The Great Abortion Debate

A forum for discussion of Buddhist ethics.
User avatar
Nemo
Posts: 1630
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:23 am
Location: Canada

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by Nemo »

Malcolm wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 7:02 pm
Genjo Conan wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 5:45 pm As Malcolm wrote, that's a non sequitur, but go for it, I suppose.
The fact is that very few people in this conversation have really given any serious thought to the ethical issues at hand. They are mostly just spewing knee-jerk religious dogmas, borrowing rhetoric from pro-life Christians, who have a one-lifetime view.
The best part of religion is not having to think. Many don't even feel their own emotions anymore. You disassociate and have the peace of living by rules. Hoarding virtue like Gollum and his ring. What this hoard is for they cannot answer. They call it freedom, but no one is more bound by rules and regulations. They might as well be robots, but tell themselves they are enlightened.
PeterC
Posts: 3324
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by PeterC »

Pondera wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 3:57 pm
PeterC wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 5:41 am
Pondera wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 12:27 am All conceptions have the POTENTIAL to become infant human beings. Ending that process is like throwing seeds into a fire. A “waste”. If my father had his way, my mother would have aborted me. My mother was a devout Christian and didn’t care that my father would have nothing to do with the child.

I was born. I was a joy to my mother. I grew up. Ran into some road blocks - but came out clean on the other side.

I write this post - as a person EXCEPTIONALLY happy with my state and growth in the dharma.

All lives should be given a chance. Those lives - if they fail - are better off than having been rooted out at the stage of embryonic development.
So you're against male masturbation, too? Those are billions of potential lives, that just need the right conditions to become people.

And if what we're protecting is potential - surely we should ban vasectomies, hysterectomies and contraceptives, because they limit what would otherwise have the potential to become life?
Those are male gametes. Unless they make contact with a ovum, there is no potential for life.

That being said, I think masturbation is a nasty habit.
But under the right condition they have the potential to become a human life. Just like the bunch of cells implanted in a uterus have the potential. So if you argue that abortion is wrong because it deprives future potential life of the chance to, well, become alive: the masturbation is wrong for the same reason. Perhaps less wrong because it has less potential, but the same logic applies.
muni
Posts: 5057
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by muni »

Well, of course there are others. But I don't believe the feelings of a minority should be used as a cudgel to restrict the reproductive rights of the majority. No one is forcing women to have abortions that that don't want; the question is whether women who do want abortions should be allowed to have them. I believe they should.
I see.

Here men are saying that woman should be allowed to decide. Women are not all having same rights in this world and this is by delusion, by identification by appearances. And so we have less right to speak.

I will have to make myself clear; there are as well wanted pregnancies and abortion; while the women does not want abortion but have to decide what to do. Most cases by which it is difficult and by which it is not just a simple decision is when there are serious health problems. The childs' body has a sever handicap, or there are serious genetic problems. Or mom-dad are in a very poor situation, not able to educate a child. Or mom's life is in danger...
Labeling takes place in confusion, for what is nonexistent is taken to exist.
Given that the nature of things is similar to that of dream images, which
have no basis,
how exceedingly strange it is to fixate on samsara and nirvana as though
they existed in their own right!
User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2020 7:43 am

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by Pondera »

PeterC wrote: Sat May 15, 2021 1:48 am
Pondera wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 3:57 pm
PeterC wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 5:41 am

So you're against male masturbation, too? Those are billions of potential lives, that just need the right conditions to become people.

And if what we're protecting is potential - surely we should ban vasectomies, hysterectomies and contraceptives, because they limit what would otherwise have the potential to become life?
Those are male gametes. Unless they make contact with a ovum, there is no potential for life.

That being said, I think masturbation is a nasty habit.
But under the right condition they have the potential to become a human life. Just like the bunch of cells implanted in a uterus have the potential. So if you argue that abortion is wrong because it deprives future potential life of the chance to, well, become alive: the masturbation is wrong for the same reason. Perhaps less wrong because it has less potential, but the same logic applies.
Under what conditions does sperm reach the uterus when a man masturbates to pornography (or what have you)?

What are the chances that the haploid gametes released during masturbation will reach an ovum? Keep in mind that haploid gametes are not living.

That being said; I think that masturbation is a poor use of time.
Malcolm
Posts: 35066
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by Malcolm »

muni wrote: Sat May 15, 2021 6:01 am
Well, of course there are others. But I don't believe the feelings of a minority should be used as a cudgel to restrict the reproductive rights of the majority. No one is forcing women to have abortions that that don't want; the question is whether women who do want abortions should be allowed to have them. I believe they should.
I see.

Here men are saying that woman should be allowed to decide. Women are not all having same rights in this world and this is by delusion, by identification by appearances. And so we have less right to speak.
Correct, and thus why being pro-choice is a bedrock of feminist values.
"Conceptuality is great ignorance,
causing one to fall into the ocean of samsāra."
—Māyājālamahātantra
PeterC
Posts: 3324
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by PeterC »

Pondera wrote: Sat May 15, 2021 9:58 pm
PeterC wrote: Sat May 15, 2021 1:48 am
Pondera wrote: Fri May 14, 2021 3:57 pm

Those are male gametes. Unless they make contact with a ovum, there is no potential for life.

That being said, I think masturbation is a nasty habit.
But under the right condition they have the potential to become a human life. Just like the bunch of cells implanted in a uterus have the potential. So if you argue that abortion is wrong because it deprives future potential life of the chance to, well, become alive: the masturbation is wrong for the same reason. Perhaps less wrong because it has less potential, but the same logic applies.
Under what conditions does sperm reach the uterus when a man masturbates to pornography (or what have you)?

What are the chances that the haploid gametes released during masturbation will reach an ovum? Keep in mind that haploid gametes are not living.

That being said; I think that masturbation is a poor use of time.
When the man chooses not to masturbate but instead conserves his semen for sex. The cells then have the potential to become life. So by your argument, that potential should be protected
User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2020 7:43 am

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by Pondera »

PeterC wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 2:05 am
Pondera wrote: Sat May 15, 2021 9:58 pm
PeterC wrote: Sat May 15, 2021 1:48 am

But under the right condition they have the potential to become a human life. Just like the bunch of cells implanted in a uterus have the potential. So if you argue that abortion is wrong because it deprives future potential life of the chance to, well, become alive: the masturbation is wrong for the same reason. Perhaps less wrong because it has less potential, but the same logic applies.
Under what conditions does sperm reach the uterus when a man masturbates to pornography (or what have you)?

What are the chances that the haploid gametes released during masturbation will reach an ovum? Keep in mind that haploid gametes are not living.

That being said; I think that masturbation is a poor use of time.
When the man chooses not to masturbate but instead conserves his semen for sex. The cells then have the potential to become life. So by your argument, that potential should be protected
Okay. So instead of masturbation you have indicated sexual intercourse.

Without preventative measures, any man and woman engaging in sexual intercourse should not be surprised if the woman becomes pregnant. Nor should it be their choice to abort the fetus because it’s an “inconvenience” for them.

If men and women choose to have sexual intercourse with out contraception, they should be prepared for the consequences.

I have nothing against masturbation; just as (in the same way) I have nothing against a woman having a period each month.

I have nothing against contraception. My only suggestion is that if a pregnancy occurs - then one should consider the life form brewing within. And one should consider it’s right to live.

I understand that in practice abortions happen for many reasons. Unwanted pregnancies happen all the time. The development of the fetus (or embryo) in some cases is within such a short time frame that the designation of “life” is debatable. So don’t straw man me here. I have a very reasonable point of view that only slightly verges on “the right to live”. And for that I should be vilified? :shrug:

So, look. I’m not arguing against your belief that a woman has a right to decide whether she brings an fetus to term or not. That is her right.

I’m saying that, as it was in the case of my own birth, a woman might want to consider that the fetus has a right to life - however inconvenient the circumstances might be.

If my father had his way, my life would have been aborted. My mother chose to have me, lived as a single mother, raised me into the adult I am now. I have had my share of crappy moments in life - but overall I am happy to be alive. I am happy that I was given the chance to live. My mother is proud of the person I have become.

That being said; I think masturbation is a waste of time and resources. It is a habit of the young. It is a habit of this generation who has access to pornography at the touch of a button. Watching pornography increases your testosterone levels by 35%. That elevation in testosterone drives you to find a sexual outlet as fast as you can. And obviously, we all now how that ends.

Do the sewage system a favour and save your testosterone for a better purpose.
Malcolm
Posts: 35066
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by Malcolm »

This issue just isn’t about you or your preferences.
Pondera wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 2:32 am
PeterC wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 2:05 am
Pondera wrote: Sat May 15, 2021 9:58 pm

Under what conditions does sperm reach the uterus when a man masturbates to pornography (or what have you)?

What are the chances that the haploid gametes released during masturbation will reach an ovum? Keep in mind that haploid gametes are not living.

That being said; I think that masturbation is a poor use of time.
When the man chooses not to masturbate but instead conserves his semen for sex. The cells then have the potential to become life. So by your argument, that potential should be protected
Okay. So instead of masturbation you have indicated sexual intercourse.

