Abortion

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

How many women, knowing that a man has wife/partner and children still chase
after him in the hope of the man divorcing/leaving his first wife/partner?

Is that a male or female problem (or both).
(it takes two to tango!!)
Please let us not be sexist in this - but let us analyse the situation and
think of what rubrics we might usefully find!

Rgds
Soroush

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

Dear Tanya

I am just making observations.
It seems that by some standards the mother's right to her body is more
important to the unborn baby's right to life.
My question is that when the woman gave her consent to conceive, she
accepted the right of the off spring to live.
It is a simple trade-off!

(For clarity - I am not including Rape)

Rgds
Soroush

[The Annan's]

Soroush -I hope this thread continues - and we all will truly explore where
we all personally come from. You do ask some very probing and good
questions. And this (for me at least) is a fantastic (though uncomfortable
in some respects) exercise to deal with my own views, biases, etc - and
learn about how to set them aside and truly view something like this in a
case.

Now, I'm waiting to see everyone's replies with great interest. Mainly
because I've heard so many arguements from both sides...and I SOO wonder
what it really boils down too (not in a legalistic sense but in a sense that
is truly supportive of a healthly balance in life...homeopathically I
suppose). Is it Choice? Is it truly a matter of choice? If so - your
question belows begs us (me included) to really ask what precedes the
other - which one takes precendence? My choice as a woman? Or an unborn
child - (aside from rape..but even that could be argued I suppose) who is
conceived out of selfish desires being indulged in?? (only one way of
looking at it of many) Or out of the conception simply being *bad timing*
(not convenient), or whatever the circumstances.

My we are a society/era of conveniences (fast food - give it to me now -
give it to me cheap and perfect), when I think of it like this. We do like
to have a choice in everything, don't we. Well - I am thinking out loud...I
still haven't voiced my personal feelings on it just in case anyone wants to
have a go at me...please don't ...I want to hear others thoughts - all
sides;). Sincerely.

Someone else posted on when life begins (believe it was Piet?).....there are
all sorts of arguements, as I said...so it truly will be interesting if
people who already have set views will put their *goal posts* down, set them
aside and really consider some things. My goals posts are laid to the
side...and now I really wonder - and honestly don't know.
All the best,
Lisa

[Dave Hartley]

This is pretty much an individual religious-based line of thinking.

The viewpoint below is held here in the U.S. amongst Xtian fundamentalists
(some of whom are interestingly enough, moved to commit murder against
living adult human Doctors as "protest" against their being party to the
removal of unwanted foetal tissues from impregnated woman's womb) -- as
opposed to the majority of U.S. citizens, including those more enlightened
individuals who realize that Soul is eternal, and cannot be created nor
destroyed- a body is merely flesh -which Soul employs and enters into
*after* birth ..

Suggest we agree to disagree on this unresolvable issue- fundamentalists'
belief structures have proven to be murderously immoveable.

thanks,
Dave Hartley
http://www.localcomputermart.com
Santa Cruz, CA (831)423-4284

Tri-Cities Computer (TN) |Asheville Computer (NC)
423-952-0983 or 877-245-3362 |(828)285-0240
$9.95 internet http://www.federalisp.com/?page=ispsignup

[Tanya Marquette]

Soroush,

i really dont want to get involved in a religious or morality debate. my concern is how the profession of homeopathy behaves towards our patients and towards each other. our culture and the world is a very heterogeneous place these days. the multicultural contacts that we make put our belief systems and practices on the line for observation. i do not want to argue that you need to change your belief system. I do want to say that 1) your belief system needs to be suspended when taking a case and 2) that you need to work on expanding your understanding of other's belief systems and practices. I say 'you' in a universal sense. And this is where i began when i posed the question originally.

My concern is how we as a profession deal with our biases and prejudices in case taking and the creation of a solid homeopathic community that includes people who come from such diverse backgrounds, experiences and beliefs. It seems to me that the first need is to acknowledge our desire to be an effective and cooperative community. Second, we need to commit to working on respecting each other's differences. Third, we need to recognize the benefit of our diversity in terms of enlarging/expanding our understanding human conditions in order to become more effective practitioners.

sincerely

tanya
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Sheila Parks]

dear dave, what you said is great and so true. piet, you say, "As Homeopaths
we no (sic) - see below - where life begins. i think this freudian is great
here and shows you do not know. sheila
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

Dear colleagues

I agree that our biases should be shelved during case taking. Our biases are
for the way we run our own lives. It is not the duty of a hom to impose his
own beliefs on the patient, but it is valid for the hom to ask pertinent
question from the patient - for the patient to see for example that it is a
good idea to have some kind of a value system in life and to understand what
is right and wrong. It is valid for the Hom to point out to the patient
that the patient's mode of life is perhaps the maintaining cause of their
disease.

As far as questions of morality are concerned, our repertory has quite a
number of rubrics associated with it. So you cannot divorce morality from
Homoeopathy. In fact sensible morality is part of health. Taken to either
extremes, it becomes 'pathological' and worthy of repertorisation!

But this is getting away from the my original question. I wanted to find
out what are the things or emotions that can drive a woman (against normally
expected strong maternal instincts) to destroy her unborn. So far apart from
the situation of becoming pregnant after being raped or when the mother's
life is in danger, all other circumstances mentioned have pointed only to
selfish attitudes, fear of poverty or yielding to a bully (rather than
walking away) etc.

Some colleagues mentioned that men were unable to understand women feelings
etc. This is probably true and visa versa, but to help us a whole community
pls come on and list what attitudes/emotions etc (or even better still -
rubrics) can be use to describe the situations where a woman will opt for
Abortion?

Regards
Soroush

[Soroush Ebrahimi]

At conception, the formed cell is ALIVE.
It will taking oxygen and food, give up carbon dioxide, it will multiply
into new cells, it will grow etc etc.

The baby inside the womb reacts to mother's emotions and other factors - so
how can you tell with certainty that Soul is rcvd at birth?

Soroush

[isali ben-jacob]

YOur myth is from another period and does not apply Universally, and certainly not today in 'modern' civilisation. We as a specie have a multitude of alternatives at every moment which did not exist at an early period.

We should be observing the pattern presented and respecting the patients intentions, not imposing ours. Whether any one of us participate in the choice exercised by the patient in furtherance of their intention is a separate issue and of which we are singularly responsible.

As for the patient, they need to seek out a physician that conforms to their intentions in their life's pursuit, for all we do is act as guides along the way to provide a service enabling the pt. to achieve a more or less improved state of well being and good health. And we ought not to judge their intentions as good or bad or right or wrong. We ought to argue and advance our thinking which we as physicians believe is a more preferrable path to follow and leave it to the pt. to decide where their intentions are best achieved.

[isali ben-jacob]

Your argument seeks to identify a quantitative confirmation; whereas, our practice in all paraidgms of energetic medicine evolve around energetics and their reflections. How do you then measure the 'value' of the life force of an idea? Life can be arguably begun there as well, for anyone who wishes to construct such a myth.

The issue, however, is to assess the 'intention' of the patient and to respect it. It is not to impose our notions of Right and Wrong, or Good and Bad. We are teachers.