Abortion And Sikh Youth

Admin · Jan 9, 2006

What is your opinion on abortion? Should it be strictly forbidden, allowed under special circumstances or is it a woman's right?

My personal view is that the right to live is above the woman's right to plan her lifestyle. Abortion is acceptable only if the mother to be's life is in danger.

If society would stop stigmatising women who give their children for adoption many lives were saved.

What is your take on this topic?

ISDhillon · Jan 10, 2006

I agree with Ideal Singh Ji, because unless the child is threatning the life of the mother then you should not kill it, I know there are alot of things such as rape etc but I still do not believe in murdering a child, but then you have alot of issues as to where do we stop the killing what about stemcell research and the destruction of embryos, I think our gurus taught us self responsibility, so dont have sex unless your married and try to live a simple and natural life so that you dont get diseases because we never has so many diseases in the olden days now we are killing and exploiting nature to find cures for our own bad lifestyle choices.

Indy

TeraRoop11 · Jan 11, 2006

Waheguroo Jee Kaa Khaalsa Waheguroo Jee Kee Fatehh

Waheguroo Jee - I strongly disagree. I do not think that an innocent child should be murdered for anyone's sake. Even if the mother's life is in danger.. if it was me, I'd rather die and let my child live, because my baby shouldn't have to die just so I can keep my life. Why should its soul have to suffer the loss of a human joon, and a chance at Bhagtee and Sevaa, just so I can save myself? I had my chance, I should let the child have its.

Even rape is caused by God's own Hand, just think about it.. why should an unborn child have to suffer? It may be a reminder of an awful occurrence, but the child is still part of the woman. How could any mother murder her baby? I really can't understand..

bhull chuk maaf karnee Maharaj..

Waheguroo Jee Kaa Khaalsa Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!

S|kH · Jan 11, 2006

ISDhillon said:
I agree with Ideal Singh Ji, because unless the child is threatning the life of the mother then you should not kill it, I know there are alot of things such as rape etc but I still do not believe in murdering a child, but then you have alot of issues as to where do we stop the killing what about stemcell research and the destruction of embryos, I think our gurus taught us self responsibility, so dont have sex unless your married and try to live a simple and natural life so that you dont get diseases because we never has so many diseases in the olden days now we are killing and exploiting nature to find cures for our own bad lifestyle choices.

Indy

What does sex after marriage have to do with anything on this topic ?

You don't think a husband ever rapes his wife ? Or forces her to have sex ?

Just because she has a ring on her finger, she must "put out" everytime her husband wishes ?

Thats simply ridiculous.

Controllabe sex before the ring is on her hand, and after is just as safe to prevent abortion as is post-marital sex.

I'm not saying pre-marital sex is good or bad, but I just dont like how some parents try to push post-marital sex on topics which it doesnt even relate too. A married couple can still have an abortion, especially if the mothers life is at risk. A non-married couple can still take the same course of action to prevent pregnancy as a married couple.

I think our gurus taught us self responsibility, so dont have sex unless your married and try to live a simple and natural life so that you dont get diseases because we never has so many diseases in the olden days now we are killing and exploiting nature to find cures for our own bad lifestyle choices.

So you say..."self responsibility" and "natural life" in the same sentence. These two phrases seem at odds in todays society. Natural Life would mean to do what happens naturally, i.e. have sex when your hormones are at their peak, such as puberty, this usually tends to happen prior to marriage. I'm not saying "uncontrollable, lets rape everyone sex"...I'm implying cosensual, controlled sex. As a society civilizes, the marriage age is delayed due to academic and financial needs. Naturally, we should be having sex at the age of 14-15 when our bodies can handle it. Self-responsibility teaches us to do otherwise. Similarily, people had sex well before the age of 27 during the Guru's times.

By all means, I agree with you as far as exploiting nature to find cures for diseases which are caused by bad lifestyle choices. I'm not a fan of attempting to cure several STDs as they can be avoided with intelligence. And I do think, sometimes...an error in your choice should remain with you your whole life.

By your society, what would most likely happen is that people would get married at the age of 22, have sex, and then divorced by 24 when they realized that they didnt make the best choice in their life. But since they tried, and had sex during "marriage"...its ok ?

Don't force your opinions on un-related topics.

Anyways, I'd just like to tell everyone that I've been really busy recently, but will start using the forum alot more in the upcoming days.

