Good day, readers. This evening I had an incidence with some acquaintances. One of them a friend, asked a question pertaining the right thing to do if a couple had sex with ejaculation but don’t want a baby.
It is easy to attach this to a fault, a necessity, a need. Something to justify that it is okay, the best thing to do. Yes this same question would be easier to answer if pregnancy is a danger to the mother, maybe she will die if she delivers or it could result in some permanent damage to her. We’ll say as a matter of utmost urgency she has to stop whatever is in her… a foetus or a sperm.
But that is not the issue here, what do we say about this couple that wants to do something about this uncertainty because they just don’t want a baby. Uncertainty because we don’t know if fertilization has occurred or not. Do we say because it is instantaneous, fertilisation hasn’t occurred? That mean we’ll just be stopping a sperm maybe destroying it. Another argument is that… just maybe just maybe fertilization has occurred. Maybe has a result of the ovulating stage of the wife. Maybe her ovary released an ovum some days prior to intercourse just before menstruation would have washed it away. Here it is possible the sperm easily fertilised the ovum faster than usual. Another scenario is if… just if the sperm contains so healthy spermatozoa that hastened fertilization than usual.
Another argument is that of the anatomy and physiology of the woman, her reproductory tract and all. Although it is all big ifs and maybes. It could be or not be. So the question here is a moral one based on your conviction. Do you decide basing your conclusion that fertilization has occurred or basing it on the fact that it hasn’t. Are you stopping a life or stopping the formation of one. It might seem like a close line but it’s quite different. One is murder and the other is well… I can’t find a criminal word to describe it, preventing fertilization is not a crime in any country, race or religion I know of. Back to the arguments. An acquaintance argued that you can do it… whatever that is destroying or stopping. Another said you shouldn’t because you are not sure. Another said you should anyway cause even if fertilization has occurred, it is lifeless with no soul. I find this controversial. If you have to wait till there is life to say destroying a foetus is abortion, it will be a long way into her pregnancy before it becomes illegal and a crime. Family and friends would be congratulating the pregnant woman already on bringing a new baby to the world. So what do we have this couple do? Stop it or not? Prevent fertilization or not? Or would it be an abortion or not? Contraception or Abortion? Is it morally Ok or not? Thanks.
ABDULKAREEM, Toyyib Oladimeji email@example.com +2347034201845; +2347053326382