A couple of questions about abortion

A friend and his son asked me for my opinion on a couple of questions about abortion, and they made me think. So here is the result, FWIW. Maybe it will spark some thinking from someone else that will correct mine.

Here is the original question as posed in the email.

“If you could find a gene that determines gayness, would it be ok to abort a child that was going to be gay? … I value your opinion Frank – I imagine you’re anti-abortion but I don’t know really – if it turns out that you are anti-abortion, do you think you could still offer an opinion on this particular issue, which is the slippery slope of defining exactly which kinds of situations are acceptable for abortion? I don’t really know what the laws are.

“I was also trying to remember things I’ve read about when “the consciousness” enters the fetus as a cutoff line.”

Here is my answer.

> I was also trying to remember things I’ve read about when “the consciousness” enters the fetus as a cutoff line –

To answer the last first, I have no idea just when consciousness enters the fetus. For all I know, it may be a multi-part operation, in which certain parts enter, then others, and each learns how it is to function and how they are to function together in the full being, for I believe (i.e. the guys have said) that although we think of ourselves as individuals, actually we are societies functioning within one psyche and body. I certainly don’t see the moment of conception as some sort of absolute dividing line. Not sure there is any such line other than in the legal sense of needing a line in the sand – “this is before, this is after.”

>  I imagine you’re anti-abortion but I don’t know really – if it turns out that you are anti-abortion, do you think you could still offer an opinion on this particular issue, which is the slippery slope of defining exactly which kinds of situations are acceptable for abortion? I don’t really know what the laws are.

I don’t know what the laws are, either, nor the basis for the laws. I imagine that if you looked closely enough the laws would turn out to be compromises and deals that were solidified into a code, as usual. Bismark said if you like sausage or legislation, you shouldn’t look too closely into how either one is made.

Am I anti-abortion? I don’t know, really. I do believe we as a society are aborting ourselves out of a future, just as the rich in every society generally do. Child-bearing is difficult and can be dangerous; Children can be trouble. They get in the way of having fun. And so the rich get richer and the poor get children. It’s an old, old story. But that goes for birth control, too, and I certainly am in favor of birth control. Anyway, this is a matter of social policy, and that’s not what you are asking about.

Do I think that abortion is morally wrong? Well, I think like most things it depends on the motive, the intent, rather than being any form of absolute. How many reasons can there be for someone choosing to abort a fetus? Shame, overwhelm, inability to continue otherwise, mere convenience, unwillingness to bring a child into the world as a result of incest or rape… You name it. To put it into terms of sin, I think sin inheres in the intent, not the act. Judging the act is a lawyer thing to do, and has nothing to do with morality, because, as the guys also say, you can never rightly judge anyone because you can never really know them..

So, coming down to the question you began with, would it be wrong to abort a fetus because it was going to develop into something you disapproved of? I don’t know. Suppose you knew it had a 90-10 chance of growing into a mass-murderer, or some other kind of psychopath? Suppose you knew it was nearly certainly going to be retarded, or deformed? Would you be entitled to abort the fetus? And I don’t mean to imply that gays are inferior. There was a time when “science,” the great god science, thought it knew how to predict IQs, and scientists were advocating improving the human race by eugenics. Would it have been proper to prevent births of brown-eyed or brown-haired or brown-skinned babies, or babies destined to grow to be less than six feet tall?

It seems to me the real question to be addressed – which nobody is addressing, of course – is, as an individual issue, which motives are proper and which are not. It’s really going to come down to a matter of individual choice, and by framing the question as it is being framed today, you can guarantee that nobody is going to be thinking about individual intent.

Does this clarify anything for you? Did for me, anyway.

10 thoughts on “A couple of questions about abortion

  1. Michael Newton’s studies indicate the soul enters the body as much as 2 weeks after birth, and sometimes longer. Aborting a fetus for any reason only means that physical life opportunity will be transferred to another physical body. At least that is how I understand it.

  2. It is much of the same as the readings by Edgar Cayce telling, the soul(s)choose by the way of to enter a body.

    Or else do agree with Frank about the same.The group consciousness`told to be a common unit within many levels of existence at the same time.

  3. I was hoping that TGU would chime in with their views on this subject, but lacking that, I ponder these snippets from Seth:

    Seth (Session 557): “Until the new personality enters, the fetus regards itself as a part of the organism of the mother. This support is suddenly denied at birth. If the new personality has not entered earlier to any full extent, it usually does so at birth, in order to stabilize the new organism.

    “It comforts the new organism, in other words. The new personality, therefore, will experience birth to varying degrees according to when it has entered this dimension.”

