answer "can we have irresponsible free unprotected passionate sex without consequences?"
-
Peace Noon.
Your questions are irrelevant here. Nothing to do with "abortion".
The point you are making is"every woman who gets pregnant knows that she will have a child at the end of the pregnancy" That is logical. Did we say those pregnant think it will be an elephant and they abort it?
However the verses do not talk about abortion.
Can you see that you are not sticking to the topic ?
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
Did we say those pregnant think it will be an elephant and they abort it?
Peace, are you "good" logic?