howdy, dear visitor

Welcome on board!

Ex-UOM student, I live my passion for programming as a senior associate software engineer. Online since October 2006, yashvinblogs.com has a growing number of visitors and a very encouraging participation rate. This success and the passion for blogging drove this blog among the most popular ones of the island.
 
You are in here for a unique experience. Simply make the most out of it.
 
Keep in touch,
Yashvin

Stay connected !

	You like this blog? - Join the Facebook fan page - Get the latest articles
	Drive to my photoblog for shots from my mobile phone & my Nikon D5000, purchased directly from eBay.

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  What are the specific cases we are talking about?
  Do you think in this Mauritian society we will respect that specific case? It will start with specific case. It will end up being unrestricted. A teenager who has made the mistake and got pregnant, the parents will make sure the child is declared handicapped, and then they will abort it. This is eventually turn the law into a joke and people will be abusing it in a way or other. What guarantee can the promoters of the legalization give that each case will be closely monitored so that people do not abuse this law? Getting pregnant and aborting will become a fashion. Well it’s one risk i am talking about. Has anyone catered for this risk?
  I have more comments. It’s nice you have raised this topic.

• JP Fortuno

  I am not for or against. Right now, I just feel that the law is not detailed and well-thought enough to being approved and be put into practice. I agree that in some specific cases, it shall be applied.

  As for the religious people, I can understand their concern. If I take the case of “believing in something” in the general sense, the thought process is complex, now take the belief to the level of a “religious belief” and it becomes even more complicated, not only because it involves the “god” but it is also involves a whole community who has passed on the “belief” from generation to generation. The belief that life is precious is again very vast, and of course subjective depending on the perspective from which we view it.

  One cannot simply change a belief or make people accept something with a law and that will be true for anything that touches sensibilities and faith.

  As for inconsistencies and debates on the radio, I had my share of laughs too, some people are just dumb. I just hope those kind of people making stupid comments won’t ever write a law and apply it.

• JP Fortuno

  maybe abortion has been a fashion on the black market for quite some time and we are not even aware of it. I totally get your point though.

• http://tinyurl.com/2f7olfl Mike

  Very courageous of Yashvin to blog this subject. This is such a delicate subject for any society as it touches on the lives of humans, born or still to be born. Passing such a law as its consequences for a society. The moral aspect is basically the decision on who lives and who dies. In some countries the system has been abused to alarming proportions. India is a typical example of where abortion is used by many in gender selection. People check out the gender of the foetus by an ecography test and if it is a girl they go for abortion. This is just one immoral aspect. I know you will say that the proposed law here is for specific cases but there are no guarantees or safeguards. If this law is passed it will be just a first step to a full law at a later stage. In my experience I have already counselled a woman who had an abortion many years back. The woman suffered depression for many years and had continuous psychiatric treatment. There are severe consequences to an abortion you should not think that it is a simple matter like having an operation to remove a cyst. I believe that MRU has been pressurized into this by the UN and EU who give substantial grants to the country. It all seems very rushed and not properly thought out in the Mauritian context. Such an important issue should at least be submitted to the people in a referendum.

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  First, please read these articles about the same story:
  http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1883598,00.html
  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/brazil-rocked-by-abortion-for-9yearold-rape-victim-1640165.html

  Now, one question:

  Do you approve the position of the Brazilian Church?

  And let me correct a huge misconception about the vocabulary being used abusively: an “IVG” = “interruption volontaire de grossesse”, whereby a woman decides on her own to terminate the pregnancy. The proposed law intends to make it an OPTION by authorities to do so, and the woman has NO say in this.

  Else, those who are against or for, this subject matter is not my problem: I am a parent of two children and I have my own convictions on the subject matter.

  But my experience in rearing two babies and the 9-month periods when your spouse is transformed has taught me things that no textbook can describe accurately: only a woman knows deep inside herself if whatever is happening inside her is good or not for herself and her baby, she’s genetically programmed in this way, call it sixth sense or whatever, she “just knows”.

  One final word to the same pen-pushers who want to impose their views on others: the laws allow smoking, drinking, gambling and what not which are all directly injurious to health: does it mean that smokers, drinkers and gamblers FORCE others to smoke, drink and gamble?

  The same pen-pushers perpetually tell you that others should not abort because they think that others shold llive by their rules.
  OK, then, can these others use condoms?
  No, these same people find it immoral to use these devices.
  OK, then, can these others try to enjoy the sexual act differently?
  No, they forbid anal sex and they consider oral sex to be deeply immoral.
  OK, then, can there be a sexual release by watching specialised materials like photos, films and other devices?
  No, they forbid solitary enjoyment of sex which they see as deeply immoral.
  OK, then, the only alternative remaining is becoming asexual like this, and these morally righteous persons should probably start giving the proper example…

  Else, what really is their problem when others want to live according to their own choices which have absolutely no bearing on others’ lives:
  Do these others tell you how to cook your food?
  How much salt to put in your curry?
  How to style your hair?
  How to brush your teeth?
  How to defecate properly?
  What size/colour/make/style of shoes is best for you?
  How to walk properly?

  So what the FUCK?!?

  I ardently wish to all those who want to restrict personal liberties that they endure the worst times of their lives on this planet…

• Faisal Mooraby

  Until the ‘specific’ cases are quite unspecific in the writings of the law, the answer remains no for me.

• Sagitarius

  Amendments to Medical Council Act to provide a working regime for the proposed bill [Section 38A. Provision of treatment in prescribed institution] contains some oddities:
  (2) (a) says no person [doctor, nurse] shall be under obligation by law to participate in a treatment to which he has a conscientious objection.
  (b) in case of legal proceedings the person claiming he has a conscientious objection will have to prove it.
  Question: How can one prove one has conscientious objection?
  (c) states that nothing in section (a) shall affect the duty [obligation] of the person having a conscientious objection to participate in [an abortion]
  Question: Doesn’t section (a) nullify section (c)?

  Specific cases: rape, incest, risks of malformations, etc. This is what is always put forward to introduce legalisation of abortion. Once it’s legalised amendments to the law are soon made to remove the ‘specific cases’ restrictions.
  How many children have been born out of incest in the last 50 years? There’s no figure but I think it could be around 10.
  How many abortions will be performed once it’s legal? Nobody is going to count [specially as collection of such data would be an offence according to Section 38A (4) amendment to the Medical Council Act] but I think it will be more than 1000 per year.

  235A. Authorised interruption of pregnancy
  (7) No person shall, by means of coercion or intimidation, compel or induce a pregnant person to undergo treatment to undergo treatment to terminate a pregnancy against her will.

  (8) Any person who contravenes this section shall commit an offence and shall and shall, on conviction, be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years and to a fine not exceeding 100,000 rupees.

  Actually pressure from family, friends and sometimes from employers contribute a lot to ‘induce’ a woman to have an abortion.
  Will any pregnant woman be ready to send family or friends in prison for ‘suggesting’ abortion?
  If abortion is legal why should it be a crime to suggest it?

  I can’t imagine what a woman who gets pregnant after a rape feels. Can’t say if she thinks about abortion. There’s one thing I’m certain of, though: a lot of people will be ready to do the thinking for her. And she will be probably in a state where she’ll submit to their views. But how long will that state last?
  Does a raped woman who has an abortion later wish she had kept the baby?
  Does a raped woman who keeps the baby later wish she had had an abortion?
  Bonus question: Do pro-abortion lobbies care about those questions?

  ………..

  The best thing about God and religion is that it is based on freewill. Contrary to what many bigots, fanatics, or atheist think, nobody is forced to believe. Religion prohibits murder, incest, stealing and a few other things, not “because God says so” but so that men [society] might live in peaceful prosperity [according Christian beliefs, anyway]
  It might not be a healthy attitude to discard any principle because it is of religious origin. Remember, there is no republican or scientific principle to justify the classification of murder and such things as crimes. When someone gets in your way, he logical, scientific thing is to kill him. Religion prohibits that and civil law on that issue is based on no other principle than the religious.

• Sagitarius

  error in last paragraf: ‘[according to ….,’ and ‘the logical…’

• JP Fortuno

  “she will be probably in a state where she’ll submit to their views. But how long will that state last?”

  a really good point as well and yes, nobody is forced to believe.

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  When it comes to sex.

  Firstly, what is the purpose of sex? Is it only for pleasure? Or is the main purpose of sex procreation? I guess the main purpose of sex is procreation and not for pleasure…

  The pleasure that we get during sex, or the desire that we have… is all just for the sake to encourage people to procreate. Sinon l’humanité ti pou fini disparaite depi longtemps.

  Now if a couple does not want a child. either they abstain themselves from having intercourse, which is difficult yes… mais ena dimounes ki ressi faire li… or secondly make use of protection which still carries a risk.

  Maybe people have also forgotten tellement zot depende lor condoms and pills that there is also a way of natural contraception. A couple can have intercourse during the period when the woman is not fertile… what we call the safe-period… Simply wait for that period of time, but we must be sure about it…

  Now there is something about the abstinence… well our desires, we are the one who control it.
  Let’s take an example, surtout bannes dimounes ki content boire beaucoup la… Aller zot dans ene fête, et zot conner ki zot ena pou conduire ene long la route et retourne home… et tellement ena tout qualité la boisson dans fête la… ça p vraiment tente zot. Ki zot supposer faire dans ça cas la? Eski zot pou choisir pou controle zot tentation oubien pou essaye tout ladans jusqu’à zot KO nette?

  So my point here is the same about sex. We do have the power to control it… When we have that desire to have sex… this does not mean ki bizin faire liem… Maybe we are forgetting that we are not animals, we are humans.

  You have also said that the law has allowed smoking, drinking, gambling and what not which are all directly injurious to health…. ok why do u think the government has allowed this? Just for the sake of boosting the economy of the country. Ok gouvernement ine gagne beaucoup casse… Mais eski kikene ine at least remarque consequence ça bannes la loi la?

  There are statistics today how many people die of a damaged liver due to smoking, we see families getting destroyed because of alcohol, missier p boire p perdi travaille, mne trouver devant moi ça fammes gagne batté… cousin p alle boire ene zafr cote ene lote cousin, gagne discussion et ene la enterre couteau dans lote la so le coeur… Gampbling… this has become such an addiction that people are ready lose all their property and when they lose it, they commit suicide or they kill others and steal their assets. There are also other laws that have been passed to control this… mais eski li vraiment p appliquer? Guette autour toem to dire. Really nice laws they are indeed…

  Now when it comes to abortion… it’s all about money… to conner couma legalise ça… docteur pou bizin claim ça dans zot income… and this will go in the government treasure of course… and about controlling that? Who cares a damn about it? With time even those restrictions will be ignored and people will use all those laws just for their own advantage. The mistakes will be certified as rape or maybe the foetus will be identified as handicapped or they will write that the mother’s life is in danger and then they will just abort it. Thus running away from their responsibilities.

  This is true, today the way people try to impose their beliefs on others is not the right way. But all those beliefs as we call them has an explanation and this is what we have to know and understand… Instead of just criticizing someone with such a belief, in the first place with all respect you must ask why is he saying such a thing, if he cannot explain ask him where has he seen that… then we go and do our own research and understand it. C vrai façon dimoune dire zordi, ki ça ine resse coumsa depi longtemps acause ça li pas bizin changer is not a valid reason. we have to go towards that. Only then you can be critical about it.

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  In Mauritius when something becomes legal… for most people, this literally means everything is permitted. And there’s absolutely no control.

  We are talking about legalization of abortion. Well one dumb reason given by XLD was that “Acoze dans bannes pays moderne p faire ça” – LOL…

  Come on buddy give valid reasons, reports what will this legalization bring, the cause behind legalizing it, the goals behind… and the aim…

  We do not just blindly apply the laws of other countries without even studying the context of our country.

  Instead of just legalizing abortion… why not just try to study the cause that pushes people to abort their babies?

  1, First sex among college children… better find a solution for that.
  2. Secondly, Rape, kifr ene dimoune pas hesiter pou violer… why not apply laws that will severely punish the rapist like castrating him for life… The rapist will think not once, not twice not even thrice but a 1000 times before raping some1. And those who will say that is inhuman, is it therefore totally justified to kill an innocent child who is not yet born?
  3. Handicapped children, if the people studying science are so strong, why can’t they explain these deformation… and therefore prevent this from happening? You people talk about humanity, so why snatch the right to live for a child even if he is not like other normal kids? You think he will suffer all his life… that’s why we prefer to end his life. But who actually makes his life miserable. It is the society itself, the mindset of that society which kills that child everyday with awful comments and bullies. Mais si ça société la ti pou respecter chaque dimounes peu importe couma line née et support li bien dans so la vie eski ça zenfant la so la vie pou misérable?
  4. If a mother is physically weak to bear a child, just abstain from having sex… but in case a girl really want to bear her child and she already gets pregnant, why not go for the transplant of the foetus or surrogate mothers? Is it not a better solution than killing the foetus?
  5. Does the law describe what will be done to the foetus once it has been removed? Will it be disposed in a dustbin? What is supposed to be done with it?
  6. If a child is born and the parents do not want it… Aren’t there couples who did not get the luck to bear a child? Why not give the child to them?
  7. We can easily say, let’s remove the foetus. someone cuts your hand or tries you strangle you… how do you feel? Do you guarantee that the foetus does not suffer any pain? You won’t hear it cry maybe because it’s vocal chords are not well developed. Do you guarantee that the foetus does not suffer while it is being separated from it’s life? A foetus even not yet born is still human we should never forget that. And literally abortion is similar to merciless manslaughter… And this is not just a belief… It actually killing a human being. Even when we kill an animal to eat it, we make sure it suffers less. Here I wonder how much that child will suffer.

  One thing I agree, that we legalize it or not… the abortion practices will continue even in the dark. What is important here is to make this visible to the society, and therefore understand the root cause that make people to abort their kids. Abortion is not a solution… there are many alternatives other than abortion… We need to find a way to solve the root causes. Just legalizing abortion here won’t bring any progress. We need to encourage people who wish to abort their children and call them, talk to them and understand the reason, set up a board and decide whether abortion is the best solution in each case or are there better alternatives? And this should be done in each case without any prejudice on the mother or whatsoever. This will also help identify the various true root causes.

  We can then take actions to prevent these situations from arising again. Are there people to work on this solution?

  And remember one thing, nature has a specific design, everything that is there in nature, it’s there for a reason. Why do you think it is a crime to kill a human being? Because this is interfering in the course of nature which is the life of that person. And it is the same thing with the foetus. It has a life, and interfering in the progress of that life in a way interfering in the course of nature.

  Well now if I look at it from another point of view… sometimes I say it’s better for the children not to come to this kind of society not because he is not worthy of the society… it is this society which is not worthy of that innocent kid. it is the child who deserves much better parents.

  To conclude, I would like to share one thing I learned in Bhagawad Gita, is that the soul is eternal… no one can kill it.
  Therefore even if you kill the foetus, the soul will still be unharmed.

• http://www.yashvinblogs.com Yashvin Awootar

  @Pramod : Referring to your last sentence, I appreciate that you shared it here. It is not that “mo pas content”, it is something else

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  Okies, mo retire ça boute ki dans braket la alors ^^

• http://www.yashvinblogs.com Yashvin Awootar

  Haha, no worries.

• Tushal

  ”
  Religion prohibits murder, incest, stealing and a few other things,”

  This is why I always say it. . Religion is made for I.D.I.O.T.S.

  Back to the main topic: I am FOR abortion in specific cases.

  *DISCLAIMER: I am NOT referring to anyone, in particular, as idiots!*

• Kit

  The last time I read about abortion was in a UK mag and statistics showed that most children born out of rape/incest do not turn out to be well-loved and cared for by the birth mother (no surprise there). I would feel extremely sorry for that child..bearing the burden that it was conceived from an act of violence must be very hard. Just my 2 cents’ worth:

  1. Concerning the handicapped babies, it’s a well-known principle that la personnalite juridique est attribuee a partir de la naissance, a condition que l’individu naisse vivant et viable. It’s more or less accepted fact that a foetus becomes a fully formed human after 3 months (20-22 weeks according to WHO stats). Abortion before that cap is accepted in all countries legalising abortion.

  2. I think that women should undergo independent counselling first, ideally from an NGO, because yes, in Mauritius esp with social stigma, there’ll certainly be a lot of pressure from family members etc. Encadrement, encadrement, encadrement! Before AND after the procedure!

  3. Strict regulations for doctors licensed to undertake the procedures, and harsh penalties for unlicensed ones. I recently worked on a case where the poor girl had her tummy pressed by her neighbour (supposedly sage-femme) who gave her hell-knows-what pills and poked an umbrella part in her vagina to crush the baby. Reading her police statement loaded with minute details nearly made me throw up. Luckily the girl didn’t bleed to death or anything but having an unsterilized foreign object prodded in your privates by some ignoramus shouldn’t go unpunished.

  4. Abortion shouldn’t be used as a quick-fix contraceptive method either. With the increasing numbers of teen pregnancies, I’d say (though rather cruelly and maybe “old school” for some) let those girls and their bfs take responsibility for their actions..they can’t just engage in sex and then decide oops we don’t want a baby. Wear a condom or practice abstinence. Simple.

  5. Religion has nothing to do with this issue. If you shove religion as an excuse down a woman’s throat, then what of the atheists and agnostics? On what basis would those religious leaders then justify their reasons?

  There was a lecture about the legislation recently and its bad and last-minute organisation was harshly criticised, and rightly so. Most of us pupils weren’t even aware of it until 5pm!!

  Parliament should really think this through and subject it to careful drafting. Imo it’s not a bunch of old patriarchal fuddy-duddies in Parliament that’s going to decide for us though. If you’ve ever had the immense pleasure (note the sarcasm) of reading the Hansard Debates of any Act, you’d be disgusted…the debates always veer off into unrelated topics, name-calling and general complaints about dinner not being provided, then they rush and vote on the bill *smh* I would be in favour of a referendum. Let the people and esp women choose for themselves.

• Kit

  suggestion and coercion are 2 extremely different things legally speaking and the definition of coercion is trite law.

  and to answer your other question: no (a) does not nullify (c). there are quite a few similar examples in legislation. it’s like the public policy exception.

• Bernardo

  For me there is no debate. A woman should be able to deal with her body as she see fit. The foetus cannot/should not have more rights than the woman. Actually I think that the woman should have absolutely NO restriction on her as long as the foetus is still in her womb.

  I am for the freedom of everyone. An individual or a group of individual cannot force their restrictions on others. If the law (which I think doesn’t give enough freedom to the woman) is passed, people opposed to IVG will not be forced to do IVG. Where as the opposite is true if the law is not passed.

  If a man complains that a woman has terminated a pregnancy to which he has contributed, then I’d say the following to him: Too bad dude, you have chosen the wrong woman. You should have know better. Until the say you’re able to transfer the burden of giving birth on yourself, you have no right to enforce. Go impregnate someone else.
  Please do not predict things which you cannot prove: Like saying that Mauritians will abuse the IVG procedures, or that women will be forced to abort etc. And do not give statistics which you cannot substantiate. If you worry about X forcing Y to abort, then you should worry about X and prevent X from oppressing Y instead of preventing Y from aborting. Else you’re fighting the wrong battle.
  And do not make parallel IVG with legalizing drugs, it will be a logical fallacy.

  One things is for sure: Whether you like it or not, whether you authorise it or not, IVG WILL still happen. So, for me I’d rather it happens safely.

• Bradd

  For abortion BUT in special cases. If a woman got raped and got pregnant, I truly believe abortion could be and option for her as she may not want to carry this “scar” till she dies. What about a health problem? Well, I got the exact same answer as you Yashvin. ABORTION IN SPECIFIC CASES. But legalizing it for one an all will be the most stupid thing to be done!

• Sagitarius

  Actually it’s (c) that nullifies (a) [my mistake] The fact that similar examples exists does not mean that the antagonism does not exist.

  (a) says no person [medical staff] shall be under obligation to partcipate in an abortion.

  okenn docter u infirmie pa pu oblize pran par dan enn avortman.

  (c) says nothing in paragraph (a) shall affect any duty to participate in an abortion [which fits in the defined specific cases]

  nanie dan paragraf (a) pa afecte obligasion [ki enn mam personel medikal ena] pu partisip dan enn avortman [ki dan sa bann ka spesifik la]
  According my understanding of English (c) clearly and effectively invalidates (a)

  The word ‘suggesting’ comes from me. Just above that in my comment (7) and (8) are copied and pasted quotes from the proposed bill.
  What is suggestion in every life can be converted to intimidation in court.

• Sagitarius

  Religion prohibits murder, incest, stealing and a few other things,”

  This is why I always say it. . Religion is made for I.D.I.O.T.S.

  That means you are for [the legalisation of] murder, incest, stealing. Our police should keep a close watch on you.

  I did not really give any opinion for or against abortion, I have mixed feelings about it.
  I don’t know about the other I.D.I.O.T.S. but I, personally don’t mind being called an idiot by anybody who thinks that atheism implies intelligence.

• Faisal Mooraby

  Just for the information, the ‘specific’ cases do not include the rape and violence scenario.

• Yogee

  Being a mother of a child,I really appreciate ur way of thinking on this subject….

• Tushal

  If you believe that religion prohibits
  murder, incest, stealing and a few other things. Then Sir, you’re WRONG.

  Education, way of growing up, amongst other social stuffs teaches you to be a BETTER human being. Religion just causes misunderstanding among human beings. We are, first of all, HUMANS. Not from this or that religion.

• Steven

  As soon as you mentioned “The soul” (thing which you cannot prove the existence scientifically).. you lost all credibility. One cannot simply use religious believes during a debate in a secular country.

  Secondly, one should not preach others when, why and how to have sex. This is simply not of your concern.

  You have the right to free speech, that’s not the problem. The problem is that you’re underpinning your opposition to IVG on these “fairy tales” and forcing them on others (by having a law against abortion)

• Kit

  Truesay, although the courts have always found a way to make little oddities like that work *shrugs* From a lay person’s perspective such as yours, I would tend to think the same as you but as a baby barrister, I see how the courts would apply it too.

  Yeah I noticed that subsections (7) and (8) were copied, and no there’s a very clear threshold regarding the definition of coercion. You don’t have to worry about that, not everything can be converted to intimidation in court. As flawed as our system may be, I don’t think the judges and mags are stupid enough to depart from trite law.

  If my memory serves correctly, conscientious objection was originally defined under human rights law during the Nuremburg Trials era but in relation to abortion, English case law is rather extensive and does provide a definition. Once more a lay person wouldn’t know that – and this is what I particularly dislike. There’s been no public notice or announcement as such which explains the mechanics behind the bill and how courts will interprete it. I think it’s vital that the population and especially women understand their rights.

  Re: religion and the law, yes initially posited law as it stands today was based on the principles of natural i.e. God given law. However it’s been accepted since the late 19th/early 20th century that all/most rule of law societies do not consider religious questions. Systems based on the anglosaxon model import Bentham, Kelsen and Hart’s theories of legal realism and clearly explain why things like politics and religion are discarded. It affects legitimacy and dangerously so.

• Kit

  It’s “easier” to draft a general piece of legislation and tweak it by churning out case law defining the scope of application..than drafting a very detailed and specific piece of legislation and having to amend every single time something new crops up. such a sensitive issue as this one, i think, should be decided on a case-by-case basis. you can’t lump all women under defined categories and it’s virtually impossible to provide for every single circumstance. generality (as odd as it sounds) sometimes does present a certain advantage.

