Blog: Abortion, the rights of the unborn baby and relative morality

Under the European secular concept of pro-death, a woman’s desire to get rid of her unborn baby has to be accepted. But this should not be the lawmakers’ priority simply because pressure groups want them to legalise abortion in Mauritius. The argument of gender equality is totally irrelevant because the man is not the one who carries the baby. If anything, it is more ‘gender inequality’! However, given the extremely complex nature of the subject, given that women are often victims of sexual violence, given that many women are at risk during pregnancy and at childbirth, and so on, under the concept of relative morality, abortion may be allowed in certain circumstances.

In making moral decisions, people tend to draw from a variety of sources, such as the Holy Scriptures, religious leaders, conscience and reason, the latter two also being part and parcel of the former two. Morality can be absolute or relative. Under absolute morality, blood transfusion may not be allowed because of religious beliefs even though it is intended to save lives. Similarly, under certain religious beliefs, abortion may be disallowed because it is regarded as the taking of lives. However, although relative morality allows blood transfusion without much ado, the matter is more complex in cases of abortion especially given that « Abortion photographs help establish the reality that abortion is a brutal act of violence » [Ref. The Center for Bio-ethical Reform].

Religious morality
Christians always followed their Jewish counterparts and regarded the baby in the womb as being « fashioned by God », and considered abortion as a sin, even murder. The Bible considers conception as the beginning of the process that leads to birth [Judges 13:7]. Recently, some Christians began to entertain the concept of « pro-choice » in allowing abortion. Differentiating the unformed embryo from the formed foetus in making a case for abortion is also commonplace. Within Christianity, different churches tend to hold differing views. Roman Catholicism opposes abortion while the mainstream Protestant tradition tends to be « pro-choice » like the Episcopal Church in the United States, while some other Churches simply do not take a stand on abortion.

In Islam, the sanctity of life is not in doubt [Qur’an 5:32]. Muslims generally regard abortion as haram (forbidden) but many accept that it may be permitted in certain cases. Abortion due to lack of financial means is forbidden and a sin [Qur’an 17:31]. But all schools of Muslim Law allow abortion to save the life of the mother, even after 120 days of pregnancy. Abortion invoking the fact that the baby was not planned or that it will interfere with the mother’s education and career is not allowed. Termination of pregnancies relating to rape, incest and so on, tends to be looked at on a case by case basis. Many Muslim scholars do not regard abortion as a « punishable wrong », but a wrong nevertheless.

In Hinduism, morality stems from the principle of ahimsa (non-violence) and, in the case of abortion, the chosen path is one of least harm to the mother, the father, the foetus and society. Hinduism regards all forms of life as sacred and is generally opposed to abortion unless it is necessary to save the mother’s life. Hindus regard procreation as a public duty rather than one of personal choice (ref. Lipner, « The classical Hindu view on abortion and the moral status of the unborn »,1989).  The doctrine of reincarnation is also against abortion because the soul in the aborted foetus would suffer a karmic setback.

Secular values
European secularism tends to take the liberal and permissive view of the woman whereby women are made to believe that they have the sacrosanct right to do whatever they wish with their own bodies. Although in pregnancy, part of the man can be said to be inside the woman, his opinion on abortion is considered irrelevant. European laws concur that the choice is the woman only, especially given the sexual permissiveness that exists across the European West. In many cases, the mother cannot even identify the father. Western values reject Eastern morality as “religious” and archaic. Religious morality has to do with « righteous behaviour » while secularists are at pains to show their ‘righteousness’ unless it is borrowed from religion but distorted for political purposes. European laws have always been based upon Canon Laws. But in western permissive society, the legalisation of abortion is, in many cases, a vote winner and represents billions of dollars in terms of business for the surgeons and trading corporations associated with the abortion trade. The same applies to the sex trade in its various forms. The barons of those trades are not difficult to identify. Those secular values are intrinsically associated with the capitalist system which the West is imposing on non-Western countries through military and economic dominance.

The United Nations are said to be complicit as the UN-sponsored abortion programme has caused the death of millions of unborn babies during the latter half of last century, for example, in India mainly because they were identified as girls, not to mention the millions in Africa. The « sex-selective abortion » in India is also referred to as « The Endangered Sex » or as « Unborn Girls », which is reminiscent of the newborn baby girls buried alive in Arabia before the practice was declared unlawful with the arrival of Islam.

Case of Mauritius
In Mauritius, abortion is illegal. But as Mauritius has effectively been turned into a Pleasure Island through tourism, and given that many Mauritians have adopted the western way of life, some women want unfettered legalisation in favour of abortion so that they can satisfy their lust and promiscuity and those of the men in the knowledge that an unwanted pregnancy can be easily terminated. Homosexuality is another area sought after by many European tourists and is the breeding ground for paedophilia. Many Mauritians also want the legalisation of homosexuality leading to homosexual marriages and, as in many European countries, to the adoption of children in homosexual homes where a new generation of male and female homosexuals are bred. The legalisation of homosexuality is said to be a corollary of an outright legalisation of abortion.

Pro-life and pro-death
Pro-abortion movements tend to focus solely on the woman’s alleged rights to do whatever she likes with her body and not on the destruction of the unborn baby like an animal. When they accuse anti-abortionists of being « pro-life », anti-abortionists can equally accuse them of being « pro-death ». In any case, being « pro-life » does not constitute an offence while the same cannot necessarily be said for « pro-death ». If abortion is regarded as human rights, what about the human rights of the unborn child? Should not that child be protected?

Mauritians should guard against copying what other countries are doing under the cover of liberalism or progressiveness or secularism, with all the sexually transmitted diseases and other complications that it entails, but rather look at the moral and ethical requirements of the people of Mauritius for a healthy society given its diversity and specificities. Mauritians have their own cultures, identities and values. They should rather copy advances in science and technology. For example, when is the Mauritian government restoring the railway infrastructure and sending the first satellite in space?

However, given the extremely complex nature of the subject, given that women are often victims of sexual violence, given that many women are at risk during pregnancy and at childbirth, and so on, under the concept of relative morality, abortion may be allowed in certain circumstances. Hence, there is a case for the review of the laws on abortion with clear guidelines as to the circumstances under which abortion can be performed. But a woman’s desire to get rid of her unborn baby should not be the lawmakers’ priority simply because pressure groups want them to legalise abortion. The argument of gender equality is totally irrelevant because the man is not the one who carries the baby. If anything, it is more ‘gender inequality’! The government has many other much more important issues to tackle, such as the elimination of poverty, protection of the sick and the old, protection of the rights and interests of adopted children, housing, health, education, crime, protection of life, and so on.