Having and raising a child is a huge sacrifice and commitment which should not be lightly undertaken. The issue of unfit parents and presence of unwanted children has serious implications for the individuals involved and serious consequences for society as well. People should not be forced for whatever reason to bear that burden if indeed unwanted.

The key factor in this issue is whether or not the soul - the sacred aspect of human life - has entered the body or not, and what its disposition is to continuance (in addition to the obvious - the health of the mother). Since that event of entry may occur any time between conception and birth - or even after the birth in some cases - the question of legitimacy then becomes a highly individual one and remains open to question, unless involved parties have that capacity of real inner vision.

This presents more variables than a single blanket statutory prescription may provide. To make such determinations of right/wrong based on any uniform code which is morally, ethically, or legally based - without including the genuinely spiritual factors, are inherently inadequate, limited, and are highly relative to numerous unique factors of circumstance including and especially the status of the soul’s presence and disposition, and the mother’s own (soul) necessities, and karmic obligations of all involved parties. These prohibitive laws cannot in the spiritual sense be fundamentally correct; they would usurp the primacy of the mother’s autonomy and interrelation of souls in favor of a blind state control that is usually largely based on the society’s dominant religion’s moral code imposed on other members of the society. For instance, the same demographic (esp. in the post-industrial West) who oppose abortion in principle as a “moral” issue - even if a woman has been raped - usually supports: capital punishment, numerous social injustices, environmental degradation, unbridled commerce, and are usually averse to vegetarianism in principle.

It is a fact that a large number of first time pregnancies end in spontaneous miscarriage, demonstrating a common reality many want to ignore in favor of these control issues. It is also why women traditionally would not talk about a pregnancy until it was well along, so as to have that autonomous discretion in the beginning of the pregnancy and the option to terminate if so wanted. It is a private personal matter. Otherwise if the state mandates all pregnancies be carried to term, perhaps the state should take responsibility for the raising of the children (and do we really want that anyway?), or give those children to people who demand this vicariously from others, making others responsible for their own sacrosanct projections of assumed righteous moral codes, which is entirely relative to their own religious and socio-economic status - yet erroneously presumed to be the primary or dominant factor for all other people. (but some religions need more souls to “save”, and there is only one way to do that: create more people in dire circumstance)

Now, people have been taught and expected as a norm, to participate in self-surveillance making public the most intimate details of their lives as a social grace and necessity. Combine that with an instant pregnancy test and the mother’s autonomy has been self-sabotaged after the fact of determination. But that isn’t where it begins. Other more existential questions need to be looked at….

Abortion is a messy topic because human sexuality is messy. For instance, why is it that so much money is spent by men on pornography, but yet that is probably equivalent or proportionate to the amount women spend on various appearance enhancing devices (cosmetics: make-up, jewelry, fashion, shoes, hair color, cosmetic surgery, etc.). It is about the largely unconscious stimulation, projection and reception of one’s sexual viability into the world to eventually satisfy largely unconscious desires. 7luminaries speaks to these issues in many posts quite well and legitimately questions the institutionalization of these modalities - including the sacrosanct institutionalization of commercialism and profit which consciously and deliberately exploits the former: desires in fellow human beings to satisfy the latter’s self-same in another form - which has become the dominant context for learned behaviour in the culture, resulting in the society we now see. In this culture, individuals do bear ultimate responsibility for individual behavior, but who’s individuality has been taught, formed, supported, and exploited deliberately by dominant elements in the collective to become (often unwitting or subtly coerced) instruments for their own purposes of existential fulfillment through those others (almost like farm animals in some cases, as a convenience exigency of production).

A vicious circle indeed, because we keep perpetuating the very circumstance that is inescapably shared by all - that is also eventually unsatisfying for all (environment, poverty, social injustice, etc.). Does the accumulation of wealth in extreme measure by the expoitation of others (voluntary, involuntary, coerced, or unconscious) actually insulate the bearers from misfortune, unhappiness, and 'bad' karma? Why should a naïve (but pregnant) teenager bear the all the moral responsibility - but not the corporate CEO who’s company perpetuates the stimulation of desire for profit (and is lauded for it)? Double standard?

Sex is something we spend lots of time thinking about, preparing for, demonstrating its viability, and importantly - stimulating the desire for it in others as a standard unquestioned and promoted social dynamic. Yet it takes relatively little time to actually engage in by comparison, but the implications of the results are far-reaching, (5 minutes of sex can result in years of pain suffering and confusion, or in some cases, worse), affect the quality of life for everyone in the long-term, and create these problems that are always after-the-fact - largely unquestioned and unchallenged as a de-facto premise - that of a presumed sacrosanct existential purpose of “feeling and being sexy” and desired - or how to achieve that as a dominant modality of life.

Women want to be desired by men, needed by children, and appreciated by family; “love”. Men want to be ‘received’ by women, dominant providers for family (and heirs), and attain power in the society by doing so; “love” (<- & yes, a hyper-simplification). Women and men mutually seek each other out to fulfill these wants and needs - again - largely unconscious & this is why the spiritual pov from various traditions is invaluable. But the foregoing play of desire is now the basis of most of our institutions. And yet, higher forms of interaction, creativity, and fulfillment - both individual and social - are available - some things we urgently need to consider and transform both individually and culturally.

The issue of abortion is just in the middle of it.
It is indicative in concentrated form of broader themes and issues that need to be questioned and considered as precursors to it, and to understand what needs to be transformed in terms of life-purpose, subsequent attitudes, and consequent behaviours.

Just some thoughts on the subject, fwiw.

~ J