Hopefully bring back some classic debates =)

Thanks,
-S|kH

ISDhillon · Jan 11, 2006

Sikh Ji,

If your response is what you got from my message then I would seriously suggest you go back to school I will reiterate and dont you dare tell me not voice my opinions if you feel threatened by my debate then feel free to face me anytime I do not fear the voice of free speech.

Tera roop Ji

You too have not understood my message at all and I am going to reiterate so that you too can grasp what I am trying to convey.

I would like to say that if a participnat has a problem with an earlier debate then you should respond in that debate and not bring anguish into another debate because that is pathetic and sad.

One participant stated that they would rather die than let the unborn child survive I disagree with this I believe what is paramount is for each human being to look after their body, but a child which could potentially kill a mother is to me a threat to a persona body, life is an opportunity in sikhism for self-realisation and such an opportunity should not be wasted unless you are defending yourself, and aborting in this case is a form of self-defense, but I respect the right to those who would like to die for the child however my respect is only as far as the right to choose not admiration.

My section on self-responsibility and sex after marriage tied in with stem cell research but it has been misrepresented by some on this forum and that is why they have started to go off on a tangent. The argument was that when is it ok not to kill an embryo, I am a serious believer in self-disipline and that can be apparent before marriage too, but in the bonds of a marriage a "mistake" is more workable, and if your husband rapes you after marriage then perhaps you need to prioritise the nature of marriage, such things do happen and it is cultural in nature but even then I do not agree with abortion. Pre-marial sex has unbelievable effect on this issue of abortion teen pregnancy account for the highest number of abortions so in future try to think outside the box!

Again you then go on to misinterpret the idea of natural and self-responsibility - self responsibility means to understand that your actions have a consequence and when you have a child you must look after it, natural- means how you eat, exercise this was aimed at the idea of not needing cures but preventative lifestyle, and you are quite right natural means following your instincts and and sex is one of them.

I am not a parent I am 26 years old and am not thinking of getting married yet I am sorry if you have suffered from parental internet provocateurs.

"By your society, what would most likely happen is that people would get married at the age of 22, have sex, and then divorced by 24 when they realized that they didnt make the best choice in their life. But since they tried, and had sex during "marriage"...its ok ?"

No I did not this is your interpretation and I dont have the energy to discover how you arrived at such a conclusion.

Just for the record:

1) Abortion only in self-defense
2) Pre-marital sex is normal
3) Live a simple life in live by nature and your body will be harmonised
4) Science and technology have created all the problems it wished to correct.

Gurfateh!!!

Inderjit Singh Dhillon :whisling:

devinesanative · Jan 14, 2006

Aren't we fooling each other ?

devinesanative · Jan 14, 2006

Hey , Lets get out of the Civilization complexity ...

Lets all of us start living in Jungle , No rape , No premarital , No postmarital , No extramarital , No abortion , No Homosexuality , No Lesbianism , No STD , No ISD , No Landline , No Mobile ....

Only and Only Self Pleasure ..........

devinesanative · Jan 14, 2006

ISDhillon said:
Sikh Ji,

If your response is what you got from my message then I would seriously suggest you go back to school I will reiterate and dont you dare tell me not voice my opinions if you feel threatened by my debate then feel free to face me anytime I do not fear the voice of free speech.

Tera roop Ji

You too have not understood my message at all and I am going to reiterate so that you too can grasp what I am trying to convey.

I would like to say that if a participnat has a problem with an earlier debate then you should respond in that debate and not bring anguish into another debate because that is pathetic and sad.

One participant stated that they would rather die than let the unborn child survive I disagree with this I believe what is paramount is for each human being to look after their body, but a child which could potentially kill a mother is to me a threat to a persona body, life is an opportunity in sikhism for self-realisation and such an opportunity should not be wasted unless you are defending yourself, and aborting in this case is a form of self-defense, but I respect the right to those who would like to die for the child however my respect is only as far as the right to choose not admiration.

My section on self-responsibility and sex after marriage tied in with stem cell research but it has been misrepresented by some on this forum and that is why they have started to go off on a tangent. The argument was that when is it ok not to kill an embryo, I am a serious believer in self-disipline and that can be apparent before marriage too, but in the bonds of a marriage a "mistake" is more workable, and if your husband rapes you after marriage then perhaps you need to prioritise the nature of marriage, such things do happen and it is cultural in nature but even then I do not agree with abortion. Pre-marial sex has unbelievable effect on this issue of abortion teen pregnancy account for the highest number of abortions so in future try to think outside the box!

