I apologize for the extended delay in getting you this piece, my 7th part of Re-Framing Abortion. I've been having radiation treatment for endometrial cancer, following a total hysterectomy....And feeling lousy. But I have now completed all of the 25 radiation sessions and can focus on allowing my body to heal.
******
I cannot write about abortion without addressing the subject of sex directly. I hope you find some new information on the subject in what I've written here.
Attitudes toward sex - specifically about women's sexuality and the sexuality of LGBTQ folks - are directly connected to one's religious or moral beliefs, beliefs about abortion, and the relationship that should exist between Church and State. And how families, especially parents, address the subject of abortion - or try to avoid doing so - is greatly influenced by what their religious faiths tell people they should believe and what their views of morality ought to be.
*****
The U.S. is a strange nation when it comes to the subject of sex. Here, sex has long been used to induce people to be rampant consumers, despite the fact that we still hold many Victorian attitudes about sex. We have a long history of prosecuting writers and comedians for talking about sex, and a confusion of sex with pornograpy.
Sex is used to advertise everything from toilet paper to pizza because it sells. Yet sex is still taboo: in some places it's specifically against the law for a woman to bear her breast in public or to breastfeed in a public place. I can remember being asked to leave a restaurant because I was breastfeeding my baby. And, although laws are changing about breastfeeding in the work place, many working women still have to breastfeed in the bathroom. Misogyny? Of course.
Research shows that differences in attitudes toward abortion usually stem from differences in beliefs as to when life begins and the circumstances in which abortion may be, is - or is not - morally acceptable. These beliefs are heavily influenced by religious leaders, most of whom are men, perhaps mores than by the religious "sacred" texts.
Among people who claim to be religious, there is a proven direct correlation between how they view abortion and how religious they believe (and claim) themselves to be, as you might expect.
All organized religions have patriarchal - misogynistic - roots, with the exception of Buddhism. And religious institutions, including Buddhism, were organized around patriarchy. Religions with the largest followers have specific dictates and traditions about sex: if, with whom, when, why, how, and how often. Just as they have specific beliefs about contraception and abortion.
HINDUISM
I'll start with Hinduis, because it's notable for its difference from other major religions, viewing sex as a natural and normal part of life. There are no sexual prohibitions in any written Hindu text. However, according to Hindu tradition, a husband should only approach his wife sexually during her ritu (season), which is a period of sixteen days within the menstrual cycle. And intercourse is forbidden on 6 of these 16 days: the first 4 days, and the 11th and 13th. Those are days when a woman is considered unclean, and dangerous to man. Patriarchy and misogyny? Of course.
Hinduism teaches that one can engage in sex simply for pleasure and not specifically for procreation. The use of contraceptives is not a religious issue in Hinduism - it is entirely up to the discretion of the participants.
However, because Hinduism believes that a child is a distinct life with the basic attributes of humanity from the moment of its conception, traditionally Hindus place a high premium on life in the womb. And abortion is therefore considered a crime.
BUDDHISM
The most common Buddhist view on birth control is that contraception is acceptable if it prevents conception, but that contraceptives that work by stopping the development of a fertilized egg are wrong and should not be used.
Buddhism's attitudes to abortion are colored by the belief in rebirth and the idea that life is a never-ending continuum. Many Buddhists therefore feel that abortion is prohibited by the First Precept against taking life.
The Dalai Lama has said:
"Of course, abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is an act of killing and is negative, generally speaking. But it depends on the circumstances.
If the unborn child will be retarded or if the birth will create serious problems for the parent, these are cases where there can be an exception. I think abortion should be approved or disapproved according to each circumstance."
CHRISTIANITY
The Old and New Testaments
Despite some believers' insistence to the contrary, the Old Testament does not take a hard line against contraception or abortion. The Bible and the 24 other books that make up the Jewish canon make both direct and indirect references to women using contraception. In neither the Old or New Testament is contraception explicitly prohibited.
For most of the last 2000 years all Christian churches have been against artificial birth control. This is not based in Scripture but in the how the Church (i.e. "fathers", all men) chose to interpret the "word of God".
