---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :
I don't think the *soul entering a body* or how much pain or pleasure can be experienced is important. Nobody knows. What we do know is that there is *life* and it is *human life* by virtue of the DNA. There has to be life in order for cells to divide and multiply. It's not the mother's life nor the father's. It is *it's* own life. Then, as far as you're concerned, just the fact that it is human life/cells then it is somehow sacred and any termination of that life mass is 'murder'? You know, in the case of the human body, or of any animal's body, when a pregnancy is going sideways, ie there is some major malfunction with the fetus, the body naturally terminates that pregnancy and the fetus is spontaneously aborted. This is nature's way of being merciful, IMHO. Now, take that one step further and consider the life a newborn might be born into - starvation, abuse, lack of love, extreme poverty in a war-torn country or being born HIV positive to a drug-addicted parent. These are some ways in which external forces and conditions can make a baby's life a living hell. Is nature's "mercy" in terminating a malformed or diseased fetus any worse or better than a mother choosing to spare her offspring such a fate, such a "handicap", were it to be brought to term? I realize there are arguments to be made for the idea of evolution and how life is a way to evolve through hardship and suffering and that there is karma blah, blah, blah. But, sometimes people make choices to spare themselves and others a life that they don't feel is bearable and that is the plus and minus of having options to make a choice. That, too, the freedom to have choices, is about learning and growing and 'evolving'. Having said all this I still can respect someone's opinion that to abort a viable embryo might be doing something 'wrong' but I also think life is very, very complex and if we try and do the best we can then hopefully that makes up for something. When governments can define when innocent*life* has value, we're all up Schitz Creek. From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 8:11 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] This is what Amerika's gonna be... ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : Kind of funny that when the woman that wrote the book about her affair with Maharishi said that when she asked Maharishi,"what if you get me pregnant?" Maharishi said "Get married , quickly"! As I recall, he would arrange something. I'm pretty certain that he never suggested an abortion. And he could have easily convinced her that there would be no problem. Maharishi knew that abortion was a hot topic in the states and to take a political stand against it could possibly piss- off a lot of devotees and potential devotees, especially since he attracted more that supported it than were against it. The important thing here is that nobody know at what time or point a fetus can support awareness but it seems to keep getting pushed back earlier and earlier. So, if the fetus is "aware" that is what makes it human or when the soul arrives to unite with the body? How about consciously aware? How about when you can distinguish all ten digits on the fetus and they can grasp something? How about when you can see its eye moving while in the womb? What about when it sucks its thumb? Who knows? No one. We're not even sure if there is such a thing as a soul or that human life is more valuable than any other life - at least I'm not convinced. (Blasphemy!)