Again you then go on to misinterpret the idea of natural and self-responsibility - self responsibility means to understand that your actions have a consequence and when you have a child you must look after it, natural- means how you eat, exercise this was aimed at the idea of not needing cures but preventative lifestyle, and you are quite right natural means following your instincts and and sex is one of them.

I am not a parent I am 26 years old and am not thinking of getting married yet I am sorry if you have suffered from parental internet provocateurs.

"By your society, what would most likely happen is that people would get married at the age of 22, have sex, and then divorced by 24 when they realized that they didnt make the best choice in their life. But since they tried, and had sex during "marriage"...its ok ?"

No I did not this is your interpretation and I dont have the energy to discover how you arrived at such a conclusion.

Just for the record:

1) Abortion only in self-defense
2) Pre-marital sex is normal
3) Live a simple life in live by nature and your body will be harmonised
4) Science and technology have created all the problems it wished to correct.

Gurfateh!!!

Inderjit Singh Dhillon :whisling:

Hey , Indy you wrote you don't want to marry .... Why Dear ?

Are You Ho.................. ?

devinesanative · Jan 14, 2006

TeraRoop11 said:
Waheguroo Jee Kaa Khaalsa Waheguroo Jee Kee Fatehh

Waheguroo Jee - I strongly disagree. I do not think that an innocent child should be murdered for anyone's sake. Even if the mother's life is in danger.. if it was me, I'd rather die and let my child live, because my baby shouldn't have to die just so I can keep my life. Why should its soul have to suffer the loss of a human joon, and a chance at Bhagtee and Sevaa, just so I can save myself? I had my chance, I should let the child have its.

Even rape is caused by God's own Hand, just think about it.. why should an unborn child have to suffer? It may be a reminder of an awful occurrence, but the child is still part of the woman. How could any mother murder her baby? I really can't understand..

bhull chuk maaf karnee Maharaj..

Waheguroo Jee Kaa Khaalsa Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!

Dear TeraRoop jI

I agree with .

Sometimes God never gives one even a split of second to decide whom to save , and ultimately the child the is saved and the mother dies.

So, Should We then Kill That Baby ?

To take a decision to abort or not does not only depends on religious scriptures or anyone opinion , but several factors are taken into consideration .

One who has gone through this phase of his/her life can better know that how it was difficult to take a decision.

ISDhillon · Jan 14, 2006

devinesanative said:
Hey , Indy you wrote you don't want to marry .... Why Dear ?

Are You Ho.................. ?

In furture pay attention to the thread the original participant though I was one of these "but I just dont like how some parents try to push post-marital sex on topics which it doesnt even relate too"

That is why I made the comment above, and if I was a homosexual then I would get married the same everyone else does so would never have said "I am not a parent I am 26 years old and am not thinking of getting married yet I am sorry if you have suffered from parental internet provocateurs."

Finally I dont mean to be picky but it is better if you stick to writing all you have to say in one post otherwise the person who comes after will not be able to write about each and everything that you have said unless they copy and paste and that can be quite tiresome, dont mean to offend.

"Aren't we fooling each other ?"

please elaborate

"Lets all of us start living in Jungle , No rape , No premarital , No postmarital , No extramarital , No abortion , No Homosexuality , No Lesbianism , No STD , No ISD , No Landline , No Mobile ...."

all these things would happen in the jungle and they are all for self-pleasure.

"One who has gone through this phase of his/her life can better know that how it was difficult to take a decision."

I dont disgree with this it is the choice of the person who is pregnant but that does not mean I agree with their choice, only their right to choose there is a big difference.

All the best,:}{}{}:

Inderjit Singh Dhillon

BTW: what does devinesanitive mean exactly?

devinesanative · Jan 14, 2006

oh , dear

90 % of the abortions are done due to what I wrote about living in the jungle...

I also don't know what does devinesanative means .

drkhalsa · Jan 14, 2006

devinesanative said:
I also don't know what does devinesanative means .

