(no subject)

[hazy_reflection]

The scenario: An extremely spiritual--in the one god, god of the Israelites type of spirituality--woman has made a mistake and "sinned", having slept with her boyfriend, and is now pregnant.

She figures she has two options.

Option One: Get an abortion. This completely goes against everything she's been raised with. Pro-choice or pro-life, it doesn't matter. Blind faith tells her that it's wrong and that it's not really an option.

Option Two: Go through with the pregnancy and give the baby up for adoption. Either way, she'd lose the child because she knows she doesn't have the lifestyle that can afford a child, but she wants what's best for the child, which would be an adopted life.

She makes a choice, but it's neither of the options she's figured. So she prays. She asks God to take this baby from her, because she made a mistake and it's not her place to push this child into a life it doesn't deserve. It's not right to force the child into a life of hardships and difficulties, which is just what it might get if she puts it up for adoption. It might not even get adopted. It might grow older and be put into the child care system, thrown from foster care home to home. But if she aborted the baby, it wouldn't be her right to kill it. Murder it. So she asks God to take it from her, to save it from a life that it didn't deserve. Is she right? A child is a special gift. Children deserve the best from a parent.

Is it the Ultimate Sacrifice or the Ultimate Act of Selfishness?

Comments

[alcon.livejournal.com]

This is purely hypothetical... right? *peers at Farynae*

Option1 and option3 are the same. Just substituing God in the place of an abortion doctor. She's still making the choice not to bring the child into the world and then asking someone to stop it.

[hazy-reflection.livejournal.com]

COMPLETELY hypothetical, Daniel. You whack job.

[roguebelle.livejournal.com]

Bah. It isn't Ultimate anything. It's momentary. Just her one little life. One tear in the bucket. Sacrifice or selfishness, it isn't monumental. She needs to get over herself. And at least schedule the abortion, 'cause if she's counting on God for a miraculous save from a situation of her own making, in the words of the immortal Malcolm Reynolds, "that's a long wait for a train don't come".

[hazy-reflection.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the input. More food for thought. Yay.

Hypothetically, of course

[cuantar.livejournal.com]

It's not a child 'til it kicks. Before then, it's potential; it's a parasite inside the woman's body that might become a child if she waits nine months. The real world doesn't run on maybes; she should think about herself, not a hypothetical someone else. If she is unable to feed a child without starving herself, she shouldn't have children.

It's selfish if she decides to abort the child (for non-medical reasons) at a point when the child could survive outside of her body, but while it's dependent on her, is it anything more than a part of her?

She should feel more guilty if she has the child and can't support it than if she decides not to have it.

Re: Hypothetically, of course

[hazy-reflection.livejournal.com]

A child is still a child, whether being fed by an umbilical cord or by a spoon that's being given odd airplane noises by a parent. It's still dependent on the parent for everything until the day it can fend for itself, which is a bit of a ways away.

But either way, keeping the child without the means to take care of it means giving it up, one way or the other.

Thanks for the input.

Re: Hypothetically, of course

[cuantar.livejournal.com]

Heh, don't worry.

What I wrote is a bit extreme, even for me? :p I mean, really, "parasite?" Hehe.

I do lean in that general direction, but the "when does it become a child" question makes it all fuzzy.

I was setting up my real argument, and what it comes down to is only that the subject is rather undebatable. There just isn't a middle ground. Instead, there are people who believe very strongly in one side or the other, and it really comes down to nothing more than a belief -- as you and I demonstrated up there :) What is a child? That's the question at the heart of it all.

My more honest opinion is that the whole thing is a deeply personal decision that I think the hypothetical woman needs to figure out on her own, without my input. I don't know what I'd do if I were in her place (hypothetically!), so I'm not qualified to offer hypothetical advice. It would be very selfish of her to carry the child nearly to term and then abort it (again, in my opinion), but how long is too long?

I agree with the commenter below about adoption, but because pregnancy isn't an easy thing where you just wait nine months and out pops a baby, one should take her own health into consideration as well.

The abortion debate has reached that point where it's talked about more than it's actually done, kind of like Puritans and sex.

Re: Hypothetically, of course

[hazy-reflection.livejournal.com]

Wow. Kinda wasn't expecting more, but glad you responded again, I guess. =)

The questions you highlight make for some good food for thought. So thank you for that. And then that last line. Because that made me laugh like a fackin' hyena.

Options?

[(Anonymous)]

The way I see it, if this young woman is truly following God's calling in her life, she would pray for His will and not her own. Pray for His direction and His solution and pray for the strength to accept whatever option He provides. Jeremiah 29:11 says, "'For I know the plans I have for you,' declares the Lord. 'They are for good and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.'" God has a plan for her life and for the life of her unborn child.

As an adoptive mom who somehow stumbled across your post, I would also add that there are millions of childless couples out there who would give anything for the chance to adopt a baby. And would give that child a wonderful, stable home and even support a relationshiop with that child's birthmother. I think there are a lot more than 3 options here.