• Steven

  There is no correlation between “Human Values or Morality” and Religion (Just google “Morality and Religion”). So it’s pointless to say that it is religion which preaches x, y & z

  And I again disagree with you: There are always people trying to force their religious believes on you. Common guys. Don’t you read the news?Then let me give you just 2 examples:1. Susheela Raman being censored because of some religious guys2. The “May God bless thee” phrase in our National Anthem3. Tax payers money (coming from pockets of people having your beliefs) being given to religious groups4. Certain materials are banned because of lobbies

• Steven

  “I don’t know about the other I.D.I.O.T.S. but I, personally don’t mind being called an idiot by anybody who thinks that atheism implies intelligence
  Well the following studies seems to disagree with you:
  http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100224132655.htm
  http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/26/liberals.atheists.sex.intelligence/index.html?hpt=Sbin

  They indeed seem to have more intelligence

  Your answer to Tushal (i.e., “That means you are for [the legalisation of] murder, incest, stealing. Our police should keep a close watch on you “)is completely preposterous and logically flawed. Saying that some beliefs are for idiots does automatically implies that he agrees with foul play

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  Bon avant mo prend ene ti nissa ek Tushal, pas ine gagne letemps reply ça zordi… Bon d’après seki tne ecrire… dimoune la pou comprend saem. Donc dans ce cas this means ki to pas mind si demain to ena ene Gay brother, who rapes you, then kills you and then takes away all ur property???

  Too good for being so intelligent, since those who belive in religion are idots!!

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  So now permit me to reply to you…
  Well u just said that it’s not education but religion that teaches you to be a better human being.
  Whatever you said about Education is good, this is what education is supposed to do.
  Now there is something, a phrase that is used in religious text and it is used quite often in religious gatherings by most Aachaaryas (mo p dire bannes dimounes ki vraiment conne la religion, pas nek seki declare Aachaarya) quand li donne so discours. It has been said that, Kaama (Lust), Krodh (Anger), Lobh (Greed), and Moh (Attachment), a person should stay away from all these. Have you ever heard these four words before? If yes have you ever asked yourself what it is all about? If no mo explique toi.

  So here we go:
  This has been defined in many religious texts.
  Lust -> This is what pushes someone for incest, rape, adultery…
  Anger -> Out of anger, one has the tendency to cause harm to others as well as self, be it through words, or you beat up someone, or even kill someone.
  Greed -> This is the source of corruption, or stealing, even lies.
  Attachment -> This one is a bit complicated for a normal human being to stay away attachments since we are all bounded by emotions which are much stronger than us. Attachment, provokes jealousy… example, if you love a girl, but the girl does not love you and she chooses another guy instead of you. What are you supposed to do in that case? Eski to pou fr tout pou ki li kitte garçon la? Will you kidnap the girl? Out of jealousy you can do anything, that’s the effect of attachment. If you just let her go and wish her all the best in her life, and you move on with your life without any regrets, then you are free from the attachment…

  So will you still tell me that religion does not teach you to become a better human being and causes misunderstandings? Ki misunderstanding to p trouvé dans ça boute ki mne ecrire lahaut la?

  Now do you think the current education system has catered for all that I have talked about above? There are laws not to murder, incest, rape, stealing, “corruption”… and the current education system makes you aware of such laws c’est très bien. But are there laws about someone cheating his / her partner, or hurting someone’s feeling? Eski le système d’education actuel, li montrer qui quand to commit toi ek ene kikene to pas supposer turn back oubien cheat? Eski li expliquer ki nous bizin pense bien avant nous causer et pas blesse ene dimoune so sentiment? Eski ena l’emphase lor tousala? Aster dimounes p pense pou mette human values dans bannes lecols, but this has been existing in the holy texts for more than 3000 years my friend. Everything that you are learning right now or u are just beginning to learn, it’s already there in those sacred texts.

  And one more thing: Education does not start from school, education begins the day u start to understand things, a few days after you are born, and the first step in education is given to you by your parents. Mange ek lamain droite, pas fr desorde, pas fr tapaz, pas fr gourmand, pas fr chuchundar … c’est to parents ki montrer toi tousala. Education is supposed to fill you with the knowledge that will help you understand all this and become a good person and there is some amount of knowledge that is given to you which can be used for the greater good of humanity.

  Misunderstanding is not caused by religion, mais human beings ki ine mal interpret c’est quoi la religion.

  Tone ressi comprend ki mo p rode dire toi? Bon mo esperer to pas ine perdi ladans… to ene frère toi mo la pou explik toi

• Steven

  Pramod said to Tushal ” to ene frère toi mo la pou explik toi ”

  That last phrase showed how much these people are fools and inapt to participate in debates! They are just racist and communal bigots..

  Plus he devoted a humongous paragraph to preach and spread his self-righteous “fairy tales”. These type of people should never be given decision making power. They’ll always try to spread their “fairy tales”

• JP Fortuno

  got your point!

• JP Fortuno

  we should probably hear women/girls’ opinions who actually did it to know how they felt about it to understand the topic in a deeper way. anyone heard the debates on radio+ yesterday?

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  Mo repond to question après Steven. Coz mo ena réponse pou tout to bannes zafrs ki to p causer.

  Mais pour le moment, premier zafr alle demande toem. Do you know me as a person as much as Tushal knows me as a friend?

  And I am talking to Tushal, a friend of mine, then who the hell are you to butt in between? To so papa toi? :S

  And one thing, mo pas conner toi couma tne comprend mo dernier phrase. But when I adressed Tushal as brother moi mo pas trouve nanrien communale oubien raciste ladans :S All my friends are like brother and sister to me sauf mo madame!

  Dire moi cote li communale et raciste vraiment et pas nek tire conclusion sans ki to penC.

  Et to p define seki mne dire as a fairy tale… one thing -> “PROVE IT”
  Avant lire bien seki mne ecrire et comprend li… I only read to Tushal what has been written in those texts that are indeed proven to exist.

  And I showed him the meaning of what has been written.

  Si to pas conner alle fr to reserche bien to vini. These texts and
  scriptures have not been written just like that. Et ça pas ine exister depi hier mais li exister même avant to grand père so grand père vine lor ça laterre la. Avant to critique li alle comprend li avant. Si to dire moi ki to pena letemps pou perdi then why the hell u wasting ur time making comments here and trying to criticize others when you don’t have anything to base yourself on? And frankly your comments are not constructive at
  all…

  And you saying that I have been preaching and spreading my self-righteous “fairy tales”. How come am I doing this? Have I written anywhere in my comments that everyone should so this or they should do that? Or they should not be doing this? And I have proposed alternatives or solutions which can be better according to me, mo pas ine impose nanrien lor
  personne. I just shared whatever I know and understand.

  To capave rer lire toi to bannes comments et guetter toi ki to p faire? If mine is preaching then what the hell are you doing? Eski dans ene de mo bannes commentaires in ecrire ki “Non personne pas ecoute Steven li ene grand imbécile” bla bla bla just like you are doing? I will never do such a thing. It is just an example btw, and I dnt know u well so it’s not my style to judge anyone without thinking especially someone I do not know.

  If I get some time tonight I will surely reply to all your questions. One by one. Tout critique ki tne fr lor moi, to pou gagne to réponse. And one more thing, mo pas conne tout zafrs moi. Mais mo toujours accepter empranne ça la vie la et mo guette pas nek ene sel coté mais on both sides. Mo ecouter, mo essaye comprend kifr li p dire ça, si mo pas satisfait ek ene explikation mo alle roder moem. Mo faire mo propre reserche. Lerla
  quand mo ressi comprend li only then I decide whether it is right or wrong.

  Notice: The above comment might be approved by some or not, everyone has a freedom of speech, but what I cannot stand is someone trying to falsely accuse me of something I have not done without reason. If you have to say something to contradict what I said. Bring proof, facts, figures and know how to stand by your point instead of making baseless comments on someone.
  I never force anyone to think like me or see things like I do. I simply share not only my views but what I have learned and understood. If you wish to understand what I say you are most welcome. If you do not like what I said, you can come with your own understanding and your facts and tell me where I might have wrongly understood certain things. I will be ready to listen to you. Not just come and talk crap about someone without thinking. If you say that I am wrong, tell me WHY am I wrong.

• Faisal Mooraby

  Please do not quote those who have a history of misinterpreting statistics and have been discredited by their own institutions (especially when one of their researches concluded that black women are less attractive than other women).

  Anyway, I assume that everyone discussing are all mature enough so as not to indulge in discussions such as ‘my way is better than yours’ or ‘I am more intelligent than you’. We do not live in a binary world (and certainly not in a one-digit binary world), and all thought process has a logic behind. Intelligence depends on individual circumstances and attitude (whether the person is atheist or believer). No one is an idiot here!

• Yashna

  Maybe you should look into scientific facts instead of blindly believing what you were given by your religion/society. As someone who’s taken two university level anthropology classes, I can tell you that humans are one of the few animals which have sex for reasons other than procreation,

  Human women have concealed ovulations and are receptive to sex through their whole cycle, unlike more primitive animals which only have sex when they are fertile ( commonly referred to as “being in heat”) Humans evolved to be be able to have sex outside of the fertile period and sexual intimacy releases a hormone called Oxytocin in their bodies,
  Oxytocin is also called the “love hormone”, you should look it up if you don’t believe it. Quoting directly from a scientific paper on wikipedia: “Oxytocin evokes feelings of contentment, reductions in anxiety, and feelings of calmness and security around the mate “.
  Sex, unlike alcohol, has been shown to have positive benefits for humans; reduced stress levels, immunity boosting, reduced blood pressure and for males, reduced risk of prostate cancer. And studies have shown that couples who have sex regularly have a happier marriage.
  As for the natural contraception method you are advocating, you should know that it has the highest rate of failure of any other method, and that it only be used by women with a regular 28 day menstrual cycle. Many women I knew had extremely irregular cycles and would not be able to use it without a high failure risk.

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  Can you relate what I said at the end of my comment about the soul, with the points 1-7 that I have mentioned? Whatever I said from point 1-7 is not merely based on belief.

  Secondly, you just said, one should not “preach” others when, why and how to have sex.

  Mo pose toi ene question: demain to garçon oubien to ti frère vine dire toi ki li ena exams dans 1 mois et li pas envie fail. Ki to pou dire li toi? Reviser et empranne bien, oubien to pou dire li pas casse tête, zour l’examen to copier lor papier to amener???

  Another example, l’hiver p rentrer la, risque maladie p augmenter. Normalement dans ça cas la ene dimoune ki li faire? Li atanne ki li fini malade lerla li prend medecine oubien avant ki malade même li fini prend so précaution mette so tricot tousala pou ki li pas malade même? Will you call the advice you give to your friends to protect themselves so that they don’t get ill as preaching?

  What I mean to say is that it’s better to prevent for a situation to occur and be more careful rather than let it happen and then you go and look for the cure, in this case you do not take your precautions and then when the woman gets pregnant she has to go for an abortion. En terme pratique, li pas ti vaux mieux li ti prend so précaution depi avant même dans place li bizin alle fr ene abortion? Et qui guarantie ene docteur donner ki pas pou ena dutout risque si ene madame faire sa opération la? Aller ene madame faire abortion ene fois, what happens if she does it twice, thrice or more times?

  Just tell me where have you seen that I am forcing things on others. Through my comments I gave suggestions. you take it or leave it that’s up to you. I won’t say that my suggestions are perfect, if you have better suggestions you can put them forward.

  And what I said at the end is something I just shared from what I learned from a sacred book. Not to impose anything on anyone. The Bhagavad Gita contains many explanations about the duties of a human being. You tagged that book as a fairy tale. On what basis did you tell me that it’s all a fairy tale? Have you ever read it first? How can you criticize something you have not even read? Ene dimoune avant li même faire ene commentaire lor ene film oubien n’importe ki livre li bizin lire li. Then how can you criticize a book wihtout even knowing abt it? Alle lire avant lerla to vine causer. Et si to pena letemps lire li, donc pas alle gaspille to l’energie critique li.

• Steven

  I’m sorry Yashna.. but you don’t owe that dude any explanation. Nobody does. I know you’re just giving sharing your knowledge here… but the way the guy’s preaching people when to have and not to have sex.. that’s simply crazy

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  Ok in the first place you talk about the freedom of everyone. Then you say the woman has the only right to decide whether she wants to abort her child or not. But don’t you think that the child being born is a human too? What about his freedom? In this case your meaning of freedom is quite questionable.

  Now a second thing, a couple get married, of course today you get married only if you love someone, You know what is the meaning of marriage? It’s a commitment, a promise that is made between two person to always remain faithful to each other and support each other. Well I am talking about a husband who dearly loves his wife, and he has dreams of having a kid. The wife agrees, then the child is conceived. However after some time, certain ambitions arise in the wife’s heart which pushes her to abort her child. But the husband has dreams of the child. Maybe the wife wishes to leave the husband for another man. She does not even care about her husband’s feelings and just abort the child. Does she have that right? Is this what you imply by freedom? That she can do anything she wishes without caring about herself? Remember one thing, a wife does not get pregnant by herself. It’s from the consent of both the husband and wife that a couple get together and they conceive a baby.

  And you saying that we should not predict things we cannot prove. In the case of people abusing the law of IVG. Have you taken a look around you? Have you taken a look at how the society is today? Corruption is everywhere nowadays. Do you still need any proof? Ki guarantie to donner ki ek sa société ki ena zordi la ek ça mindset ki dimounes p vivre la IVG will be properly monitored and made sure that it is not abused. Even if they monitor it at the begining. Till how long will they maintain it?

  Abuse of IVG is a risk that must be taken care of before implementing the law and ensure that it is well followed. Case-by-case. Mais to pas croire si ene dimoune ki ena casse et pouvoir line envie fr abortion mais so cas pas eligible pou IVG, to croire li pas pou fr so propre demars passe ça discrètement et fr abortion la même si li contre la loi? Avant to reply ça to guette autour toi bien et etudier ça société dans ki nous vivre zordi la.

• Steven

  Well-collected stats don’t generally lie. However there will always be various point of views to the stats.
  There will always be exceptions to any rule: I, for instance, personally have many religious friends who are very intelligent and who refrain from regrouping “bigots, fanatics, or atheist” (unlike what the Original Poster did)

  I respect your take of the subject. Your approach to this discussion is commendable and sane. You played the game, you did not play the man. If only the OP had been like that

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  There is one thing that I do agree with you though. The IVG even if it is legalized, those who are for it they will have their freedom to interrupt their pregnancy, while those who are against it will have their own freedom not to go for any abortion. Here you have the freedom of choice and no matter what the government law allows, people still have their rights to follow their own disciplines and abide by their own beliefs. This will be fine as long as no law forces someone to go against the law of nature.

• Steven

  No way, I just can’t believe that you also do gay bashing…

• Steven

  The whole story is about just that… it’s about giving the choice/freedom to the women/girls to do or not to do IVG… We cannot decide for them. Give them that choice!

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  Well I won’t disagree to what you have said cause you do have a nice explanation about the desires of a human and therefore why they should have sex. Which is indeed a valid reason to have sex. When i talk about sex I mean having sexual intercourse.

  Well just confirm with me whether whatever u said is it necessary to involve sexual intercourse or they can also involve other ways of love making?

  And whatever you have just said above is already described in the Kama Sutra script in the form of desires and as well includes the discipline of love making.

  Now coming to the natural contraception. Can you tell me what are the reasons for women to have irregular periods?
  Well what I read from a website are the following:Pregnancy: If you are pregnant, your body will begin producing different levels of hormones. This will cause numerous pregnancy symptoms, including an end to your period.Stress: Stress is a common cause of irregular periods. If you are fatigued, worried, or anxious this can cause your hormones to become unbalanced.Diet: A poor diet or extreme weight loss or gain can also affect your hormones. Women with anorexia or bulimia often have no period or irregular periods.Exercise: Intense exercise can wreak havoc on your body, often causing irregular periods.Menarche: the cycles after a girl’s first period may be irregular for some time. It can take up to 3 years to get regular periods.Menopause: Menopause causes changes in your hormone levels, and is often signaled by irregular periods.Hormonal Birth Control: Birth control pills and irregular periods sometimes go hand in hand. It can take a while for your body to adjust to the new levels of hormones delivered by hormonal birth control.
  For the pregnancy, menopause and Menarche, it is something natural. But what about the other factors? Stress? And as you know there are many causes of stress. You can list them, taking pills etc. anything that goes against nature causes the irregular menses.
  You know Yoga is beneficial for health? And today it has also been proved scientifically. It helps you fight stress.
  Having a well disciplined diet. Do you know that all these have already been mentioned in the books much earlier? The moment the modern scientists discovered it, all these were already mentioned in those religious books that I have read and not believed blindly as u said, but I do try to understand the reason behind. Even if i do not get my answers right away, I get them with time, through experience.
  Aster penser si madame la ti pou tini so dicipline couma ine mentionné wouldn’t the probability of having irregular menses decrease? Therefore being able to predict her safe period appropriately. Et kifaire to penser ki ça natural contraception method la li fail zordi? Acause zot pencore vraiment comprend zot propre cycle de la nature. Don’t you think it is very possible for science to help determine whether the woman is in her safe period or not? Si bannes scientists pas encore conne prove li pas veut dire ki li pas possible. This simply means that the scientists need to learn even more to be able to understand this cycle.
  And whatever you said about the desires is human nature and sex is meant for pleasure etc… does this still justify the ending of the life of an unborn child?

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  I guess to ine lire partie embas la et tone bliyer ki mne ecrire au commencement.
  I have already said it’s a joke si to pas comprend… And jokes are never meant to be taken seriously.

• selven

  who the heck are we to decide on someone [born or
  unborn]‘s life.. specially if it is human… system that supposedly mentioned the value of human life, now suddenly decides that “in some
  cases its not valued”? … Animal Farm v2.0?

  A Life must not pay for the system’s INCAPACITY to prevent rape or cure health issues.

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  To pou gagne beaucoup bannes readers ki pas pou content toi la
  But I still give you a thumb’s up !!

  And one point to note: There is no mention of religion in the statement of Selven. Donc personne pas capave dire ki p involve religion ladans xD

• Kit

  I agree. Seriously, it’s free people, just get it from our (crappy) Supreme Court website or google it.

  Unless Pramod hasn’t gotten the gist of the law, abortion IS ILLEGAL EXCEPT in certain circumstances ie in cases of endanger, the neccessity rule bladibla. I hope he understands that the bill in no way whatsoever makes abortion legal – pas tout tifi/fam ki irresponsable re: contraception/drunken nights and whatever you’re going on about ki pu capave al faire avorter. It’s a rule to be interpreted a contrario. Maybe you should’ve read it first.

• Kit

  ..give them the choice first by voting on a referendum I say! What’s the point of “giving women the choice to abort” when they don’t even have the right and choice to vote for or against the promulgation of the bill!!

• Kit

  the specific cases where abortion is permitted don’t include rape/incest as someone said earlier…but for arguments’ sake do you guys think that it should be included?

• Yashna

  You seem to be contradicting yourself, at some point you claim that sex is only for procreation and then you say that pleasure is a valid reason to have sex, which is what I’ve been telling you. Abstinence does not work, not for teenagers or for adults. The most reliable method is condoms, something most people who are also against abortion are also against, which is the point Akash was making. These people don’t have a problem with abortion, they have a problem with people having sex.
  And if you think that avoiding stress and avoiding medicine is something women can do on a regular basis, you must think that they live in cotton boxes. There are also women who don’t ovulate each month, their bodies don’t regulate it properly, in which case it wouldn’t be possible for them to know when they are ovulating. I had friends who had continuous periods for a month and had to use birth control pills to regulate it. And even with a regular period, there still is a 30-5% risk of failure depending on the length of their cycle.
  A fetus isn’t a child until it has a developed brain. Before 3 months, it doesn’t even have the necessary neurons to feel pain. A woman has the right to decide if she wants to allow it to grow inside her or to abort it, it’s her body that will be affected by the pregnancy, her body that will feel pain during labor. She alone has the right to decide.

• Kit

  IVG won’t be legalized for crying out loud, READ THE BILL!! It’s illegal EXCEPT in certain circumstances. To compren kieter 1 interpretation a contrario? IVG pas legal SAUF dans certain cas. Pane dir okene place IVG la ine vine legal. Si to pa rempli critere ki ena dan bane exception la, to pa pu capave faire avorter. Mo completement d’accord are toi ena certain fam ek tifi et zot partenaire ki irresponsable, ki pa servi protection, etc mais zot pa pu eligible pu al faire avorter donc tou ca bane cas “oops ine faire galipette, b en fin de compte mo penvi baba la” = no IVG allowed.

• Kit

  The case you just mentioned here will not fall under the exceptions. She won’t be eligible to have an abortion so your tirade ends here, doesn’t it? Your last paragraph is true but that’s why the bill should prone harsh sanctions against medical practitioners.

  If you want another real-life situation, do you think every injunction (always decided on a case-by-case basis) that’s granted by the courts gets followed? As much as the judiciary aims to do follow-ups, it’s not always practically possible to do so. Some injunctions get breached but not all breaches are sanctioned because a) it’s not reported and/or b) nobody knows there’s been a breach. I suppose there shall always be a percentage of what you call discreet abortions that will fall under the radar. As much as the Law may be pure, remember the enforcers are human – and therefore flawed too.

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  I never said only for procreation, I said MAINLY for procreation… lire bien And by sex i more precisely mean sexual intercourse.

  Si to etudier la nature ene humain, pas nek so le corps mais aussi so psychologie, li normale ki bizin ena ene phase that a person first understand sex and practice the sexual intercourse before she decides to have a child. And as I have said there is also a discipline in that, else how can the woman, the first time she has her sex and then she immediately gets pregnant? And in today’s world, overall, there are two different factors that pushes a person to have sex. One is out of lust, and the other one is out of pure love. In lust, what matters is that you eventually attain orgasm, the feeling that you get is the same as a drug addict takes his dose and he feels heavenly. The emotional factor is lost in that. Secondly out of love, the aim here is not to attain orgasm in the first place. and the love making process has been described in Kama Sutra, the the woman feels loved, and when she feels loved, she becomes more comfortable with her partner and only then you will see her being completely receptive to have a penetration. Mo croire toi si to accepter ki ene sel coute pas supposer ena penetration. Bon mo pas pou alle dans details in that to alle lire toem cause mo pas envie to zis ecoute seki mo dire. Well you say abstinence does not work… well that is another thing. In fact I was waiting for such a comment and I can also explain that from the little that I learned and understood. I will share it with you if you would like to know when I return from work tonight.
  In the mean time, let me reply to ur last paragraph. At what time does the brain start to develop physically? Can you tell me that? Mo d’accord avec toi que c’est la cervelle ene dimoune ki permette li senti la douleur. The first neuron develops within 1-4 weeks as described in the link:
  http://www.pregnancy.org/fetaldevelopment

  Neural tube forms at 1-4 weeks of your pregnancy – It will develop into the nervous system (Brain, spinal cord, hair, and skin). Already your baby has the foundation for thought, senses, feeling, and more!

  Well I won’ t discuss much about this cause mo pas trop conner en détails. Eski within 1-4 weeks ene maman fini conner ki li pregnant?
  One thing now, for me people using condoms while having sex… All this is ok, pou moi being pratical zamais mo pou dire personally that you should not use condoms if you do not want to get pregnant and you still want to enjoy sex. I never forbid that, taking into account how the human are living today.
  And you said the woman only has the right to decide whether to abort her child or not. Simply because she is carrying the child in the first place does not mean that she owns the child, pas bliyer, without a male sperm, the mother will never able to conceive, and the sperm cell comes from the father. Li pas vaut mieux ki li fini prend so precaution en avance au lieux ki li alle pousse li faire avortement? Ene madame premierement si li pas envie zenfant li pou fini dire so missier ki li pas envie zenfant and taking that into account in the first place they will be more careful and they will prefer to enjoy sex in other ways instead of having an intercourse. Pas bliyer ene zafr, si ene missier vraiment respecter le choix so madame, zamais li pou force li dans intercourse. There are also other ways like oral. Well many people believe that it is gross. But there are a few poses in the Kama Sutra you can check it out if you wish.
  Bon ena encore zafrs pou mo dire mais mo continier tantot now. Have a nice day ahead.

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  Exactly,
  That’s why for me, legalization is not really a solution. In fact, it all comes from within our own self, the decisions we take all impacts the society as a whole.

  Well the case that I mentioned it was only to reply to the comment above saying that it’s the woman who will have the right to decide no matter what her husband thinks about it. It’s something more about the emotional aspect of a human being.

  You do agree to me that the human race today is not perfect. But eski zot bizin continier resse flawed? Oubien eski they should learn and strive to make themselves a better human being?

  Even if the society is not perfect, what’s important is that you strive towards perfection.

  The Law of nature is the only perfect law and not what other human being have made up.

  I do agree the law will define the different criteria where abortion will be allowed. Mais eski ça li pou empêche sa société corrompue ki nous p vivre la suivre la la loi la à la lettre? No matter how much bills are passed, there will always be a loophole somewhere.

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  Ben c’est ça. Au faite nous en tant que ene humain, c’est pas la loi ki ene gouvernement ki p metter ki controle nous la vie. The human race in itself have its own principles and discipline and we should always learn to abide by that discipline. This is what makes us a better human being. Respecter notre prochain, respecter la nature et même le respect pour ceux qui vont venir dans ce monde.

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  Hey one more thing before I go, you said that it is impossible for a woman to know when she is in her safe period. Bon premierement capave to croire oubien non, pas dire ki li impossible pou comprend to propre le corps. Since you all believe in science and even I do, can you tell me today that mankind has been able to learn all the secrets of nature or are there still more things that need to be discovered? In the same case. Never say that is is impossible to learn more, right now a human does not know about it, this does not mean that it is not possible. The current civilization, the modern society does lack the knowledge. When we do not know something or cannot explain something, it does not mean that it does not exist or it makes no sense. It simply means that we lack the knowledge to understand it.

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  Look who is preaching???

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  Mone rate ene point la: How can you say that it cannot be proved scientifically? Have you heard about the subconscious mind? The names can be different, the meaning is the same. How can you explain the feeling you have of your existence, and what happens to that feeling after you die? Have the modern scientists been able to explain what happens to that feeling after the death?

  If the modern scientists have not been able to explain it does not mean that it does not exist. It simply mean that they have more to learn about Science and understand it. Mankind came to know about the existence of electricity much after. Does this mean that it did not exist before that?
  Demain ene kikene ine maltraite toi, et quand to p alle la cour to p dire ki dimoune la ine maltraite toi and you have no proof for it. Does it mean that you are lying?

  Learn to respect the belief of others, it can be true it can be wrong, but we will all know and understand it through the course of time.

  And one more thing, we are arguing about who’s belief is right and whose belief is wrong. You believe it or not, maybe we will learn the ultimate truth when we die, Till then let’s wait while we continue to serve mankind.

• Yashna

  I suggest you read actual research instead of looking up facts on websites that may be biased at 4 weeks, the fetus has the foundations for a human brain, not an actual one. Again quoting ”
  In March 2010, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists submitted a report, Fetal Awareness – Review of Research and Recommendations for Practice, concluding that “Current research shows that the sensory structures are not developed or specialized enough to respond to pain in a fetus of less than 24 weeks”, pg. 2 “,

  Also, why are you deciding why people should have sex? People have sex, vaginal, oral or anal, for a variety of reasons but primarily because they want to and derive pleasure out of it. And that’s perfectly okay. You have no right to tell people whether they should have sex or not, which position they should use or if they should do it out of love or lust, I don’t care what your opinion or your experience is, as long as you label them as such and not as fact.
  Carrying a fetus for 9 months and enduring labor for several hours is not the same as contributing a sperm. A woman has the sole right to decide because she owns her body and has the right to choose whether she wants to share it with a fetus who’s going to use her her energy and nutrient supplies.

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  Pramode, Can you please stop polluting my post/comment, please?

  I repeat have my opinion on the matter (in fact, if I were female, I’d be against. But since I’m not… does NOT mean I’m for: I’m neutral to the “debate”, because there should not be any) and I don’t care about anyone else’s, but especially yours: always the same stale story, rehashed and regurgitated ad nauseam like a sterile vomit. Stop, please.

  And please again, stop preaching to the free-of-mind. I’m not telling you, nor anyone, to “DO THIS” and “NOT DO THAT”, but please give them others the freedom of thinking for themselves, they have their own way of thinking, and probably much richer than your supreme know-it-all being, repeating endlessly the same moralistic, paternalising stale story.

  And I ardently wish you the fun of unwanted pregnancies. Really, from the bottom of my heart. Then you’ll know the anguish of being trapped in your preconceived and categorical certitudes, and I’ll be the pointed-tail side of your conscience laughing at you dealing with it.

  He who lives by the sword, will die by the sword…

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  ” we are arguing about who’s belief is right and whose belief is wrong.”

  NO, I excuse you: only YOU are arguing. Only YOU are asserting your beliefs onto others.

  I stated my opinion, full stop.

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  “Et si to pena letemps lire li, donc pas alle gaspille to l’energie critique li.”

  So read it all, uh?
  So does that make you superior to them?

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  I propose to NOT reply to Pramode at all. He’s simply way too intelligent and superior in ALL domains for us… Really, from the number of point-wise rebuttals he’s made so far, he doubtlessly and effortlessly wins the yashvinblogs uber-troll award of the decade…

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  “Misunderstanding is not caused by religion, mais human beings ki ine mal interpret c’est quoi la religion.”

  Parski, TOI to bien interprett-li toi, to tousell konn-tou, non? Korek bé, pran gagné bé!

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  I propose to NOT reply to Pramode at all. He’s simply way too intelligent and superior in ALL domains for us… Really, from the number of point-wise rebuttals he’s made so far, he doubtlessly and effortlessly wins the yashvinblogs uber-troll award of the decade…

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  “Misunderstanding is not caused by religion, mais human beings ki ine mal interpret c’est quoi la religion.”

  Parski, TOI to bien interprett-li toi, to tousell konn-tou, non? Korek bé, pran gagné bé!

• Shad

  Agreed with Selven,We do not have the right to decide on someone’s life.We won’t be happy to be the foetus who gonna be aborted.Everyone has the right to breath,either he is a child without a father or a handicapped.

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  Point No. 4 is so well written, Sir.
  I hope that all people read it well, aloud, so that they do not get tempted to say that abortion is not a contaceptive. It is a last-resort measure for averting more damage ahead.

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  “I guess the main purpose of sex is procreation and not for pleasure…”
  Sorry to all but you, but you failed at guessing.You’ll cross the bridge when you come to the bridge, and that marriage bridge will sure be a real life experience for you, dude. Best of luck.

  “secondly make use of protection which still carries a risk.”
  So what? Anyway, thank you for confirming all my points…

  “what we call the safe-period… Simply wait for that period of time, but we must be sure about it… ”
  You are so ignorant about the menstrual cycle: you are mistaking it for the atomic clock, dear fellow human being. Wish you lotsa fun with your spouse, if one day…

  “about the abstinence… well our desires, we are the one who control it. ”
  There’s this very efficient way of controlling your impulses. From what I’ve seen as criminal cases, those who say they can control it are merely lying to themselves.

  ” Just for the sake of boosting the economy of the country. Ok
  gouvernement ine gagne beaucoup casse… Mais eski kikene ine at least
  remarque consequence ça bannes la loi la?”
  “Guette autour toem to dire. Really nice laws they are indeed…”
  Ou ena enn problem ar ou gouverman-la, alle guétt ou gouvernman mo bouzwaa…! Si pa kontan, all férr paradd tam-tam pou férr sanz la-lwa la, pareiy couma ti férr Tabor fek-la…

  “Aller zot dans ene fête, et zot conner ki zot ena pou conduire ene long
  la route et retourne home… et tellement ena tout qualité la boisson
  dans fête la..”
  Hein, pa blié rapél ki fodé ou gouvernman interdi bann fétt oussi, who knows… Ek bann loto ki péna airbag pou piéton oussi, parski loto oussi touiy dimounn. Ek oussi kouto la-kizinn, parksi… Non, en fétt, ena enn “universal truth” ki zamé piblié par la-poliss: si enn dimounn mor par violanss, sé á environ 80% ki sé pa enn étranzé ki péna nargnié-na-foutt ar ou ki pou réglé ou kontt, sé swa enn fami, enn kamarad (kamaron?), enn ki dan ou lantouraz, bréf, enn pross ki pou tir ou manzé.

  “There are statistics today how many people die of a damaged liver due to smoking,”
  Seems legit!

  “Thus running away from their responsibilities.”
  Like those who impose their beliefs onto others.

  “Instead of just criticizing someone with such a belief, in the first
  place with all respect you must ask why is he saying such a thing, if he
  cannot explain ask him where has he seen that… then we go and do our
  own research and understand it. C vrai façon dimoune dire zordi, ki ça
  ine resse coumsa depi longtemps acause ça li pas bizin changer is not a
  valid reason. we have to go towards that. Only then you can be critical
  about it.”
  No. I respect a rational position, not irrational myths based on fairy-tales that these supposedly sacred books tell us.

  Enough said.

  Just like I’m against smoking, drinking and gambling, I’d be against abortion if I were a female, but since I’m male, I’m striclty neutral to it – it’s up to the woman to choose, in her own free will. But I understand that I cannot decide for anyone how frequently and how much one should smoke / drink / gamble: the “libre arbitre” should apply and all of us should be free to choose. It’s not because it’s permitted that I should feel compelled to indulge in it.

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  All 4 points perfectly to the… point!
  And some find it perfectly right to tear off artistic works at MGI, and never got into any trouble.

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  “No one is an idiot here!”

  I, for one, am an idiot. Si ou pa dakor, mo dakor ki ou pa dakor.

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  “No one is an idiot here!”

  I, for one, am an idiot. Si ou pa dakor, mo dakor ki ou pa dakor.

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  “No one is an idiot here!”

  I, for one, am an idiot. Si ou pa dakor, mo dakor ki ou pa dakor.

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  Do not worry about my marriage, I have my own faith that will help me perform my duties as a husband. I have yet to learn to understand her even more after marriage so that I make sure I am able to fulfil her wish and keep her happy. I am aware of this.

  Concerning the safe period, it does carries risk simply because today it has become difficult to determine and recognize the exact time and phase a women is in her safe period. But I don’t think it is impossible. I am not imposing this on anyone. I am not saying that we should just blindly calculate and wait for that. I simply suggested it needs a bit of more research. It is just a suggestion and I don’t know whether you will make me disagree with me. And as far as my spouse is concerned, it is obvious I will have to use protection so that she feels secure.

  When I meant abstinence I meant we can refrain from sexual intercourse, and again I am not imposing this on anyone. However today the desire of human have grown so strong that it’s really tough to do so. The moment we are able control our mind and thoughts we will also be able to control our desires. That’s why using a condom is the best alternative here.
  I just wish to know and understand something, nothing religious just something to think about. Imagine that we would not have been exposed to pornography at a very young age… we would still have that innocent mind where we only know things about the theory at the maximum but we do not see it happen in front of us, only when we grow older and we get married we learn to understand the opposite sex. The point here is, well I am not saying it is a fact, I might be wrong I do not know but I believe that when anything related does not even come into your mind, even if you get an erection that moment you won’t even care about it for a man. The though won’t even come that you need a woman to satisfy any desire that moment.
  Today at a young age many kids are exposed to pornography, seeing it, their mind does not really understand what does it mean, won’t they be curious to try it? Tellement ça envie essayer la fort, given the way they have seen in in porn movies they will try out all this even without understanding what it is all about. And they will only discover that pleasure aspect without even thinking what might be the consequences. Therefore they become used to it. Most of them if they are not well guided, when they get married, some might have the tendency to compare their partner with the one they have seen in movies. They might even force their wives in an act they are not comfortable with.

  As far as government is concerned I don’t wish to argue about that.

  The case of that party with alcohol maybe u did not understand what i actually meant. I simply meant that if we are consious that we will be driving a long way back home after the party we will make sure we do not drink so much that we might have difficulty to drive. My point is that it’s not a myth when it is said “Prevention is better than cure”. I used this case just to illustrate an example. That’s all.

  Well I will make sure I never run away from my responsibilities. to reply to your last paragraph in one of your comments about unwanted pregnancy. If ever my wife gets pregnant unexpectedly, do not worry, I am ready to take the responsibility as a father of my child, I will never consider it unwanted. and I will never go for abortion, and sorry, for me no child must be tagged unwanted. I will respect it as a gift of creation. And please note that this is only my choice and I am not saying anyone to think the way I do.

  Ok what you call as myth, have you read and ever understood the Ramayan, or the Gita? Well, I have gone through the script of Ramayana. And I did get to learn a lot of things which indeed reflects life as it is. I am not telling you that you should go and read this, but please just understand that this is not simply a fairy tale. It’s not fair when you criticize something without knowing it. Every event in that text teaches us a lot of things about a human life, it teaches us to always abide by our promise, faithfulness, duties, justice and other beautiful things. Well did anything that I said is wrong?

  Well i won’t bother you anymore with my beliefs as you say it. And in all my comments I have never meant to impose anything on anyone. I am sorry that I polluted you post. This is my last comment to you.

  Cheers.

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  Well I just watched that video where Psychologist Dr Stuart Derbyshire tries to explain his research of twenty four weeks foetal pain and
  obstetrician and gynaecologist Professor Stuart Campbell debate on this.
  Here is the full link between a debate on the validity of this research on BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10403496
  This time it’s not a text from wikipedia, the person themselves are there.
  Well Dr Derbishire starts with the following phrase: “There are a number of structure that we ‘think’ are necessary for the experience of pain.” note this down: “We think” which means they have not proved it yet, it is still a theory.

  Further when Professor Campbell states that the evidence shows that a foetus is responsive to touch by pricking the foetus of 8 weeks with a pin. Even if Dr Derbishire agrees to Professor Campbell he follows with: “we don’t believe that it involves the brain at all” Note this: “We don’t believe” Not believing is also a belief.

  When you say, “mo pas croire ene zafr coumsa” does this mean “mo sire li pas coumsa?” Therefore there will be more future researches that will maybe prove to be more precise than the current one. This means that the research is still in progress. We have not yet till the end of it. It does not end here yet!

  Well I won’t discuss further about it. Cause it will only complicate things and I don’t want that.

  And I would like to repeat myself again, I have never meant to decide for anyone or forced anyone to have sex or not. I don’t understand why u all keep saying that i am imposing my beliefs on everyone, Well I have written so much, I won’t be able to look for it. But I have no intention to force anyone to believe what I say. All my comments is my own point of view. Whether anyone likes it or not that is their own problem. If you feel I am wrong and you can tell me where, just reply back the comment with your own understanding and justification that I will totally respect even if I agree with it or not and not unnecessarily tagging me as a preacher which I am not.

  Well you said the women has the sole right to decide whether she wants to share it with a foetus or not. For you it is just a foetus, but this foetus is a future human being. And not a thing. Well that is your opinion I won’t tell you to consider the foetus as a human. Even if the father wishes for a child and the woman has already accepted it but later decides to abort it because of some fear or other reason this means given that it is her body, she owns the foetus, without caring about what her husband thinks it’s justified for you. Isn’t it?

  Well in that case tomorrow if u get married and at one point of time maybe u get pregnant are u are in a phase that stops you from having sex for a long period of time. According to your logic it’s totally justifiable for your husband, given that he has his sexual desires, he has to protect his own body from stress, he can go and sexually satisfy himself with other women. Given that it is his own body. Will this be fine for you?

  Well you don’t need to reply me this. If you are fine with this it’s ok. If this made you angry, I did not mean to do so. Sorry about that, but i just hope you try to understand what I meant in the end. I wish you have a nice and faithful husband.

  And one thing I would like to say about Women, They are the most wonderful creation on earth. She has the ability to carry a life in her womb for nine months and has got the ability to bear so much pain to bring that life on earth, that she deserves to be highly respected by our society according to my beliefs, my sacred texts that you have all tagged as fairy tales and myths.

  Well I again wish to clarify that i am not telling you that you should follow my belief. This is just what I have read and understood. Do not take it personally.

• http://pramoduniverse.com/ Pramod

  Well friends,

  I have noticed that my comments tend to create a lot of displeasure among many readers.

  I don’t know how but my comments are being misunderstood by many for imposing on everyone.

  Therefore I prefer to stop arguing on this. Else this might get even more complicated.

  I would just like to clarify that I have never meant to impose anything on anyone. I have only shared what I have understood and what I think about it.

  And coming back to the topic of IVG in certain cases. To summarise my opinion, Well personally I am really not in favor of it. Cause I believe that every life has its right to live and I have no right to interfere in that. I cannot just punish an unborn life for the mistake of another person.

  For example, even if a child is a result of rape or he is born handicapped. Why does he deserve to be hated or rejected by the society? It is all in the way we think.

  Well the only case that is justified is that when the mother’s life is in danger. Her life becomes a priority because she is the one carrying the child, if the mother herself is not healthy then how will the baby be healthy inside the womb? In that case aborting the child is justified. At least one life will be saved and hopefully the mother can also give birth to another baby in good health.

  Anyway we want it or not, I guess IVG in certain cases will be legalized eventually. Let us see what it brings to the society. As it is, we cannot claim whether an action is right or wrong until we see or experience the consequences of that action.

  Well it was a very enriching experience and it was nice to know all your views as well. I have also learnt and realised a few things, thanks to you people. Even those who have strongly not agreed to my views.

  I am really sorry if I have hurt anyone’s feelings through my comments or if anyone has felt I am imposing my beliefs on them. With all due respect I have really no such intention. I have only tried to express my views and ideas.

  I hereby end my comments on this post.

  Best of luck to you all!

• Kit

  You mean miss not sir :p thanks

• Kit

  You probably mean miss not sir =p Why thank you

• Kit

  THANK YOU!

  “Have I written anywhere in my comments that everyone should so this or they should do that? Or they should not be doing this?”

  Unless I’m frickin’ blind, your self-righteous tone and non-constructive criticism and tirades have been what then?

  “And I have proposed alternatives or solutions which can be better according to me, mo pas ine impose nanrien lor
  personne. I just shared whatever I know and understand.”

  Which clearly in certain circumstances…is nothing.

  1. You’re not a woman, don’t come preaching about the menstrual cycle or the safe method.

  2. WHO ie World Health Organisation in case you don’t know what it means, says that 20-22 weeks is still alright for abortion because the THING is still a FOETUS not a BABY, which is why abortion is accepted in countries where it’s legalised (whether it’s applied in specific cases or not). It’s not fully developed. They’re not monkeys in the WHO, I am more inclined to believe them rather than your just-googled links as an attempt to substantiate your arguments. The WHO substantiate their statistics, reports and arguments better, you don’t. Unless you are a doctor too?

• Kit

  So you read about menstruation on google. Congrats, that makes you an expert. More so than Yasha who’s got a cervix, a vagina, fallopian tubes, ovaries and a cervix. Have I forgotten an anatomical part from the list? Oops sorry, as a woman I should’ve known better. Do enlighten me, oh so smart Pramod.

  To p croire fam kieter ca? Robot? Tou fam regler coma l’horloge ca? Alors tou fam ki pena cycle 28 jours fix zot ena 1ti prob dan diet, stress etc? B ki to ler mo dire toi, gagne beaucoup cash comsa to madame pena pu travay, ena 50 employees lakaz pu cuit, nettoyer, faire jardinage, tou louvrage ki ena pu faire. Lerla capave so cycle pu fix 28 jours apres to va kav pratik safe method ek controler kan to gagne zenfan ou pas. Bon courage et bonne chance.

  1 dernier kestion: si suiv to logic bzin faire ca ca ca pu ena cycle fix, si tou zafer capav controler, b bane fam ki ena endometriose ki to pu dir? Si to pa coner kieter b laisse google enlighten toi. Pena okene cause ki bane scientific ine accepter a ce jour pu endometriose. Coment to pu explik ca? Diable? Pauvre fam, she just got the losing end of the womb lining lottery so deal with it?

• Kit

  Your argument MAY tenir la route for Hindus, I wouldn’t know. There are no deadly sins in Buddhism. I challenge you to use Buddhist precepts and/or texts to substantiate your argument as above. If you think that laws are based on religion then clearly you are wrong.

• Kit

  I’ll ask you a question then. Presuming that your perfect wife having a perfect fixed 28 day cycle and in your perfect life you perfectly time your safe method and get preggers at the perfect time just as you decided, (of course my argument will be full of fallacy, I’m no doctor but just for the sake of argument) the FOETUS under 3 months (I haven’t said baby, it doesn’t have fully formed organs by then) is a danger to your wife’s health and/or has been diagnosed with an uncurable disease, you have to choose between either the baby lives or your wife…the question is: do you

  1. both choose to abort the foetus and try for another baby when the time is right after you’ve recovered from the loss

  or

  2. keep the baby, potentially with your wife dying and a) your child eventually dies because of the uncurable disease or b) your child dies during birth?

  You who seem to love having control over everything including a woman’s menstrual cycle, you have only these two choices. Which one do you choose? Abort and try again or risk playing the russian roulette with your wife and your child’s lives?

• Kit

  Ben devient politicien et va precher tout ca. Life doesn’t work this way.

  Mo donne toi 1 lexemple. Al dire ca fam kine faire tou ceki li capave de bien dan so la vie, ine marier, ine eleve so piti bien coma bizin, montrer zenfan la bon principe, faire li al lekol, zordi zenfan la ine ariver dan so la vie mais pendant so mariage kine dure 30ans, so mari contigne batte li, viole li, boire, zourer, gamble. Jamais line dir nanier.

  Only the law of nature is the perfect law? Manmade law says she can say stop to this horror on a daily basis and divorce her husband. Vine dir moi ki ca la loi de la nature ki permette li dir so mari stop, aret bat moi, aret soumet moi a to bane betise, mo p vire mo ledos r toi zordi, pas approche moi 50m. I challenge you.

  And btw if you bothered to read my post above, natural law lacks legitimacy. Posited law doesn’t and it’s been so since the 15th century or so, 20th century legal positivism as we know it today dates from the definitions given in the late 19th century. Not everyone has the same reasoning per se. Those with social disorders can’t always distinguish right from wrong, or what’s socially acceptable from what’s not. Eg: their natural law in their head says torturing animals is fine. La ki to pu dir?

• JP Fortuno

  thumbs up for no.4. especially considering condoms are quite cheap

• Steven

  And who are you and some others to decide what women should do with their lives and body ? … Slavery v2.0?

• Steven

  Well.. I think we’re being (a little) hypocrite here…
  1. The Catholic church does not concur with the use of condoms (unless that has changed now.. but religious views rareeeeeeeeeeeeeely changes.. that the whole problem anyway). I understand that this point is irrelevant for non-Catholics.
  2. There will always be “Accidents du preservatif”.
  3. So many women are already taking “Pilules du lendemain” everyday in MU. This is some sort of abortion in my books… So Abortion is already some sort of contraceptive measure..

  I’m totally OK if we counsel people not to use abortion as a contraceptive measure… but it’s not our place to judge (throw a stone on) a woman if she finally decides to terminate her pregnancy..

• Steven

  Are you a Vulcan? Cause you’re talking about controlling mind, thoughts, desires and impulses?

• Steven

  “We won’t be happy to be the foetus who gonna be aborted”

  Your point is irrelevant…

  You would not even know if you were aborted. So much about being happy or unhappy.

  Plus your mum (or mine) owns her own body

• Steven

  Dude, when you talk in a public forum you have to be very explicit. You say a person is your “brother” or “sister” and then later claim, in another post, that this person is your friend and that you refer to all your friends as “brother” and “sister”. Seriously, this is not (usually) the way people talk in public forums.. People reading the post do not know and do not care about your personal (but yet hidden) life and relationship.
  It’s like I call someone ‘n*gger’ on a public forum …. and make everyone angry… to then later say in another post.. “how dare you people, oh by the way.. i’m black too’..

• Steven

  It has always been the problem with rel1g1ous people. They think the burden of proof lies on the shoulders of the disbelievers.. It has to be the other way round.. I cannot say something exist and then challenge you to prove me that it does not exist. It’s you who have to prove your claims in the first place.

  Have you heard of the “Great Spaghetti Monster”?

  And something being mentioned in a 1,000,000 years old book is not a proof in any way that that something really existed or is real or is a real as its modern day description!
  I wonder for how many years Father Christmas and his elves (and the reindeers and gifts distribution through chimneys) have been mentioned in books.

• Kit

  “Well I just watched that video where Psychologist Dr Stuart Derbyshire tries to explain his research of twenty four weeks foetal pain and obstetrician and gynaecologist Professor Stuart Campbell debate on this.”

  Yes point being TWENTY FOUR weeks. The World Health Organisation accepts that a foetus becomes a baby after 20-22 weeks because it’s fully developed. Abortion usually sets the time limit at around 14-20 weeks. Unless you don’t know how to count in any situation, the foetus isn’t a baby yet so it’s not technically feeling anything. Your stubbornness just speaks for itself.

• Yashna

  I read your link and the only thing it does is restate that all research so far show that fetuses before 24 weeks cannot feel pain.
  “not believing is also a belief”, that’s a really bogus argument and I suppose not playing football is a sport too right?
  And you don’t seem to understand this point, the woman owns her body, she and only she can decide whether she wants to give birth to it or because it involves her. The father has to make sure he has the woman’s permission before letting the fetus he help conceive grow inside her.
  Marriage is a commitment between two people, if we have an arrangement that involves fidelity and he breaks it, I have the right to be angry at him, but what he did wasn’t illegal just morally wrong. And that’s the way it should be. The law shouldn’t prevent him from doing what he wants to, no matter what my opinion. He has the legal right to have an affair and I have the legal right to end the marriage if I’m unhappy with it.
  Likewise, whether I feel abortion is right or wrong shouldn’t matter, it is only the concern of the woman carrying the fetus. In the end it’s her choice.
  And I have read the sacred texts you talk about, including the disgusting parts which claim that a woman’s highest duty was to obey her husband.

• Missy

  Yes or no to abortion- I think it’s the woman who should decide- strangely the debate on the radios have mainly (actually only) men talking- and on top of that priests????!!!!! OMG! Holy smokes!do you really think it’s a priest who can decide whether a family should have another child, let alone raise it, when both mother and father are homeless, jobless and with a house already full of kids??? Priests!! for god’s sake we are not in the 16th century anymore, or are we?? I better consult my calendar.!!!

• Sagitarius

  A few days ago I made a comment on the proposed amendments to our laws to legalise [not depenalize] abortion ‘in certain specific cases’. Here now is what I what I have to say on abortion itself.

  Abortion should be depenalized, i.e. a girl or woman who has had an abortion should be considered as a patient and not as a criminal if she goes to hospital in case of complications and walk out free after treatment.

  Public hospitals should not participate in the abortion itself. Where the motive is ‘threat to the mother’s life’ decisions [in hospital] have always been taken [and can still be taken] even in the absence of a law.

  I won’t elaborate any further on abortion itself. I won’t debate on that and I won’t bother to try to thrust it down anyone’s throat. This is just a little note to avoid that anybody who has adopted the habit of diagonal reading without having really mastered it, may have misconceptions about my views.

• Sagitarius

  My comment was hidden as soon as posted due to ‘abuse report’ very funny! I’ll post two more and avoid visiting that blog again

• Sagitarius

  A few words more on the proposed amendments and the way they are been presented or debated:

  On last Friday’s debate in the National Assembly, the Minister of Health said that some trisomies, ‘bec de lievre’ absence of limbs, and other such malformations that do not preclude viable life would not be included as cases where abortion is allowed.
  Here is a quote of the relevant article of the proposed law:
  235A
  (2)The specialist referred to in subsection (1)(a) may only provide
  treatment to terminate a pregnancy where another specialist in the relevant
  field shares his opinion, formed in good faith, that –

  (c) there is a substantial risk that the continued pregnancy
  will result in a severe malformation, or severe physical or
  mental abnormality, of the foetus, as assessed by the
  appropriate specialists; or

  I can’t see how 235A(2)(c) matches what the minister said.

  The pro-abortion propaganda keeps saying ‘only in specific cases’ to reassure those who don’t like the idea of abortion becoming fully legalized with abortion available on request without questions, but on that same Friday I heard several members of the Assembly say ‘this is the first step’. So what is the next step? Deleting any idea of ‘only in specific case’ from the law?

  M.P. R.Uteem mentioned an interesting point: So, a girl is raped or is involved in an incestuous relationship and gets pregnant. That pregnancy is horrible for her. The law acknowledges that and allows her to have an abortion, but only within the first 14 weeks of pregnancy. After that she is not allowed to terminate her pregnancy. What about her feelings of horror then? Do they vanish after 14 weeks? If her feelings are not just being used as an accessory to justify this law, why the time limit?

  Some M.P.s have also been heard to say ‘I have my faith, I have my personal beliefs, but I also have my duty to my constituency, and I have to vote ‘Yes’ to this law.’
  So their religion and their personal conviction are against this law but as a duty to the electorate they feel bound to vote in favor of this law. Since when are our M.P.s so true to their electoral promises and when did they vow to their electorate to legalise abortion? I have an excellent memory and I don’t recall anybody having said a single word on that issue in the 2010 electoral campaign.

  There seems to be an urgency beyond women’s health or women’s rights to pass this law. What can be the reason for this? Let me have a guess. Could it be that in view of the failure of the ‘Medical Hub’ concept, our political leaders are working on a specialized version of it: the Abortion Hub. If that’s the idea, yes, it’s only the first step.

  On last Friday’s debate in the National Assembly, the Minister of Health said that some trisomies, ‘bec de lievre’ absence of limbs, and other such malformations that do not preclude viable life would not be included as cases where abortion is allowed.
  Here is a quote of the relevant article of the proposed law:
  235A
  (2)The specialist referred to in subsection (1)(a) may only provide
  treatment to terminate a pregnancy where another specialist in the relevant
  field shares his opinion, formed in good faith, that –

  (c) there is a substantial risk that the continued pregnancy
  will result in a severe malformation, or severe physical or
  mental abnormality, of the foetus, as assessed by the
  appropriate specialists; or

  I can’t see how 235A(2)(c) matches what the minister said.

  The pro-abortion propaganda keeps saying ‘only in specific cases’ to reassure those who don’t like the idea of abortion becoming fully legalized with abortion available on request without questions, but on that same Friday I heard several members of the Assembly say ‘this is the first step’. So what is the next step? Deleting any idea of ‘only in specific case’ from the law?

  M.P. R.Uteem mentioned an interesting point: So, a girl is raped or is involved in an incestuous relationship and gets pregnant. That pregnancy is horrible for her. The law acknowledges that and allows her to have an abortion, but only within the first 14 weeks of pregnancy. After that she is not allowed to terminate her pregnancy. What about her feelings of horror then? Do they vanish after 14 weeks? If her feelings are not just being used as an accessory to justify this law, why the time limit?

  Some M.P.s have also been heard to say ‘I have my faith, I have my personal beliefs, but I also have my duty to my constituency, and I have to vote ‘Yes’ to this law.’
  So their religion and their personal conviction are against this law but as a duty to the electorate they feel bound to vote in favor of this law. Since when are our M.P.s so true to their electoral promises and when did they vow to their electorate to legalise abortion? I have an excellent memory and I don’t recall anybody having said a single word on that issue in the 2010 electoral campaign.

  There seems to be an urgency beyond women’s health or women’s rights to pass this law. What can be the reason for this? Let me have a guess. Could it be that in view of the failure of the ‘Medical Hub’ concept, our political leaders are working on a specialized version of it: the Abortion Hub. If that’s the idea, yes, it’s only the first step.

• Sagitarius

  About those mentions of religion I made, or have been made in reply to me.

  The last paragragh of my first comment was written because of this worldwide [and Mauritian too] tactic of atheists preaching ‘modernity’ of launching a sort of preemptive attack against religion when stating their views. [four 'of' in a sentence! isn't that a lot?] It was as concise and as clear as I could and I’m at lost as to how it could have been misread or misunderstood. I won’t go through all the comments, just those which catch the eyes most and I’ll probably won’t reply to a second batch of replies as religion is not the issue here [and anyway God is getting on my nerves and if That Old Sod doesn't amend His ways, I'll convert to Atheism in the next few days]

  @ Tushal. “Religion prohibits murder, incest, stealing and a few other things,” you must have understood [Steven missed it] what adding your first remark to that meant, when you tagged a second remark [which I won't comment] to that. Is ‘education’ [which is good] good enough to replace religion in maintaining ‘our values’ [watszat?] Religion is static, is that good or bad? Education, what education? There has been, there are and there will be different ideas of what education should be.

  Right now on this planet, sometimes in the same country, the concepts of ideal education put forward can vary a lot. Those concepts can be based on the ‘acknowledgement’ of female superior intelligence, and stregth and their innate capacity to resolve every problems if stupid, awkward, depraved, beer-loving males don’t get in the way with their obsolete ideas. Or they might be based on the idea that women has no purpose, no reason to exist apart from bearing children and serving men. There are those who are ready to destroy everything old and the those who will defend at any cost those same old concepts. All those ideas ['values'?] emerge then subside continuously through the centuries. I’ll chose religion [which is not the same as God] for stability over the volatile principles of ‘education’ [although I'm totally addicted to continuous learning]

  @ Steven. Reread the quote + the remark and try to figure out what they add up to. I don’t think Tushal really meant that and I hope police will not more interesting activities [like sharing some hot tea] than watching him.
  I usually do my own thinking [despite being considered an idiot in some quarters] but I visited your links. I also checked on the studies S.Kanazawa [have a look on his c.v.] based his assertion that atheists are nore intelligent than people who follow a religion.
  Actually those studies centered on the social and sexual behaviors of young Americans and I did not find any mention of IQ.
  So for any proof of the equations, Atheist=Intelligent and Religious=Idiot, I understand I’ll have to wait a bit longer.
  Bigots, fanatics and atheists do have something in common: they ignore the fact that free will is one of the basic tenet of religion.

  P.S. I wonder if those who where so offended by my use of the words ‘bigots’ and ‘fanatics’ might find the proper word for whoever reported my comments as abusive. BTW the author of the post [Yashvin] and at least one other person brought religion [something I have been blamed for] into the discussion before my comment. A good day to you all. Discussion should proceed more smoothly among people who share the same opinion.

• http://www.yashvinblogs.com Yashvin Awootar

  Hi Sagitarius!

  Your comment was well received and just approved. Please remember that all comments go through a moderation process, the reason why submitted comments do not appear immediately.

  Thank you
  And have a nice day!
  *Y.A*

• Sagitarius

  Hi Yashvin
  I am a regular visitor to your blog since I stumbled upon it a little bit more than 2 years ago. I have no idea who [which] the 2nd best Mauritian blog is, but it certainly is far behind. That is why it was a profound deception to see my comments suddenly disappear. I must say receiving notification, this morning, that they had been published was a nicer surprise.

  The part of my comment starting “On last Friday’s debate in the National Assembly, the Minister of Health said ………. and ending “If that’s the idea, yes, it’s only the first step.” seem to have been published twice [I must have pasted it again when it was first hidden] It might be a good idea to delete the duplicate.

  The post scriptum [which I wish I had not written] contains an unnecessary ‘h’ which should compensate for the missing word in the police tea parties.

• http://www.yashvinblogs.com Yashvin Awootar

  I’m much flattered. Thanks for being regular

  I will do the necessary this evening, since I do not have access to the modification panel right now. As far as the blog is concerned, you can be sure that I don’t delete comments unless REALLY necessary : swear words, personal attacks etc. I think that I should write a post about how I moderate my comments.

  Have a nice day.

• http://www.facebook.com/marshall.a.peters Marshall Angelo Peters

  Its rather good to legalise abortions rather than take a middle ground on such issues. For such cases you are either for or against it. The government should first improve the standards on sex education to the kids in school. Well it is very important for our adolescents to know that watching porn is not sex education but entertainment there is a difference. Well as we know there is where we first curb the problem. I have live in Mauritius for a year now and its just shocking to hear in my neighborhood in the north, I have witnessed almost 4-5 cases of girls as young as 13 getting pregnant and not getting reported to the cops. It is necessary for the government and the social apparatus to understand why such issues are important. If you can tell me a girl as young as 13 can be a victim then why not the government be brought into the picture. Another issue that we have is where illicit relationships and immorality with pregnancies arising out of it and what are the remedies? Well aren’t we a socialist state set up with socialist ideologies if its of a woman’s need to get rid of a fetus and she has no monetary means of doing it . It better be taken care by the government. Well now we will have a debate about how if someone has unprotected sex and has a pregnancy why should the government bother ? Let me answer that question well how many of us know that smoking of tobacco is injurious to health? Common knowledge everyone except a child probably knows, now if you have cancer after 20 years because of your choice its your fault isn’t it? Well if the SSRN hospital doesnt assist you in curing or at least providing you with basic medication to control or eradicate cancer is it right? its not that’s what you would say. Well compare this case to a pregnant lady who doesn’t want to bear the stress or financial burden of the fetus and she makes a choice even after she made a choice to have sex in the first place which led to her pregnancy she should be helped by the government hospital indeed. Well its a case of a woman’s free will and her belief. Finally lets not bring religion into it because to the times of today believing in some folks sitting in a cave or a desert or some place else who lived in a society where women was considered a secondary human being with animals together about 2 thousand years ago cannot even contemplate in their wildest dreams can they. So please YES for woman’s rights. YES for Abortion.

• http://www.facebook.com/marshall.a.peters Marshall Angelo Peters

  Religious people believe in some fairytale written by some old cranky fools sitting inside a cave 2000 years ago on some piece of animal skin or papyrus and if they want to live by those laws you can go back in time in the early 10 th century AD. Those times were called as DARK AGES…. want to go there your choice.This is the beginning first is workers rights and not reforms then women’s rights and then Gay rights, Black civil rights will follow.. . I don’t have a problem with religion altogether but you have the freedom under constitution to practice what you believe but not at the cost of somebody’s free will.

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  “Do not worry about my marriage, I have my own faith”
  Why share with us, keep it to your own self-sufficient self. You’re too perfect for us, simple imperfect mortals, compared to your godly perfection.

  “I am aware of this. ”
  Pa dir mwaa…

  “Concerning the safe period, it does carries risk simply because today it
  has become difficult to determine and recognize the exact time and
  phase a women is in her safe period. But I don’t think it is
  impossible.”
  Well, one contradiction again. We’re not done yet!

  “And as far as my spouse is concerned, it is obvious I will have to use protection so that she feels secure.”
  Well well well… for her to feel secure. Not you? Strange for such an egoistic being like you.

  “Imagine that we would not have been exposed to pornography at a very
  young age… we would still have that innocent mind where we only know
  things about the theory at the maximum but we do not see it happen in
  front of us, only when we grow older and we get married we learn to
  understand the opposite sex.”
  Ah, really? Your puberty shielded you from adolescent urges to know the other… WOW!

  “The case of that party with alcohol maybe u did not understand what i actually meant.”
  Certainly because either your logic is twisted or you did nor explain correctly, or both. Face it, Mr Perfect.

  “And please note that this is only my choice and I am not saying anyone to think the way I do.”
  Man, THIS IS ACTUALLY WHAT WE ARE ALL TELLING YOU SINCE THE FREAKING BEGINNING!!!

  “It’s not fair when you criticize something without knowing it.”
  So why criticise the proposed legislation? Ah, that’s something where you should taste your own medicine…

  “And in all my comments I have never meant to impose anything on anyone.”
  Pa dir mwa doh…

  “This is my last comment to you.”
  AAH! ENFIN!!!
  BON DEBARRAS!!!

  I’ll greet you in hell…

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  “Do not worry about my marriage, I have my own faith”
  Why share with us, keep it to your own self-sufficient self. You’re too perfect for us, simple imperfect mortals, compared to your godly perfection.

  “I am aware of this. ”
  Pa dir mwaa…

  “Concerning the safe period, it does carries risk simply because today it
  has become difficult to determine and recognize the exact time and
  phase a women is in her safe period. But I don’t think it is
  impossible.”
  Well, one contradiction again. We’re not done yet!

  “And as far as my spouse is concerned, it is obvious I will have to use protection so that she feels secure.”
  Well well well… for her to feel secure. Not you? Strange for such an egoistic being like you.

  “Imagine that we would not have been exposed to pornography at a very
  young age… we would still have that innocent mind where we only know
  things about the theory at the maximum but we do not see it happen in
  front of us, only when we grow older and we get married we learn to
  understand the opposite sex.”
  Ah, really? Your puberty shielded you from adolescent urges to know the other… WOW!

  “The case of that party with alcohol maybe u did not understand what i actually meant.”
  Certainly because either your logic is twisted or you did nor explain correctly, or both. Face it, Mr Perfect.

  “And please note that this is only my choice and I am not saying anyone to think the way I do.”
  Man, THIS IS ACTUALLY WHAT WE ARE ALL TELLING YOU SINCE THE FREAKING BEGINNING!!!

  “It’s not fair when you criticize something without knowing it.”
  So why criticise the proposed legislation? Ah, that’s something where you should taste your own medicine…

  “And in all my comments I have never meant to impose anything on anyone.”
  Pa dir mwa doh…

  “This is my last comment to you.”
  AAH! ENFIN!!!
  BON DEBARRAS!!!

  I’ll greet you in hell…

  – ENDNOTE: Thanks to the moderator for allowing me to vent my trolling tendencies…
  Now, back to work.

• http://www.yashvinblogs.com Yashvin Awootar

  #Update : Yesterday, the national assembly voted to go forward with the modifications on the criminal code.
  50 votes for, 14 against.

• http://www.facebook.com/marshall.a.peters Marshall Angelo Peters

  Did you say religion prohibits murder what a joke is that. Religion is the sole reason for mass murder in the whole of the period from 1000 AD to 2000 AD. Read some history facts are put up in some books. Ask the Jews and if you are a Christian read the inquisitions and if you are a Muslim just go to Iraq and Afghanistan or some stupid middle eastern countries where religion is used to stone and hack peoples bodies for criminal acts. Religion is not about peace at all. If you are a Hindu please go to India and look at what all the blind faith and religion has lead to mercy killings,infanticide, religious clashes,untouchables, women subordination. Religion was a part of evolution of thought and its now time to get rid of that impairment when we know that organised religion is just a big sham and a business to earn some tax free dollars still sheep’s like you and others follow some stupid bedtime stories written some 2000 years ago by some stupid people in the cave to put scared and silly people like you to sleep and save your mother some trouble.

• Bhooks

  Ena enn zafer ki apel pilildilandemin. Li pa marse sa?

• Bhooks

  Moi je suis pour l’avortement. Si enn dimoun oule avorte li sipoze kapav avorte.

• Sagitarius

  About 95 million people have been killed for reasons having nothing to do with religion in the last 100 years by Germans, Russians, Chinese Taiwanese, and Cambodians.
  Can you give me the figure for killings motivated by religion for the 1000 years period you mention?

  What religion teaches and what ‘religious’ people do may differ.

  In the same countries where you mention religious inspired brutal justice, for every single subject of such barbarity there are 10,000 innocents killed by atheists for oil, etc.

  What’s it to you if I’m scared, silly, and I need to hear fairy tales to go to sleep? My being scared, silly, and needing fairy tales doesn’t impair my capacity for coherent reasoning, something which you seem to lack.

  Just being curious: Who lived in a cave and what did he write? I could be interested in bying a copy.

  Your two precedent comments were quite clearly intended to start a sort of quarrel. No one seemed interested so you turned to me. It’s okay. I don’t like quarrels but when it needs be, I stand my ground very well. So, let’s quarrel a bit just for sports. Just a bit: the subject of the blog post is abortion and much of what have been written till now is beside the point.

  Just do me a favour if you want to discuss with me; hit Shift + Enter to paragraph your text. If you are confused about where to put your paragraph it might be an an indication that you have a confused mind

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  Wai.
  Ena pilil SIRR-lendémin tou astérr mo bouzwaa:
  http://www.lemauricien.com/article/operation-l%E2%80%99adsu-saisie-2-kg-d%E2%80%99heroine-et-deux-arrestations

  Appel “EllaOne”.

• http://profiles.google.com/akashsky Akash Gura Goredo

  Si vous vous donniez la peine de cliquer sur “SHOW COMMENT”…

• http://www.yashvinblogs.com Yashvin Awootar

  In fact, it was not published immediately upon submission as I said. because of the moderation process.
  Already talked to Sagitarius on this

• http://www.facebook.com/marshall.a.peters Marshall Angelo Peters

  alright here is the list .. 1) Crusades more than a million. 2) Muslim holy wars . Million more 3) Inquisitions – a million or more of indigenous people. Religion is the reason of the greatest mobilization of an ethnic population and murder, riots and rape that took place in the Indian subcontinent. 4) The church supported slavery and never even tried to go against it well the reason maybe you and I are here in the first place is because the church didnt do its part in letting its white populous know that we are not inferior … well all they care for is who gets the donations…..Dont call the communists bad the church was the only reason that Europe’s population shrank to almost one tenth during the dark ages remember the bubonic plague…. well Nazis were racists and they killed jews the church knew it well they never condemned it. The church killed and persecuted jews for more than 2000 years. Oh to top it all we have an ex Nazi as a pope…. Look at the current world today Africa almost 4 – 5 countries are locked in religious uprisings and skirmishes… middle east is full of SUNI AND SHIA conflict . Ireland should i remind you the Irish protestant and christian issue and the death toll. Right wing Christian controlled America..and the attitude towards asian and arabs… mate all you need is to check the facts on wikipedia… Well or else type these keywords .. Inquisitions , Bubonic plague, Crusades, holy wars, suni shia conflict… Christian right … well and stop searching for people like stalin and hitler and mao and pot those nutjobs are a different gang of murderers and Nazism is most probably is like a mixture of religious and occult bullshit.

• Angel Ali

  My opinion: YES to abortion!