Devine Sanative : as i understand is made up of two words

Devine + Sanative: Meaning of the Devine I dont know and Sanative means: Healing hand /healing effect of something

So Devinesanative would possibly mean : some healing place

Jatinder Singh

Hardkaur · Jan 31, 2006

Hardkaur

Wahaguru ji ka khalsa Wahaguru ji ki Fatah

I think i would personally have to agree with Tera roop ji, Guru ji has always told us to help others even at the cost of our own lives, it is by doing such that we are liberated from the cycle of birth and death and are given the ability to merge with wahaguru. If I as a sikh woman was in a situation where I had to chose between my life our my childs I would let my child live because I could never kill my child and live with that kind of guilt for the rest of my life. And suppose I had chose to save my life and kill my child, and say a few years latter I had healthy babies when they grow up won't they ask me " mom would you die for me?cuz you sure did not die for my older brother or sister" then what will I say? That I Loved myself and my life more than my childerns.

:shy:

ISDhillon · Jan 31, 2006

Re: Hardkaur

“Guru ji has always told us to help others even at the cost of our own lives, it is by doing such that we are liberated from the cycle of birth and death and are given the ability to merge with wahaguru”

I agree that the guru taught us to give our lives for the welfare of humanity but unlike other faiths we were never told that we are rewarded with anything, I have never found any evidence to support this claim that by giving my life for others I will go and merge in vaheguru, I believe that good deeds give us good karma but I do not believe that shaheeds will get salvation uless they are already jivanmukt before they give their lives.

“And suppose I had chose to save my life and kill my child, and say a few years latter I had healthy babies when they grow up won't they ask me " mom would you die for me?cuz you sure did not die for my older brother or sister" then what will I say? That I Loved myself and my life more than my children’s.”

I would then question the loyalty of your children they would rather their mother died than a complicated pregnancy be aborted, like I said before I disagree with abortion unless its in self-defense, how do you not know that the child you save wouldn’t rather be dead knowing they are the reason why they have no mother what about the guilt you are leaving with your new born, ultimately I cant say cos I am not male so will never know fully what its like to have a child and therefore women must have pro-choice but I still objectively disagree with abortion unless in self-defence.

I respect your right to choose but believe with spiritual evolvement we become righteous and know whats more pleasing to god and guru,

Isdhillon

aCe · Nov 22, 2006

ISDhillon said:
I agree with Ideal Singh Ji, because unless the child is threatning the life of the mother then you should not kill it, I know there are alot of things such as rape etc but I still do not believe in murdering a child, but then you have alot of issues as to where do we stop the killing what about stemcell research and the destruction of embryos, I think our gurus taught us self responsibility, so dont have sex unless your married and try to live a simple and natural life so that you dont get diseases because we never has so many diseases in the olden days now we are killing and exploiting nature to find cures for our own bad lifestyle choices.

Indy

-OR USE PROTECTION...the development of science has allowed us to have pleasurable experiences thus there's birth control and condoms and other things to protect from pregnancy and disease. Even when ur married u might end up having way too many kids...some pple don't want that so abortion is the way...as for abortion....its a women's right, if she cannot provide it the best possible life then theres no point of making it suffer or if ur child is handicapped and u know this---uncalled for suffering

Hardas Singh · Jun 18, 2009

I have to agree with Tera roop ji and HardKaur ji.

ਬਿੰਦੁ ਤੇ ਜਿਨਿ ਪਿੰਡੁ ਕੀਆ ਅਗਨਿ ਕੁੰਡ ਰਹਾਇਆ ॥
ਦਸ ਮਾਸ ਮਾਤਾ ਉਦਰਿ ਰਾਖਿਆ ਬਹੁਰਿ ਲਾਗੀ ਮਾਇਆ ॥੧॥
"The Lord created the body from sperm (of the father), and protected it in the fire pit (in the mother's womb). For ten months He preserved you in your mother's womb, and then, after you were born, (as result of forgetting God) you became attached to Maya. ||1||"
(Ang 481)

This is proof that we have an identity long before we are even born! This pauri says "you" it does not say "an inanimate blob of tissue that could potentially become a life", the choice of the word you is very significant because inanimate thngs can not be called you (in a realistic sense).

I also oppose embryonic stem cell research even though I have type 1 diabetes. It would be to my advantage to support ESC research, obviously I do not enjoy pricking myself 6-8 times a day or injecting myself with insulin 5-6 times a day, or knowing that I am at an increased risk for amputations, blindness, kidney failure, etc., not to mention no matter how careful someone watches their diabetes they will most likely lose a couple of years of their life to this disease. Despite all this I am strongly opposed to the destruction of embryos.

Enlighten Me · Feb 16, 2011

Having a child is no easy task.

Being a good parent to a child isn't easy either.

I think it's up to the woman who will carry the child to make the decision to keep it or not. The termination will be on her conscience, she will have to deal with the outcome of her decision.

But, I do feel that in some cases it's better to terminate then to ruin a life by neglecting it.

There are too many children being abused, neglected, deprived of love. So in order to stop that, in order to stop these kids growing up and experiencing pain ten times worse than them never having come into existence I would have to support the right to abort.

I also dislike how the woman is blamed for getting pregnant and wanting an abortion when it takes two to tango... women are burdened with the responsibility of having a child. If she aborts, whatever her reason she's looked down upon in society, if she keeps the child and raises it alone, she'll be blamed for the rise in crime rates, be blamed for her child not having a decent father figure..etc. Pst.

I do apologise for my post not having any religious backing and for it turning into a semi-feminist rant.

spnadmin · Feb 16, 2011

Enlighten Me ji

In some societies even today a woman is killed not the baby for having engaged in sexual intercourse outside of marriage. There is a recent example in Nigeria of a 14 year old girl who was imprisoned until she gave birth and then she was stoned. Abortion is not an option, but punishing a fornicator is.

These are centuries old issues in your words below:

There are too many children being abused, neglected, deprived of love. So in order to stop that, in order to stop these kids growing up and experiencing pain ten times worse than them never having come into existence I would have to support the right to abort.

I also dislike how the woman is blamed for getting pregnant and wanting an abortion when it takes two to tango... women are burdened with the responsibility of having a child. If she aborts, whatever her reason she's looked down upon in society, if she keeps the child and raises it alone, she'll be blamed for the rise in crime rates, be blamed for her child not having a decent father figure..etc. Pst.

Your description is very realistic. But...and this is a major ethical question: Should we judge the ethics of a deed, abortion for example, by weighing the possible consequences? Should we even consider what might happen if an unwanted child is allowed to live, both positive and negative. The question how to decide if an act is ethical is actually an ancient one, going back at least to the time of Aristotle. Aristotle asked whether wickedness and virtue are proportional or absolute.

When we see wickedness and virtue as proportional then we will understand the rightness or wrongness of abortion as something that can be weighed - more or less bad depending on the possible consequences. When we see wickedness and virtue as absolute, then abortion absolutely wrong in and of itself, because taking a life is wrong.

When wickedness and goodness turn proportional, then it is very hard to know what is ethical and what is not.

Caspian · Feb 17, 2011

Well if this becomes a debate about relative right or wrong and absolute right or wrong it would seem that a majority of sikhs, even the Guru's themselves, where absolutly wrong in participating in war-like activities (be it in self-defence or otherwise) because as you said: "When we see wickedness and virtue as absolute, then abortion absolutely wrong in and of itself, because taking a life is wrong." And if taking a life is absolutley wrong, then that poses a problem about how to justify the actions of our ancestors and gurus.

SO, I dont think we can deal in absolutes unless were willing to acknowledge all murder as wrong. And that's simply not the case, Self defence is fine. Unfortunately, the only other option is to assume wickedness and goodness are porportional—so yeah, were stuck in a tricky ethical situation.

Anyways, I think a woman has the right to abort in the first trimestor (maybe even up until the second trimester). Late-trimester abortion is where I draw the line and call that lump of cells a "human being."

Mai Harinder Kaur · Apr 22, 2011

I definitely believe that an abortion if the mother's life is in jeopardy is a decision for her and her alone. One consideration is that very often, both lives are in danger. I think of a friend of mine with diabetes. She was told that carrying to term would probably kill her and the child would certainly die.

I am opposed to abortion on demand and not only because it is distasteful to murder children, but because of how the children to murder are chosen. Girls, of course! Punjab is now reaping the fruits of selective abortion, ie, female foeticide. I consider this abhorrent practices to be the #1 threat facing the Sikg Qaum today. We have many, many problems from the Badals to violent disunity that are very real threats. I think that murdering our females is our largest threat, both practically and morally.

"Without woman, there is no life at all."

Abortion And Sikh Youth

Admin

Attachments

ISDhillon

TeraRoop11

S|kH

ISDhillon

devinesanative

devinesanative

devinesanative

devinesanative

ISDhillon

devinesanative

drkhalsa

Hardkaur

ISDhillon

aCe

Hardas Singh

(previously Satyadhi)

Enlighten Me

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)

Caspian

Mai Harinder Kaur

Latest Activity