Without preventative measures, any man and woman engaging in sexual intercourse should not be surprised if the woman becomes pregnant. Nor should it be their choice to abort the fetus because it’s an “inconvenience” for them.

If men and women choose to have sexual intercourse with out contraception, they should be prepared for the consequences.

I have nothing against masturbation; just as (in the same way) I have nothing against a woman having a period each month.

I have nothing against contraception. My only suggestion is that if a pregnancy occurs - then one should consider the life form brewing within. And one should consider it’s right to live.

I understand that in practice abortions happen for many reasons. Unwanted pregnancies happen all the time. The development of the fetus (or embryo) in some cases is within such a short time frame that the designation of “life” is debatable. So don’t straw man me here. I have a very reasonable point of view that only slightly verges on “the right to live”. And for that I should be vilified? :shrug:

So, look. I’m not arguing against your belief that a woman has a right to decide whether she brings an fetus to term or not. That is her right.

I’m saying that, as it was in the case of my own birth, a woman might want to consider that the fetus has a right to life - however inconvenient the circumstances might be.

If my father had his way, my life would have been aborted. My mother chose to have me, lived as a single mother, raised me into the adult I am now. I have had my share of crappy moments in life - but overall I am happy to be alive. I am happy that I was given the chance to live. My mother is proud of the person I have become.

That being said; I think masturbation is a waste of time and resources. It is a habit of the young. It is a habit of this generation who has access to pornography at the touch of a button. Watching pornography increases your testosterone levels by 35%. That elevation in testosterone drives you to find a sexual outlet as fast as you can. And obviously, we all now how that ends.

Do the sewage system a favour and save your testosterone for a better purpose.
"Conceptuality is great ignorance,
causing one to fall into the ocean of samsāra."
—Māyājālamahātantra
User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2020 7:43 am

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by Pondera »

Malcolm wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 2:47 am This issue just isn’t about you or your preferences.
Pondera wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 2:32 am
PeterC wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 2:05 am

When the man chooses not to masturbate but instead conserves his semen for sex. The cells then have the potential to become life. So by your argument, that potential should be protected
Okay. So instead of masturbation you have indicated sexual intercourse.

Without preventative measures, any man and woman engaging in sexual intercourse should not be surprised if the woman becomes pregnant. Nor should it be their choice to abort the fetus because it’s an “inconvenience” for them.

If men and women choose to have sexual intercourse with out contraception, they should be prepared for the consequences.

I have nothing against masturbation; just as (in the same way) I have nothing against a woman having a period each month.

I have nothing against contraception. My only suggestion is that if a pregnancy occurs - then one should consider the life form brewing within. And one should consider it’s right to live.

I understand that in practice abortions happen for many reasons. Unwanted pregnancies happen all the time. The development of the fetus (or embryo) in some cases is within such a short time frame that the designation of “life” is debatable. So don’t straw man me here. I have a very reasonable point of view that only slightly verges on “the right to live”. And for that I should be vilified? :shrug:

So, look. I’m not arguing against your belief that a woman has a right to decide whether she brings an fetus to term or not. That is her right.

I’m saying that, as it was in the case of my own birth, a woman might want to consider that the fetus has a right to life - however inconvenient the circumstances might be.

If my father had his way, my life would have been aborted. My mother chose to have me, lived as a single mother, raised me into the adult I am now. I have had my share of crappy moments in life - but overall I am happy to be alive. I am happy that I was given the chance to live. My mother is proud of the person I have become.

That being said; I think masturbation is a waste of time and resources. It is a habit of the young. It is a habit of this generation who has access to pornography at the touch of a button. Watching pornography increases your testosterone levels by 35%. That elevation in testosterone drives you to find a sexual outlet as fast as you can. And obviously, we all now how that ends.

Do the sewage system a favour and save your testosterone for a better purpose.
If it’s not about preference, then what is it about?
User avatar
Budai
Posts: 798
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:12 pm
Location: ༀ ∞ Nam Myoho Renge Kyo ∞ ༀ

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by Budai »

PeterC wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 2:05 am When the man chooses not to masturbate but instead conserves his semen for sex. The cells then have the potential to become life. So by your argument, that potential should be protected
This is actually a fun argument. What about that time you walked by that hot girl and didn’t get with her.... :tongue:

:rolling:

Well...

I guess the implication of the sadder and more difficult portion of the argument is whether and when new life has been created towards the womb...
Last edited by Budai on Sun May 16, 2021 6:03 am, edited 4 times in total.
PeterC
Posts: 3324
Joined: Tue May 20, 2014 12:38 pm

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by PeterC »

Pondera wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 2:32 am Okay. So instead of masturbation you have indicated sexual intercourse.
No, I’m illustrating the problems of making ethical arguments based on potential scenarios.
Without preventative measures, any man and woman engaging in sexual intercourse should not be surprised if the woman becomes pregnant. Nor should it be their choice to abort the fetus because it’s an “inconvenience” for them.
But we’re not in the realm of “should” here. We’re in the realm of “can” or “can’t”. You disapprove of it. I happen to disapprove of Ferraris being any color except red. But I can’t compel people on that.
If men and women choose to have sexual intercourse with out contraception, they should be prepared for the consequences.
Of course, and one possible consequence is termination.
I have nothing against masturbation; just as (in the same way) I have nothing against a woman having a period each month.
It’s pretty clear that you do have something against masturbation, but I submit that you probably won’t be too successful in stopping it.
I have nothing against contraception. My only suggestion is that if a pregnancy occurs - then one should consider the life form brewing within. And one should consider it’s right to live.
You think women don’t consider this? If so, you must have a very low opinion of their capacity for reflection.
I understand that in practice abortions happen for many reasons. Unwanted pregnancies happen all the time. The development of the fetus (or embryo) in some cases is within such a short time frame that the designation of “life” is debatable. So don’t straw man me here. I have a very reasonable point of view that only slightly verges on “the right to live”. And for that I should be vilified? :shrug:
Nobody’s vilifying you. Don’t be such a drama queen. We’re just pointing out the fundamental untenabiiity of your argument.
So, look. I’m not arguing against your belief that a woman has a right to decide whether she brings an fetus to term or not. That is her right.
So everything you said above is moot?
I’m saying that, as it was in the case of my own birth, a woman might want to consider that the fetus has a right to life - however inconvenient the circumstances might be.
They might indeed, but it’s entirely up to them.
If my father had his way, my life would have been aborted. My mother chose to have me, lived as a single mother, raised me into the adult I am now. I have had my share of crappy moments in life - but overall I am happy to be alive. I am happy that I was given the chance to live. My mother is proud of the person I have become.
The fact that someone else chooses to terminate has absolutely nothing to do with you, it is in now way a judgment or comment on you or your parents decisions. It’s completely separate and distinct.
That being said; I think masturbation is a waste of time and resources. It is a habit of the young. It is a habit of this generation who has access to pornography at the touch of a button. Watching pornography increases your testosterone levels by 35%. That elevation in testosterone drives you to find a sexual outlet as fast as you can. And obviously, we all now how that ends.

Do the sewage system a favour and save your testosterone for a better purpose.
I don’t think anyone will stop the young from masturbating. And although it’s not a topic I’ve ever given much thought to, it seems to me that the groups advocating against masturbation tend to be the conservative Christians, and in general I hesitate to line up with them on any issue. But as I said, it’s not a topic I have particularly strong feelings about.
User avatar
Nemo
Posts: 1630
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:23 am
Location: Canada

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by Nemo »

So if the Buddhist ideas about conception are true do identical twins share a soul. Monozygotic twins disproves the Buddhist THEORY of conception. Sounds like the entire process of you see your dad and get jealous stuff is BS no one will ever be able to prove. Ethical conduct means not living your life by ancient fairy tales.
Giovanni
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 11:07 am

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by Giovanni »

I would not push the “potential child sees the parents having sex” too much literally.
We need to see when things are literal and when metaphor and when cultural.
Malcolm
Posts: 35066
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by Malcolm »

Pondera wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 3:45 am
If it’s not about preference, then what is it about?
It’s not about YOU and YOUR preferences.
"Conceptuality is great ignorance,
causing one to fall into the ocean of samsāra."
—Māyājālamahātantra
Malcolm
Posts: 35066
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by Malcolm »

Könchok Chödrak wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 5:54 am
PeterC wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 2:05 am When the man chooses not to masturbate but instead conserves his semen for sex. The cells then have the potential to become life. So by your argument, that potential should be protected
This is actually a fun argument. What about that time you walked by that hot girl and didn’t get with her.... :tongue:

:rolling:

Well...

