GoddessImaginos
Posts: 1493
Joined: 8/5/2009
From: A small blue planet near Alpha Centauri
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW
I don't know whether I would keep the baby or not. Much would depend on the circumstances I found myself in at the time, I think, and whether or not any people I was involved with were going to be properly nurturing of the child brought about by the violation would make a difference for me. See, sometimes it isn't about the mother -- sometimes it's about the family.
If I were thinking about having an unplanned baby, regardless of whether that baby came about by rape, etc., I'd have to consider whether I could take care of the baby or make sure that xhe had a placement for adoption. Not every baby who is put up for adoption -gets- adopted, and that's just a fact. If I were going to keep hir, I would want to know that I could take care of hir properly -- see to hir education, make sure xhe was properly dressed, sheltered, and fed... and also assure that xhe would be loved, and that I did not carry bitterness, anger, rage, fear, despair, or hatred into the space between us.
My biggest issue with the whole abortion debate is whether or not someone -else- has the right to decide for another person whether or not they should be "allowed" to manage their own fertility. I defy anyone to have the right to decide for me what I am -allowed- to do with my own body, and that includes whether or not I am "allowed" to carry a baby. The same argument, for me, comes up when people talk about mandatory birth control or forced limitation of fertility. While I wouldn't choose to have a dozen kids myself, I would never think about telling another woman/family that -they- can't have a dozen kids. To me, if we kill ourselves as a race because we can't control our fertility, that is exactly what we deserve -- but it is ethically wrong, in my mind, to attempt to force someone to manage hir fertility by any rules besides the moral code that xhe has in hir own mind and heart. (I am intentionally using the gender-neutral form in that sentence, because I believe that men have the right to determine their fertility obligations as well, and to choose to remain abstinent, require birth control to be used before engaging in sex, and to tell a woman that they will not support an unwanted pregnancy. (The woman can still choose to give birth, but I do -not- believe that a man should be obligated to parent a child that xhe never wanted just because a woman decides, unilaterally, to keep that baby.) I also think that a man has the right to know, up front before they have sex, that a given woman knows that if she gets pregnant at this point in her life, she will absolutely abort, so that he can decide whether or not to take that chance, in the event that HE is particularly adamant about not participating in the abortion of a human fetus.
I completely grasp that there are some people who could never have an abortion, and I defend, to the death, their right to decide for themselves that they will absolutely not terminate a pregnancy (for some, not even in the case of rape, incest, or potential illness/death of the mother) -- and I really think that discussion needs to happen BEFORE they have sex with someone. ("By the way... if I happen to accidentally get pregnant, I will absolutely not have an abortion, and I probably won't be able to give the baby up for adoption, either. Are you prepared to be a father, if that were to happen?") I think, though, that forcing one's beliefs on someone else is ethically corrupt and morally bankrupt, in that it denies the fundamental right one has to the sanctity of one's own body. For that reason, I believe that any law that denies the fundamental right to the sanctity of one's own body or denies an individual the right to make decisions about allowing the parasitic presence of pregnancy to commence/continue is a defiance of human rights at the basest level.
I do not know when a fetus becomes a human being, except in my own philosophical framework*. Neither does anyone here. Even if you believe in the soul, there is no clear evidence of when that soul takes residence in the body...and quoting diatribe from some religious sacred text that is only relevant to that religion is NOT valid proof of the soul or when the soul, if there is one, takes up residence in the body. In the end, though, through all the sacred texts that I've read, a soul that does not take residence would not be lost, since every religion I've explored that references a soul also teaches that the soul is immortal -- so the only thing that is being lost is a particular body, right... so I find that, for me, the ethics of determining whether it will be -this- house for the soul or -that- house for the soul is not worth the suffering caused by taking away the free will of the currently incarnate souls burdened with those decisions.
Calla
* For those who want to know, yes, I do believe in something outside of the shell of the human body that transcends physical existence.
~*I absolutely, positively AGREE with this post, every syllable, and could not have said it better Myself. Right on, Calla..
_____________________________
Delicious and nutritious, does NOT taste like canoli.
~member:Clan of the Scarlet O'Hair-a's/Mouthy Wenches having been ModSpanked
~10 fluffy points
~RJD RIP xoxo
|
RE: Abortion comments!!!! I'm sure there is a Extreme... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread