Oh, I love Taiwan ... here, you can right the wrong

I’m not starting a thread about for or against abortion, but it seems that in Taiwan going to a Temple and lighting up some incense, burning substitute money and bowing a few times can make any wrong, right again …

This is even better …

Today’s TT article

Perhaps you can look at as a means for the women to soothe their souls and minds. It is a major, invasive surgery. Not to mention not every Ob/GYN knows how to use speculums properly :s

You could do that … but not ask 2,000 NT$ to reincarnate via e-mail … :s

Also not touching the for or against abortion issue, doesn’t the Catholic Church offer something somewhat similar?

Six one way, half-dozen another…

No idea if the Catholics have something similar … but if, then for free and not via e-mail … I guess it’s called confession …

Also not touching the for or against abortion issue, doesn’t the Catholic Church offer something somewhat similar?

Six one way, half-dozen another…[/quote]

Are you talking about Rosary prayers? Doesn’t work. Murder is a mortal sin, straight to hell, do not pass Go.

I used to be a ‘Catholic’ … guess I still am in the books at the Vatican … anyways, Nama, you seem to know your stuff better than I do …

No different than Catholic indulgences, I suppose.

The Catholic church considers abortion to be a form of murder. As with other forms of murder, absolution is available through the sacrament of confession. In order for the confession to be valid, the penitant must truly be sorry, and truly intend not to do it again. The priest is likely to assign some form of penance.

Oh yes, and the premarital sex which caused the pregnancy is a sin, too, though such a routine one that priests will often not fret about it overmuch (they know to “choose their battles”), but just ask the penitant to reflect upon the church’s teachings.

In an Australian discussion forum of which I’m a member, there’s presently a debate going on over whether or not parents may abort on the basis of preferred gender selection. The debate concerns this article:

[quote]PARENTS should not be forced by law to give birth to children of a type or gender they do not want, the Melbourne-born head of Oxford University’s ethics department says.

Julian Savulescu, who holds the Uehiro Chair of Practical Ethics at the University of Oxford, said legislation before the Victorian parliament that would legalise abortion on request before the 24th week of pregnancy was flawed, because it did not give couples enough freedom over the number or the type of children they have, The Australian reports.

“The legislation seems to suggest that some fetuses can be aborted at any time, while others cannot,” Professor Savulescu said.

"Abortion is an area where there is hypocrisy between practice and legislation.

"Abortion is a legitimate way for people to control the number of children they have. Morally, we should suggest to the women that they give up the children they don’t want, put them up for adoption.
"But there is a division for what, morally, people should do, and what the law requires them to do.

"I don’t believe it should require women to deliver children and give them up.
“We can advise, we can counsel and encourage, but in the end, it is the women who are bearing the children, not the state. It’s a very serious decision to have a child and the law should not compel people to do it.”

Victorian Premier John Brumby is seeking to have abortion removed from the Victorian Crimes Act, where it has been for more than 150 years.
Under planned changes, known as the Law Reform Commission’s Model B, abortion would be available on request until the 24th week of pregnancy.

It might still be legal after the 24th week, but only with the permission of two medical experts.
Debate on the proposed law is expected to begin on September 9.

Professor Savulescu is among prominent Victorians agitating for the commission’s Model C, abortion on request at any stage of a pregnancy.

“Model B imposes criminal sanctions in an area where there is no good justification for criminal sanctions,” he said.

"Constraints to access raise impediments to a small number of people who face very difficult decisions (in choosing a late-term abortion).

“They should legitimately be allowed to make that decision, without fear of the law.”

Mr Brumby is believed to favour Model B because some fetuses are viable after the 24th week of pregnancy.

But Professor Savulescu said viability “is not a ground for making a decision about whether an entity lives or dies”.

"It’s quite possible in the future that a fetus below the age of 20 weeks or even 15 weeks will survive, so will we then revise legislation?

“Say we could keep embryos alive at some point in the future. Would we then demand that all embryos be protected?”[/quote]

A surprising number of non-religious members on the forum have expressed their concerns over this, as well as their repugnance for aborting after the 25th week.

This kinda reminds me of this Chinese class I took taught by a Chinese teacher who was really into Chinese spiritual beliefs, focusing on mostly Buddhism. She said something about how abortion is considered a sin (or whatever the Buddhist equivalent is) and that the spirit of an aborted would have to go to some sort of realm which reminds me somewhat of limbo to await reincarnation. Btw, I have no idea if this is “official” Buddhist doctrine.