I guess the implication of the sadder and more difficult portion of the argument is whether and when new life has been created towards the womb...
There is no such thing as new “life.,” again, that is a Christian pro-life talking point.
"Conceptuality is great ignorance,
causing one to fall into the ocean of samsāra."
—Māyājālamahātantra
Malcolm
Posts: 35066
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by Malcolm »

PeterC wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 7:20 am
If my father had his way, my life would have been aborted. My mother chose to have me, lived as a single mother, raised me into the adult I am now. I have had my share of crappy moments in life - but overall I am happy to be alive. I am happy that I was given the chance to live. My mother is proud of the person I have become.
The fact that someone else chooses to terminate has absolutely nothing to do with you, it is in now way a judgment or comment on you or your parents decisions. It’s completely separate and distinct.
Not only that, if his mother had chose to end the pregnancy, it still would have nothing to do with him, because a) a fetus is not a person and b) if one has the karmic traces to be reborn a human being it’s gong to happen anyway.
"Conceptuality is great ignorance,
causing one to fall into the ocean of samsāra."
—Māyājālamahātantra
User avatar
tkp67
Posts: 2881
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by tkp67 »

Malcolm wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 1:32 pm
PeterC wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 7:20 am
If my father had his way, my life would have been aborted. My mother chose to have me, lived as a single mother, raised me into the adult I am now. I have had my share of crappy moments in life - but overall I am happy to be alive. I am happy that I was given the chance to live. My mother is proud of the person I have become.
The fact that someone else chooses to terminate has absolutely nothing to do with you, it is in now way a judgment or comment on you or your parents decisions. It’s completely separate and distinct.
Not only that, if his mother had chose to end the pregnancy, it still would have nothing to do with him, because a) a fetus is not a person and b) if one has the karmic traces to be reborn a human being it’s gong to happen anyway.
doesn't this imply the perpetuation of suffering through a perpetuation of rebirths due to suffering?

it almost sounds like pascal's wager albeit in a different light.
Malcolm
Posts: 35066
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by Malcolm »

tkp67 wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 2:56 pm
Malcolm wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 1:32 pm
PeterC wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 7:20 am


The fact that someone else chooses to terminate has absolutely nothing to do with you, it is in now way a judgment or comment on you or your parents decisions. It’s completely separate and distinct.
Not only that, if his mother had chose to end the pregnancy, it still would have nothing to do with him, because a) a fetus is not a person and b) if one has the karmic traces to be reborn a human being it’s gong to happen anyway.
doesn't this imply the perpetuation of suffering through a perpetuation of rebirths due to suffering?
Yes, suffering is perpetuated through rebirths, the cause of suffering (vipaka) is karma, and the cause of karma is affliction. However, if a sentient being has activated the traces of affliction to be reborn in the human realm, they will be reborn a human being, if they do not, then they cannot ever be born a human being until they activate those traces.

As long as there is birth in the three realms, there is suffering. This is axiomatic in Buddhadharma.
"Conceptuality is great ignorance,
causing one to fall into the ocean of samsāra."
—Māyājālamahātantra
User avatar
tkp67
Posts: 2881
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by tkp67 »

Malcolm wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 3:18 pm
tkp67 wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 2:56 pm
Malcolm wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 1:32 pm

Not only that, if his mother had chose to end the pregnancy, it still would have nothing to do with him, because a) a fetus is not a person and b) if one has the karmic traces to be reborn a human being it’s gong to happen anyway.
doesn't this imply the perpetuation of suffering through a perpetuation of rebirths due to suffering?
Yes, suffering is perpetuated through rebirths, the cause of suffering (vipaka) is karma, and the cause of karma is affliction. However, if a sentient being has activated the traces of affliction to be reborn in the human realm, they will be reborn a human being, if they do not, then they cannot ever be born a human being until they activate those traces.

As long as there is birth in the three realms, there is suffering. This is axiomatic in Buddhadharma.
is the assumption that each opportunity for rebirth and the conditions of those specific existences is identical presumptuous and deterministic? Or is there a teaching that details such things?

Thank you in advance.

:anjali:
Malcolm
Posts: 35066
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The Great Abortion Debate

Post by Malcolm »

tkp67 wrote: Sun May 16, 2021 3:29 pm
is the assumption that each opportunity for rebirth and the conditions of those specific existences is identical presumptuous and deterministic? Or is there a teaching that details such things?

Thank you in advance.
It is not deterministic, but if the being has the karma to be born into a cakravartin family, they will never be born in a family of farmers, and vice versa. This is based on their own actions in past lives.

Further, if a being has the throwing karma to be reborn in the human realm, they will not be reborn elsewhere, even if aborted, because a fetus cannot create new karma which would interfere with a human rebirth, and the throwing karma will still be active.

For this reason, Buddhists should not get all worked up about abortion the way Christians do, because we accept rebirth and karma, and they do not. They use language like "a new life," "innocence," etc., because they have a one and done view of birth. One is only born once, with a soul given to one by God, and when one dies one ultimately goes either to heaven or hell forever.
"Conceptuality is great ignorance,
causing one to fall into the ocean of samsāra."
—Māyājālamahātantra
Locked

Return to “Ethical Conduct”