It's interesting to note that, in the first centuries of Christianity, contraception (and also abortion) were regarded as wrong because they were associated with paganism or with heretics such as the Gnostics, the Manichees and, in the middle ages, the Cathars. And early Catholic leaders wanted to separate themselves from other belief systems.
According to the Christian Bible, any sexual activity outside of marriage is wrong. That has continued among all major Christian denominations. Yet the Bible never explicitly states that sex outside of marriage is a sin. Nor does it talk about abortion.
CATHOLICS
Catholicism holds the strictest views on sex outside of marriage, declaring it to be a sin against nature, and specifically forbidden it and naming it a "mortal" sin. "Homosexually inclined" Catholics are expected to be "chaste", in other words not to engage in sexual acts.
The Roman Catholic Church only allows 'natural' birth control, by which it means only having sex during the infertile period of a woman's monthly cycle. Artificial methods of contraception are banned.
Thus the only way for a Catholic couple to be faithful to the Church's teachings on human sexuality and to avoid having children is to use 'natural' family planning. Increasingly, practicing Catholics are choosing to go against the Church's dictates by using birth control and also having abortions.
Nevertheless, the official teachings of the Catholic Church hold any form of abortion, right from conception, to be a mortal sin.
PROTESTANTS
The Protestant Reformation was begun in 1517 by Martin Luther, a German monk and professor. The movement he began challenged both the authority of the Catholic Pope and the power of Catholic priests to transform the bread and wine of Communion into the body and blood of Christ. Over time, various Protestant sects developed, ranging from the rigid and anti-body, anti-sex churches to ones that did not denigrate the body. Protestant sects include: Adventists, Anabaptists, Anglicans [also called Episcopalians], Baptists, Calvinists, Lutherans, Methodists, Plymouth Brethren, Presbyterians, the African American Church, and Quakers [also known as The Religious Society of Friends].
Protestant views on sex arose directly from their views about the nature of the human soul: whether it inherently tends toward evil, is neutral, or is inherently good. The Quakers who uniquely believed that human beings are inherently good.Instead of seeing sex as something dangerous and innately sinful, many Protestants began to regard the human body and sex as part of God's great gifts to humanity.
And sex slowly became recognized by many as a force that could preserve the institution of marriage if couples didn't feel threatened by the possibility of having children they could not support. So some Protestant churches concluded that, as the use of birth control often led to stronger families and better marriages, churches should allow believers to use birth control as their own consciences dictated.
This change came slowly - as late as 1908 the Lambeth Conference of the Anglican (Episcopal) Church stated that birth control "cannot be spoken of without repugnance," and denounced it as "demoralising to character and hostile to national welfare."
Yet, the Anglicans were the first church to issue a statement in favour of contraception, in 1930.
Nowadays most Protestant denominations permit artificial birth control to some extent.
Similarly, Protestant attitudes to birth control began to change in the 19th century, as theologians became more willing to accept that morality should come from the conscience of each individual rather than from outside teachings.
Among Protestant religious leaders there is a long tradition of not condoning abortion. There's a wide range of moralistic beliefs among the various Protestant faiths, some continuing their tradition of preaching "hell, fire and damnation" while others having altogether left behind moralistic views about sex and sins. In recent decades Protestant clergy have mostly embraced the value of being emotionally supportive of any women having sex outside of marriage or considering - or having had - an abortion.
Protestant spiritual leaders and clergy are trained to feel compelled to love and provide "pastoral care" to everyone in their flock. Paradoxically, although most protestant theologians and clergy emphasize the importance of empathy and compassion for people who have unplanned pregnancies, only those individuals whose attitudes are “pro-choice” or neutral on the subject consider they have an obligation to confront stigmatizing attitudes and behaviors towards women who experience or are considering abortion - regardless of the person's age or marital status.
CONSERVATIVE EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANITY
Evangelical Christianity supports sex only within marriage. Within marriage, there are separate injunctions for husbands and wives: husbands should love and honor their wives and wives should submit to their husbands.
White evangelicals in the U.S. in the 1970s did not mobilize against Roe v. Wade. They considered abortion a Catholic issue. Instead, they organized around defending racial segregation in evangelical institutions.
In 1968, Christianity Today, the flagship magazine of evangelicalism, organized a conference with the Christian Medical Society to discuss the morality of abortion. Noted theologians from throughout the evangelical world debated the subject over several days and then issued a statement that acknowledged the ambiguities surrounding abortion, which, they said, allowed for many different approaches.
“Whether the performance of an induced abortion is sinful we are not agreed,” the statement read, “but about the necessity of it and permissibility for it under certain circumstances we are in accord.”
Two successive editors of Christianity Today took equivocal stands on abortion. Carl F. H. Henry, the magazine’s founder, affirmed that “a woman’s body is not the domain and property of others,” and his successor, Harold Lindsell, allowed that, “if there are compelling psychiatric reasons from a Christian point of view, mercy and prudence may favor a therapeutic abortion.”
In 1971, the delegates to the Southern Baptist Convention, never a liberal institution, passed a resolution calling for the legalization of abortion, a position they reaffirmed in 1974 — a year after Roe — and again in 1976.
Because evangelicals had considered abortion a Catholic issue until the late 1970s, they expressed little interest in the matter; Falwell, by his own admission, did not preach his first anti-abortion sermon until February 26, 1978, more than five years after Roe.
Opposition to abortion was a godsend for leaders of the Religious Right because it allowed them to distract attention from the real genesis of their movement: defense of racial segregation in evangelical institutions. With a cunning diversion, they were able to whip up righteous fury against legalized abortion and thereby lend a veneer of respectability to their political agenda!
MORMANISM - The Church of the Latter Day Saints
The Book of Mormon contains many passages about sex and relationships for a Mormon couple – from masturbation to procreation – and the Church has rules for all of it. However, sex for Mormons is not only for procreation but also a way of expressing love and strengthening the emotional and spiritual bonds between a husband and wife. Furthermore, sex within marriage is supposed to be celebrated and enjoyed.
Although, according to the leaders of the Mormon church, marriage is not for those of the same sex, there has recently been some loosening of the prohibition against same sex marriage.
Nevertheless, the Mormon Church has been strongly opposed to artificial birth control and abortion. In its beliefs, heaven has millions of spirits awaiting an earthly body, and since the female body is considered the tabernacle of the spirit, women are meant to bear as many children as possible. But today's Church leaders do not condemn birth control.
Abortion is a most serious matter and Mormons are only supposed to consider it after they have received confirmation through prayer and not for personal or social convenience.
JUDAISM - followers of the Old Testament & other sacred books
Judaic law encourages full enjoyment of sexuality, but only within marriage. And sex is not permitted during a woman’ menses. There are specific rituals to follow regarding the start and ending of the time when a woman is "unclean".
Unlike Hinduism and Mormonism, the Hebrew Bible makes it clear that a fetus does not have the status of a human life. However, different Jewish denominations – Orthodox, Conservative, Reform and Reconstruction – hold differing views regarding abortion.
Among Orthodox Judaism, use of birth control has been considered only acceptable for use in limited circumstances. Conservative Judaism, while generally encouraging its members to follow the traditional Jewish views on birth control, has been more willing to allow greater exceptions. Reform Judaism has generally been the most liberal with regard to birth control, allowing individual followers to use their own judgment in what, if any, birth control methods they might wish to employ.
Many Jews today feel that the benefits of contraception - female health, family stability, disease prevention, etc - uphold the commandment in Judaism to "choose life" more strongly than they violate God's commandment in Genesis, "be fruitful and multiply."
While Judaism takes a far less rigid approach to abortion than do many pro-life denominations of Christianity - including providing explicit exceptions for threats to a mother’s life and rabbinic support for terminating a pregnancy in a host of other situations - there is nonetheless broad objection to abortion in cases without serious cause. And, despite the consensus that abortion is permitted in cases where continuing the pregnancy poses a threat to the life of the mother, there is disagreement among rabbinical scholars over just what constitutes a threat.
Jewish law does not share the belief common among abortion opponents that life begins at conception, nor does it legally consider the fetus to be a full person deserving of protections equal those accorded to human beings. In Jewish law, a fetus attains the status of a full person only at birth.
Sources in the Talmud - which is the central text and primary source of Jewish religious law - indicate that prior to 40 days of gestation, the fetus has an even more limited legal status. And one Talmudic authority declared that, prior to 40 days, the fetus is “mere water.” Elsewhere, the Talmud indicates that the ancient rabbis regarded a fetus as part of its mother throughout the pregnancy, dependent fully on her for its life — a view that echoes the position that women should be free to make decisions concerning their own bodies.
ISLAM
In Islam, sexual relations between husband and wife should be mutual and done in a good manner, and not by oppression, hatred, violence, coercion and intimidation.
One is prohibited from having intercourse while being a pilgrim at the "House of Allah," in the sacred city of Mecca in Saudi Arabia - a journey every Muslim is expected to make at least once in their lifetime - or when one is staying in a mosque for a special religious purpose. Other than that, the only time intercourse is prohibited is during a woman’s menstrual period. If a man and woman have intimacy during a woman’s period, both have committed a sin, for which they must repent.
Islam teaches strict respect for every human being., especially to women. Islam also forbids injustice to anyone.The Koran (Quran) and the "hadiths" allow only sex with married and "what the right hand owns". This historically permitted men to have extramarital sex with concubines and sex slaves. Otherwise, extramarital sex is strictly forbidden.
The Koran, first and sacred source of Islamic law, does not mention contraception.
Although there is no single attitude about contraception within Islam, eight of the nine classic schools of Islamic law permit it as a means of birth control. But more conservative Islamic leaders have openly campaigned against the use of condoms or other birth control methods, thus making population planning in many countries ineffective.
Nowadays, because of the risks of overpopulation, the majority of Islamic governments have passed family planning laws; however among the masses the erroneous belief that Islamic law prohibits contraception is spreading.
Although opinions among Islamic scholars differ over when a pregnancy can be terminated, under Islamic law there are no explicit prohibitions on a woman's ability to abort, because abortion is not mentioned in the Koran. Today there are several Muslim countries that have specifically legalized abortion.
*****
I found researching various religions' beliefs about sex, contraception and abortion, to be enlightening. In particular the story behind the evangelical Christian right's current rigid anti-abortion and anti-contraception stance!
We can't think clearly about sex without recognizing that, traditionally, in patriarchal societies women were always considered to be property. Growing up, a girl was the property of her father. He could do with her as he pleased. And in marriage a woman was also property - purchased by, and owned by, her husband. This is why women were, in many non-indigenous societies, not permitted to leave or divorce an abusive spouse.
Patriarchal attitudes toward women, sex, contraception and abortion are deeply entrenched in cultures around the world. They do not die easily and contribute greatly to the pervasiveness of rape and the full range of male abuse of girls and women, including within marriage. And they directly influence beliefs about the rights of a woman when it comes to her body, including the right to use contraception or to have an abortion.
or today's evangelical Christians, being against abortion is a major part of their religious beliefs.
The Efforts to Criminalize Abortion Has a Long, Nasty, and Puritanical History.
The long history of the efforts of church and state to restrict abortion and contraception of all kinds has been the subject of extensive research and fine recent books. There was a set of laws passed by the U.S. Congress (when it was then entirely male) in 1873, known as the Comstock law, named for a man named Anthony Comstock, who found all forms of unmarried sex obscene. (He is not to be confused with Henry Comstock, who discovered the first major deposit of silver ore in the U.S.)
The Comstock Act of 1873 resulted in a set of U.S. Congressional laws that made it illegal to send “obscene, lewd or lascivious”, “immoral”, or “indecent publications” through the U.S. mail. They also made it a misdemeanor for anyone to possess, give away, or sell an obscene book, pamphlet, picture, drawing or advertisement. All contraceptives were declared obscene and illicit and it became a federal offense to disseminate birth control or information about it through the mail.
There are many in the U.S. today who want to see all forms of birth control outlawed, as well as literature about it and not allowed to be sent through the U.S. Mail. So, abortion and other forms of birth control have a nasty woman-hating as well as sex-phobic history in the U.S. I recently discovered that for 75 years the American Medical Association (AMA) lobbied to have abortion banned. It had nothing to do with either morality or religion but was all about the effort of male physicians (traditionally only they were allowed to attend medical schools) to eliminate the traditionally female practice of midwifery.
Midwives traditionally and across the world cared for women at all stages of their lives, notably their entire reproductive life, and midwives have had a long history of being skilled in the wise use of herbal remedies for children and for adults when they were sick, and especially for pregnant and birthing women. And midwives throughout history have aided women in abortions.
Today, a small number of American OB/GYNs have been putting their reputations, their license and their life on the line by performing abortions. Some of them are now teaching doulas and midwives how to perform safe early abortions. Increasing the number of abortion providers, in an era when doctors are not required to learn how to perform abortions and many won’t.
Thanks be to those non-physicians now training to provide safe, early abortions. It places pregnancy back in the hands of women, where it belongs.
Who or What Dies in an Abortion?
Anti-abortion folks not only want to eliminate abortions performed by licensed physicians; they want to eliminate the possibility of women using medications for abortion. Before I talk about the death of the fetus, which anti-abortion folks are most concerned about, let me remind you that, whenever pregnant women desire, but cannot obtain, legal and safe abortions, many turn to “underground” abortions or attempt a self-induced abortion. Both of these options have always come at great risk to that woman; and a fair number of those women die from them or end up with lifelong health problems.
Unsafe abortions are a leading cause of preventable maternal deaths across the world. According to the Guttmacher Institute, in 1972, the year before Roe v. Wade, the rate of maternal mortality in the United States was 34 deaths for every 100,000 births. In 1973, following the legalization of abortion, that rate declined by 50%.
To those who are pro-choice: let’s stop trivializing abortion by referring to is as a simply a “procedure”.
Abortion does result in a fetal death, albeit a regrettable one. I believe there is a distinction between ending a life by abortion and intentionally perpetrating the murder of a child, as pro-life folks claim it is. Furthermore, I do not shy away from declaring that the life in a woman’s womb is both sentient and conscious.
Research now shows that, from fairly early on in womb life, a fetus experiences the full range of human emotions. This is a natural part of its development. A fetus experiences everything that its mother is experiencing, and takes into its body whatever nourishing - or toxic - substances she is taking into her body. Whether in the food she eats or the air she breathes. The fetus also takes in its mother's thoughts and feelings, in the form of hormones. No, a fetus does not have self-awareness, because it is fused to the mother and cannot differentiate itself from her.
We must therefore consider a mother and fetus to be one being throughout pregnancy. For this reason, many of us in the movement to improve childbirth birth, refer to them as “a mother-baby”. Regardless of the essential oneness of a mother and baby, at times aborting a baby’s life in the womb is the wisest choice for everyone: the baby, the mother, the father, and the entire family, both immediately and over the long term.
I believe, and research in the field of pre- and perinatal psychology affirms, that a fetus/prenate is both sensitive and aware. Given this, a pregnant person is already a mother and is therefore ought to be communicating her feelings and desires with – and listening to – the developing life inside her. Shouldn’t that include letting that tiny being know if it is not the right time for it to come into the world, or at least not through her body, not now?
If killing is wrong, why should only the fetus be protected?
Let me suggest, dear reader, that if any life is sacred it should follow that all life is sacred. And that is seldom part of the right/wrong abortion “debate”. Anti-abortion folks are not consistently against killing. Many of them support capital punishment, even though, like all forms of imprisonment, it has always been applied unfairly and frequently killed innocent people.
Given the same crime, black men are still far more likely to receive a death sentence than are whites, and a fairly high percentage of these men are later – sometime many decades later – proven innocent. Why then don’t prolife folks vehemently protest capital punishment and show up to demand systemic changes in our unfair criminal justice system?
Here’s another issue that you might consider bringing up at a family gathering, in your workplace, or at a neighborhood picnic: the huge and growing number of preventable child deaths from air pollution. The State of Global Air Report confirmed that, in 2019 alone, half a million babies worldwide died from the effects of air pollution.
I suggest that it is hypocritical to claim to be “pro-life” if we are only concerned with the life in a woman’s womb.
Continued in Part 8 of 9