More than a thousand words...

Abortion: Murder or Mercy?

Call me Honorable Abdullah Bello now.

If you've been following my status, you'd have seen the promotion for an LLDS event tagged Parliament, where we were to discuss an important topic.

“Abortion: Murder or Mercy” was an engaging topic to explore, and despite the many contentions, I left the meeting a more informed person. While my opinions did not change in any way, I still found the open discussion quite interesting.

So, if you didn't come, you missed.

In this piece, I shall address certain things that were brought up and clearly state the Islamic position on the matter at hand. But first, let me make these important things known to my readers:

1. I am a theist—a Muslim, to be precise—and as a result, my morality stems from the Supreme Being known as God. Anything related to right and wrong is defined by what God has revealed, and it is based on this that I form my opinions and perspectives.

2. I do not take any international body as the authority to decide what is right or wrong. However, this does not mean I cannot agree with or support aspects of their charters or declarations—if I do, it is only because they do not contradict my belief system in any way, shape, or form.

3. I believe religion is logical. Once one has independently and objectively verified the truth of a scripture, then whatever is derived from it is, in itself, logical.

Now that that's out of the way, let me give an overview of what was discussed.

The speaker started with a speech and concluded by throwing three questions to the parliamentarians:

•What is abortion to you, and why?

•Who has the right to decide on life—the mother, the doctor, the government, or the Supreme Being?

•Can a society value life if it does not value the life of the woman and the child?

The first speaker stood up boldly and said we call a spade a spade. He declared abortion to be murder.

Me, still trying to gather my thoughts to respond to any of the questions, was unexpectedly called upon to speak. Unprepared, I stood and introduced myself as the Honorable Abdullah Bello—and all that stuff.

I said: Would murder be considered valid if we were to kill a person who has no life?

Due to my lack of preparation, I didn’t articulate my point well, and I was immediately rebutted and asked whether I was a medical student (no offense, of course).

If I was, did I not know that life begins at conception? I responded later.

(This was in no way supporting abortion. I will make my point clearer in later paragraphs)

I also answered that it is only God who has the right to decide who lives and who dies.

He does not grant man the arbitrary ability to make such decisions—except in certain specific cases, which are guided by clear principles.

A lot of people stood up and made many other points—most of which I do not clearly remember—but I shall describe the ones I was able to jot down and respond to

Now, someone brought up the issue of sex. They said that people who engage in it should know its possible consequences— childbirth. So why engage in it if you knew you might give birth?

Then someone else made an humorous point: You knew that drinking tea in the rain is cheaper than buying Pampers, yet you chose the path of Pampers. He also mentioned something about warming yourself or something.

I don’t really know what he meant by this, so please don’t ask me.

They also asked: If you must engage in the deed, why not use contraceptives or prophylactics?

Another person brought up a more extreme suggestion: Why not just remove your womb if you don't want children?

She responded to the notion that rape could be a justification for abortion and asked: Does aborting the child reduce the burden? A deeply thought-provoking question that left me wrangling with my thoughts.

Perhaps in protest of the fact that only women were being addressed, someone introduced the idea of vasectomy for men or something along those lines.

Mind you, the people making these arguments were in support of calling abortion murder.

Other trains of thought were also present.

Perhaps due to the diversity of faiths represented and the many mentions of scripture during the discussion, one person suggested letting the government decide everything. An interesting point, as I’ll show soon.

This honorable member mentioned the UDHR (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) and cited the 1948 declaration which stated that human rights begin only at birth.

She argued that as long as you're not born, you have no rights whatsoever—and referred to the fetus as an “unborn entity.”

Interesting, right?

She went on to state that the woman has the right over her body and the choice to decide whether to keep the child or not—“Her body, her choice.” , she said.A popular feminist rhetoric.

She further argued that if a woman lacks the emotional or financial capacity to care for a child, this is grounds for abortion—and thus, abortion is an act of mercy, not murder.

Another honorable member argued that it would be selfish for a woman to abort for selfish reasons if she consented to the act that led to pregnancy. Unless her health is at risk, abortion should be considered murder. However, he also said: People should do whatever they want, because we all have different perspectives and worldviews. This in a way reminds me of John Stuart Mill.

One honorable member made several points I completely agreed with. She responded to the earlier argument that emotional or financial strain should justify abortion by saying—beautifully—“When do we draw the line?” I had initially planned to say this in my earlier response, but she beat me to it.

Now to the final person I’ll discuss: a Muslim, whose points more or less sum up what I intend to say. She responded to those who raised financial arguments and quoted scripture beautifully from Surah Al-Isra (Chapter 17), Verse 31:

“And do not kill your children for fear of poverty. We provide for them and for you. Indeed, their killing is ever a great sin.”

Also echoed in Surah Al-An’am, Verse 151.

That was enough.

Now, let me make my points and respond to these arguments in due course.

Yes, I am a medical student. But when I mentioned life, I was not speaking from a medical perspective, but from a theological one. In Islamic tradition, we speak of the “Ruh”—the soul—and this is what I was referring to.

It has been recorded that the soul enters the body around 120 days of pregnancy.

It is at this moment of ensoulment that the human becomes fully human in the theological sense. However, this should not be confused with biological life, as cells—the basic units of life—are alive, and some organs may even begin to function before this period.

This ensoulment is accompanied by four decrees, according to the hadith:

An angel is sent to blow the soul into the fetus and is commanded to write four matters: his provision, his life span, his actions, and whether he will be happy or miserable.

This must be taken into account.

Now, I do not mention this to justify abortion. In general, abortion is wrong and considered murder in Islam—but there are exceptions. I will now quote a fatwa from IslamQA:

https://islamqa.info/en/answers/42321/ruling-on-aborting-a-pregnancy-in-the-early-stages

1 – It is not permissible to abort a pregnancy at any stage unless there is a legitimate reason, and within very precise limits.

2 – If the pregnancy is in the first stage (within 40 days), and aborting it serves a legitimate purpose or prevents harm, then it may be permissible. But aborting it for fear of difficulty in raising children, financial inability, or concern for the child’s future is not a valid reason.

I’ve already quoted the Qur’anic verse in support of this.

When it comes to rape, some scholars (not the majority) have allowed abortion within the first 40 days, or between 40 and 120 days.

But many scholars still say abortion should not occur—even in this case. Perhaps, this could be her test. And God knows best.

Now, does abortion ease the mother's suffering?

I want to believe movies are made as a reflection of the happenings in our society. Not to even talk of movies based on real-life events.

I once saw a movie where a woman hated her child because he was born from rape. She constantly prayed for his death. He was a walking reminder of her violation. A vestige of her shame. She was mentally and psychologically broken.

So what should happen in such cases?

If you ask me, I’d say—it’s not up to me to decide. But I’d favor keeping the child and seeing it as your own test.

After all, Justin Bieber’s mother almost aborted him (not because of rape), and look at him now—successful, as people say. (I personally don’t define success by money.)

To the honorable member who mentioned the UDHR, I stood and responded.

I said something along the lines of (not verbatim):

If you take the UDHR as an authority, would you still agree with them if they said something different? If they convened again today and declared that human rights no longer start at birth, but at age two, would you then justify killing a baby simply because the mother wasn’t emotionally or financially ready?

So no, the UDHR cannot be the ultimate authority. Lest we fall into contradictions, Only God can.

To respond to the idea that “My body, my choice”, let me say this: from a theistic worldview, this is an erroneous belief.

As Paul Williams aptly wrote:

“Ultimately, as the Creator of our bodies, God has the categorical prerogative to endow them with meaning and to place limits on how we use them. It is not for us to devise purposes or assign meanings of our own accord or to dispose of our bodies (which ultimately belong to God) as we see fit. The slogan ‘My body, my choice’ is therefore antithetical to Islam. It challenges God’s moral authority by denying Him that right and placing it in the hands of individuals.”

This was enough, even though I didn’t get to quote it during the session.

But it suffices to address the points raised—and those who say everyone should do whatever they want.

I believe this is enough and pretty much says it all.

This, I tell you, is more than a thousand words.