Abortion

 Thoughts on Abortion

7 October 2024

NB:  This causerie is not going to allude to any of the modern various gender issues, medical insemination issues, age issues, invasion issues or relationship issues.

It is probably very well understood that for a woman to be impregnated she needs to allow a man to invade her physical space, indeed she gives permission for insemination. If a woman allows sexual intercourse there is a likelihood of becoming pregnant.  Every child is taught this worldwide in middle school.  Suppose the woman has taken drugs to prevent pregnancy. In that case, the man has worn a prophylactic device or the woman takes a post-coital drug to destroy the possibility of becoming pregnant, there is still the possibility of pregnancy.  A resulting “new life” should be the responsibility of both the potential mother and father. “It takes two to tango.”

Most of the world's major religions do not support aborting a child. The reason for this is obvious: a man and a woman have come together, had sexual intercourse (hopefully in a loving relationship), a child was conceived, and is expected to be born to loving parents. This act is considered sacred in Islam, in Christianity, in Hinduism, in Zoroastrianism, in Buddhism, and in Christianity. This is the natural way that mammals procreate. It was never intended to be a zero-sum game: this action is to provide a way for the species to continue nurtured by the female and male participants.

As a man, from my earliest memories, I knew that having sex with a woman could very well result in a pregnancy, and I was taught that this is partially my responsibility. I needed to be careful if I just wanted to playfully have sex without the possibility of becoming a parent. So, like many other men of my age, during the sexual revolution of the 60s particularly in Berkeley, CA, I always asked if the woman was protected or whether I needed to wear a rubber.

I was married and after nearly six years my wife and I decided we were ready to have children. We were absolutely delighted with the advent of our son and felt content. Five years later, without specifically planning it, my wife became pregnant again. She wanted to abort the fetus. I spent weeks with her explaining my position and that half of the responsibility was mine. Though in complete agreement with the meme of the time, especially in feminist circles, “my body my choice”, I simply could not agree with the assumption that I was somehow not also responsible for or a seminal part of the beginning of a new life. The potential child would be our child. I was very fortunate that my wife decided not to abort that baby (after weeks of my words):  that fetus is now an amazing married working woman with two daughters of her own.  So?  If I had just capitulated and allowed my wife to follow that idea that a woman’s body is her own business (even when allowing another to sexually engage with the probability of human life being formed which was overwhelmingly the way of the 80s in Seattle) I would not have my daughter.  More importantly, the mother/daughter bond that is so strong today would never have happened, nor would my daughter’s bond with hers. 

Did I save my daughter’s life?  Yes, 100 percent so.  She would have been so much tissue in a refuse receptacle. 

I cannot understand why male partners have been excluded from this whole abortion issue.  I can understand how it can be a religious dogma.  I cannot understand how it could be a political issue.  I can understand how females may say that a fetus is not a viable human being.  I cannot understand why science is saying a seedling is a sentient being, but not a human foetus. 

Okay.  So, whatever a woman’s choice may be regarding giving birth to a child she is normally only 50% responsible for its existence (though of course, the burden of a nine-month gestation is on her).  I used to joke with my wife that the only way to get parity is to have a backpack baby:  four and one-half months sucking your vitals, the other half sucking my vitals. If there are questions, I say consider: 

1.      It takes two to tango (let the partner be a part of that decision and responsibility).

2.      Is procreation different from sexual play or having fun?  Define the terms as a society. Either follow nature’s laws (it is paramount for species survival) or make one that suits the fickle humans (and perhaps a few other mammals). Fun seekers are different from individuals seeking to be parents.  Adjust law and practice accordingly.  Do not rely on “Roe vs. Wade” to solve an international woman’s personal rights issue which differs in every region on the planet. 

3.      If a fetus is an inconsequential “thing” that may be disposed of, let the state decide whether it is to its advantage to pay for, nurture, and raise that future child as “state property” to be used for whatever purpose the state deems:  warfare, slave labor, medicinal experimenting (which is already going on with the current abortions).

4.      Amend the Hippocratic Oath to absolve physicians from the responsibility of killing.