Abortion poll

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism

Your opinion on abortion

Morally against abortion and anti-choice
17
32%
Morally against abortion and pro-choice
23
43%
Morally ok with abortion and pro-choice for the first 8 weeks (embryo)
3
6%
Morally ok with abortion and pro-choice up to the start of second trimester (3 mos. pregnant)
4
8%
Morally ok with abortion and pro-choice up to the start of third trimester (6 mos. pregnant)
3
6%
Morally ok with abortion and pro-choice up to the delivery (9 mos. pregnant)
3
6%
 
Total votes: 53

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: Abortion poll

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Tue Dec 26, 2017 9:35 pm

say i said, because it's my body i can go around cock-slapping anyone i like. who would a woman be to tell me i cant do that
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

perkele
Posts: 939
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:37 pm

Re: Abortion poll

Post by perkele » Tue Dec 26, 2017 10:58 pm

Stiphan wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:01 pm
How can I possibly vote? I am a man. It should be up to the woman/women. Men should stop making decisions on behalf of women when it comes to women's bodies.
Well, but it is not just about women's bodies, but about growing babies' bodies inside women's bodies.

And the thread is not directly about making decisions for pregnant women, but about condoning or condemning, approving or disapproving of the possible choice to abort a child who could live. In my opinion such moral checks and balances have to be part and parcel of a well-functioning human society.

As to the choice, yes, I think it should be the woman's choice. She is the one providing the physical means of survival for the growing embryo (at the very least, most directly). That does not mean that her choice should never be subject to moral judgment by others.

With that said, I can't make a categorical moral judgment in line with any one of the possible answers enumerated here.

Situations can and will be more complex than any number of definite categories. Pregnancies could be fatal for a mother, for example (but that is only one possibility, and quite rare nowadays in technically/medically advanced societies).

In general I would say, abortions should be discouraged, and one can get the impression that they have become far too "normalized" among the general population, partly, some might surmise, because it has become sort-of sacrilegous to infringe upon "women's rights" in some parts of modern western society. (I have no clue, though, how non-western [especially, Eastern, Asian, especially Buddhist influenced] societies look on the "problem" of aborting pregnancies. My guess would be there's less of forced guilty conscience, but [hopefully, as I like to imagine] also more acceptance of life, therefore less willingness to abort what is deemed "not worth living" [or excused away that way]).

With all that said, I don't see abortion (at least in the earliest stages of pregnancy) as on par with such grave a crime as murdering a human who has already been born. My reasoning is that the being yet-to-be-born has not yet taken such a strong hold of and identification with the life to come. So the suffering might be presumed to be less compared to killing a grown-out (or at least, already born) human being. But I'm not quite sure about this reasoning either. Human birth is rare and samsara is gruesome. In any case, it is intentionally depriving another (human) being of life. Even in the case when the woman would die, yet the child live, if she would carry her pregnancy to term. In that case, of course, I'd find it morally justifiable. The woman is the one who gives (or decides not to give) birth. It is, to no inconsiderable extent, also a matter of generosity on her part.
Sovatthika wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 7:46 pm
it reeks of chivalry
As to the accusation of "chivalry" (or rather the fashionable new aspersion of "white-knighting" [But what's wrong with actual chivalry? - not so much, IMO]) levelled against Stefan, I guess there may be a modicum of truth to it.

However, then there is the flipside of disdain and disregard for women, which seems to be more prevalent among certain types of homosexual males.

"White knight woman pleaser" vs. "grudgeful misogynist". These are the exaggerated stereotype categories my prejudiced perception is inclined to sort you two into, on this matter (only ever so slightly). Of course that's inaccurate and exaggerated for the sake of exaggeration. Just wanted to share the distorted (vipallāsa) view through my eyes. :spy: :jawdrop: :tongue:

:anjali:

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6631
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Abortion poll

Post by Cittasanto » Tue Dec 26, 2017 11:06 pm

This is a hot topic here atm as the law is changing. I am against abortion but understand it is better to have proper medical supervision and support extra allowances for other reasons than an unwanted pregnancy due to the complex emotions and difficult decision being made.

I remember watching a film with Richard Attembrough who played a back street abortion killer. I certainly wouldn't want a return of that sort of thing.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: Abortion poll

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Tue Dec 26, 2017 11:23 pm

perkele wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 10:58 pm
Sovatthika wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 7:46 pm
it reeks of chivalry
As to the accusation of "chivalry" (or rather the fashionable new aspersion of "white-knighting" [But what's wrong with actual chivalry? - not so much, IMO]) levelled against Stefan, I guess there may be a modicum of truth to it.

However, then there is the flipside of disdain and disregard for women, which seems to be more prevalent among certain types of homosexual males.

if that weren't hilarious i'd report it. heck off
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: Abortion poll

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Tue Dec 26, 2017 11:35 pm

come to think of it, how about making it illegal to kill (intentionally) animals or insects? ...in light of claims of discrimination
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 5395
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: Abortion poll

Post by Ceisiwr » Sat Apr 27, 2019 12:36 am

I’ve been thinking about this topic recently. If bad kamma is due to intention then isn’t abortion morally wrong regardless of when the foetus becomes a person or not, as the intent is the same prior to personhood as it is after. It seems to me that if you say sentience matters then you are arguing that kamma isn’t just intention but intention and the “value” of the external object. This seems to go against what Buddha said when he defined kamma and it’s result in terms of the intention behind the act and not what the act was aimed at.

Thoughts?

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Abortion poll

Post by DooDoot » Sat Apr 27, 2019 1:11 am

perkele wrote:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 10:58 pm
My reasoning is that the being yet-to-be-born has not yet taken such a strong hold of and identification with the life to come.
I am not sure the above argument is relevant; given MN 64 appears to say a new born child does not have identification.
clw_uk wrote:
Sat Apr 27, 2019 12:36 am
kamma is due to intention,,, sentience matters
The 'sentience' criterion appears to be from the Vinaya for purposes of Vinaya rather than from sutta. The only sutta support appears to be imaginative interpretations of 'gandhabba'. Thus it appears two conflicting ideas.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati

User avatar
Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta
Posts: 668
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:06 pm

Re: Abortion poll

Post by Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta » Sun Apr 28, 2019 4:25 am

Buddhism on abortion
(from blog - THE OUTSIDER: Incendiary reflections of a politically incorrect Buddhist)
http://politicallyincorrectdharma.blogs ... rtion.html


Image

And whatever monk should intentionally deprive a human being of life, or seek out (and utilize) an assassin, or praise the advantages of death, or (otherwise successfully) encourage death to another, saying, “Hey, man, what use to you is this evil, difficult life? Death would be better for you than life”—with such an idea in mind, with such an intent in mind, should he praise the advantages of death or encourage death to another in whatever ways, he also is excommunicated and no longer in communion. —Pārājika #3 (in other words, the third rule of monastic discipline entailing instantaneous excommunication)
Which leads to the question at hand, namely: What is the official position of Buddhism towards the issue of abortion? And without beating around the bush, I will simply blurt out that the plain, unvarnished answer to that question is that abortion is murder. Not just unethical or wrong, but literal, actual murder of a human being. Now I suppose I should substantiate that claim with some orthodox evidence.
Fully ordained Buddhist monks are subject to four rules which, if any of the four is broken, entail instantaneous excommunication from the Sangha for life. The third of these Pārājika rules is the one quoted in translation above, which absolutely forbids a monk to deliberately kill another human being. Because these four rules are so important, the exact implications of them are discussed in great detail in the books of monastic discipline—the Sangha needs to be absolutely clear on whether a monk is really a monk, or is excommunicated for life. So in the ancient texts various scenarios are discussed to determine whether or not they entail the breaking of the rule. One of these scenarios is abortion. If a monk performs an abortion on a woman, even by giving her a miscarriage-inducing drug (which was the primary method for abortion of a fetus in ancient times), or if he helps her in any way to get an abortion, as by persuading her to have the abortion, making arrangements with a doctor, or helping to pay for it, then he is declared to be a murderer or an accessory to murder, and that’s it—he is excommunicated for life and no longer a monk.
From the traditional Buddhist point of view a human life begins at conception. One requisite for conception is the “spirit,” or karmic psychic momentum, of a being to be reborn; so even a fertilized ovum is more than just a biological organism, it’s already a human being in the spiritual sense. This would be roughly akin to a Christian belief that an immortal “soul” enters the embryo immediately upon its conception.
Thus another rule of monastic discipline states that no man may be ordained as a monk or bhikkhu until he is at least twenty years of age—but the age is not counted from birth, but from conception, with ten months considered in ancient times to be an adequate approximation. So a person who is nineteen years and two months of age by modern western reckoning would be considered twenty by the reckoning of the Indians of the ancient Ganges Valley who formulated the established system of Buddhist philosophy.
🅢🅐🅑🅑🅔 🅓🅗🅐🅜🅜🅐 🅐🅝🅐🅣🅣🅐
  • "the one thing all the mistaken views have in common is the assump­tion that the self exists" ~ DN1
  • "It is an entirely and perfectly foolish idea" ~ MN22
  • The No-self doctrine is found only in the teaching of the Buddha.
  • No-self (anatta) means that there is no permanent, unchanging entity in anything animate or inanimate. ~ SN22.59

User avatar
robertk
Posts: 3185
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Abortion poll

Post by robertk » Sun Apr 28, 2019 4:43 am

:anjali: :sage: :anjali:

good post.

sentinel
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: Abortion poll

Post by sentinel » Sun Apr 28, 2019 5:24 am

Morally wrong and violate precept : yes
The context of abortion in Buddhism according to dhamma and vinaya should first put aside other concerns such as whether the life begins at conception or later stage . Regardless of whether it is your human rights or yourself wanting or not or some other issues causing one a lot of problems and difficulties in life to have baby .
:buddha1:

User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 5395
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: Abortion poll

Post by Ceisiwr » Sun Apr 28, 2019 10:43 pm

Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta


Can we speak of a human being within the first 2 weeks? There is a multi-cellular organism there, yes, but I find it hard to see how its a being or has any kind of consciousness. If you say that it is conscious then so are other microscopic organisms.

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Abortion poll

Post by DooDoot » Sun Apr 28, 2019 11:51 pm

Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta wrote:
Sun Apr 28, 2019 4:25 am
Buddhism on abortion
(from blog - THE OUTSIDER: Incendiary reflections of a politically incorrect Buddhist)
http://politicallyincorrectdharma.blogs ... rtion.html
SDA. I am sure there might be many good Buddhist teachings in your post however my impression of Buddhism is it is for Buddhists (rather than is something pushed upon non-Buddhists, like Christian evangelicals push their doctrines onto others). Is there are problem of abortion among Buddhists? :shrug: If not, then why the anti-abortion promotion here? :shrug: What are we going to do with this non-abortion Buddhist information? Use it to attack non-Buddhists? :shrug:
This is the best of gifts: the gift of Dhamma. And this is the best of friendly speech: to teach again and again Dhamma to those who wish for it and who listen attentively.

AN 9.5
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati

2600htz
Posts: 475
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 11:37 pm

Re: Abortion poll

Post by 2600htz » Mon Apr 29, 2019 12:33 am

Hello:

Science, because its hard to tell when consciousness starts,decided to establish "feeling pain" as the moral limit of abortion.
But, current science doesn´t even know if insects feel pain or not !!, so i dont take seriously any discussion in terms of science regarding this issue.
Dhamma goes by "not killing beings", and a being is something with desire, passion, delight, or craving for any of the 5 aggregates.
Suttas talk about a gandhabba, or a being taking part in the "descent of an embryo". But i don´t know what it means "descent".

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

So, if science its inconclusive, the right thing to do would be to abstain from abortion.
Suttas are also inconclusive, unless "descent of the embryo" means union of a human egg and sperm, or day 1.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

But, maybe out of ignorance, if the thing doesnt have human form, i don´t feel sooo bad about ending it, like at the Blastocyst stage. Probably i would still have some remorse.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, if something is wrong, should we force the population to not do it by laws?. Thats politics, maybe education, i dont know if i would advocate prohibitions.

Regards.

User avatar
dylanj
Posts: 904
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:48 am
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: Abortion poll

Post by dylanj » Fri May 03, 2019 9:55 am

clw_uk wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:03 am
I voted "up until the start of the 3rd trimester" as I believe that is when "consciousness has descended". That's based upon my limited understanding of fetal development (I'm not an expert)
not an expert, limited understanding, but going to say to just go for it & kill the potential-babies anyway because you feel like they're probably maybe not alive yet you hope?

sounds dangerous
Born, become, arisen – made, prepared, short-lived
Bonded by decay and death – a nest for sickness, perishable
Produced by seeking nutriment – not fit to take delight in


Departure from this is peaceful – beyond reasoning and enduring
Unborn, unarisen – free from sorrow and stain
Ceasing of all factors of suffering – stilling of all preparations is bliss

User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 5395
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: Abortion poll

Post by Ceisiwr » Fri May 03, 2019 10:03 am

dylanj wrote:
Fri May 03, 2019 9:55 am
clw_uk wrote:
Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:03 am
I voted "up until the start of the 3rd trimester" as I believe that is when "consciousness has descended". That's based upon my limited understanding of fetal development (I'm not an expert)
not an expert, limited understanding, but going to say to just go for it & kill the potential-babies anyway because you feel like they're probably maybe not alive yet you hope?

sounds dangerous

That quote is years old. That’s no longer my solid position.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: char101, Google [Bot], kamui and 120 guests