    Seth (Session 874): “Jane, for example, entered the fetus when it was about three months old, and accepted this as a new life. You [Rob] waited longer. Some personalities wait until just before birth. Some do not thoroughly enter into the body until it is months after birth. So there are no particular rules as to when the personality enters the fetus in those terms, and meshes with the body consciousness, which of course it must do.”

    Seth (Session 730): “To a certain extent what you are was latent in the fetus, but there is no one point when the full awareness of the soul enters into the flesh. The process is gradual. In physical terms it begins before your own parents are born.

    “The soul within the fetus cannot be destroyed by any kind of abortion, for instance. Its progress cannot be charted, for it will always escape such calculations. Its history is in the future, which always creates the past.”

  4. Thank you very much indeed.
    One thing is for certain of it is no death.
    Sitates Seth in Chapter 2 of the one book, Seth Speaks:
    “My environment, now, is not the one in which you will find yourself immediately after death. I cannot but speak humorously, but you must die many times before you enter this particular plane of existence.(Birth is more of a shock than death. Sometimes when you do not realize it,but birth almost always implies a sharp and sudden recognition. So there is no need to fear death. And I, who have died more times than I care to tell, write this book to tell you so.)”

    …it is surely intriguing The last sentence above by Seth: “Its history is the future, which always creates the past.”
    It is reminding me of the funny science fiction movies(mostly done for the youngsters)back in the 1980thies, which titles as “Back to the Future,” or something like it. So, the same idea must have occured to the producer of the movies somehow…..or perhaps the producer have been inspired by the read of the Seth books?

  5. I do Animal Communication, and my cat “mentor”, Sergei, tells me that it is possible for the kitten soul to enter the body up to when the body is 3 or 4 months old. Somehow the kitten soul asks the resident soul if it would mind moving out so that the soul that wants that particular body can move in.

    A few years ago we had THREE old cat friends decide to come back into bodies at the same time. At that point the cat breeder we buy from had a number of young kittens, so i asked the “returnees” to select the bodies they liked, so we could buy those bodies for them. The breeder was startled when the chosen kittens had sudden personality changes, but relaxed when I explained that it was just that the new personalities had moved in.

    I know this sounds insane, but it happened, despite our left-brained logical skepticism.

    Sergei himself is an example of a cat coming back into a body we agreed to buy for him. He, as “Yevgeni”, had died at age 3 of feline peritonitis. He had warned us that when he came back, the personality would probably be a different “mix” of characteristics. But in fact Serge’s personality is almost identical to that of Yevgeni. This extends to dietary preferences. Yevgeni loathed cottage cheese, even cottage cheese plus bewers yeast. (Most cats love this.) Sergei won’t touch cottage cheese either! Sergei tells me he kept this food quirk to help convince us that he is really the same cat as was with us before.

    1. Doesn’t sound insane to me. We know so little about who and what we actually are! The guys upstairs maintain that we are more like societies within a body than like the individuals we think we are. So, another way of seeing what you just described might be that certain elements agreed not to be “alpha personality” so that another, or others (who knows?) might come in to take that role. If you’re interested in the idea, you might look at The Sphere and the Hologram, or The Cosmic Internet.

      1. I have both The Sphere and the Hologram AND The Cosmic Internet already, also Muddy Tracks. I got frustrated trying to find passages in “Sphere” so I downloaded the Kindle edition to my Ipod Touch, to be able to use the Search function.

        My confidence in TGU increased when I saw that they say that EVERYTHING has consciousness, not just animals. In the Animal Communication workshops I took, I had conversations with trees and rocks, and a delightful chat with a red hollyhock. Other students spoke with fields and ponds.

        Thank you for this blog!

        1. That’s great that your own experience and TGU’s statements agree. Over the years I have acquired quite a bit of confidence in them. They do good work, and are obviously benefiting from associating with me. 🙂

          I’m waiting for the day when we will be able to simultaneously search every book we own, so that in effect the books can talk to one another and create a product greater than the sum of its parts.

  6. Thank you, very interresting as always.
    It is reminding me of the one book by Ruth Montgomery titled:Strangers among us.
    R.M.,telling about “The Walk-Ins,” in the book.
    Cannot but to be thinking if it is the group consciouness all about us,of it is a neccessity of to have the own strong individuality intact as such. All of the influences about us will be in the need of discernment at large. Intuition is “a tool” in each case.
    What fits for one, not neccessarily fitting for another is it told:
    But to be good for a reason.
    The animals certainly will be in the need of a caring environment in the same way as the humans.
    I have a pussycat by the way, and he is not the same at all as the other late cat of ours. They cannot be more of the disparity as personalities.
    We have had two dogs once upon a time as well….a sheep-dog/Border-Collie, and an Alsatian/Schafer, in the norwegian language,(not at the same time thou)…Hmm,wonders if it is an exercise in the expanding of consciousness?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *