Question #1503: Is It Ethical To Plan Births For Specific Natal Charts???

I don't see the problem to plan the babys birth, mainly because, yes there are very bad natal charts that has way more negative karma than the others.

The Natal Chart is determined at that point, but in the soul itself enters the baby around four to five months. Meaning outside of danger to the mother and possible death (in which case, planning an elected Caesarean within limits could be beneficial RELATIVE to something without), the baby itself is basically fixed to manifest a certain way regardless of what you 'plan' for the birth.

A child with Downs is not going to come out healthy because you chose a C-section for a specific time. Even if they have Jupiter in Gemini and Mercury squaring Uranus, their Natal Chart will still reflect... somebody with Downs. Whatever is applicable to a higher life-form is inert or externalized.

Caesareans can be DANGEROUS for the mother and intended as a secondary resort. If the surgeon is a fucking lunatic, then things obviously won't go too well either, though any proper election would likely cancel this out.

You can elect Astrologically to have sex to make a baby at the right time for the most optimal and healthy child between you and your partner, which can also ensure the health of the woman within reasonable limits, but you know, given how sex is, this is FAR easier said than done in practice.

All of this is contingent on the karma and other factors of you and your partner, both individual and as a pair.

If you both have a recessive disease gene, things are not going to turn out wonderfully for the child regardless of what you are electing. If the mother has extreme body issues related to being unable to give birth, is 13 or 51 years old, or is prone to devastating gestational diabetes, it's not going to make her healthy. Perhaps somewhat 'better' than what could've been otherwise.

Everything I say here is simplified. This is a very, very, VERY complicated subject that takes years to understand and frankly a lot of members as very young people don't have expertise or maturity to articulate this properly, prone to wishful thinking. Before modern medicine this also was much more precarious and dangerous.

AskSatanOperator wrote:

I.e. first breath outside of womb

Baby's don't breath when released from the Vaginal canal. In a proper society babies should be born in birthing pools or spawning pools. Sheer fact is I think for many babies they'd be much happier and less traumatized if they were to be removed underwater and swam up to their parents.

Babies don't breath when they are removed from about, 45:mins to an 1:hour after birth in most cases. Most people don't realize this and probably would be freaked out thinking their child is born dead. They actually breath from the oxygen flowing through the umbilical cord.

I think for the following minutes leading up to 45:minutes the first minute or so connecting a plastic clasp on the baby to make sure the name is recognized and it belongs to the family. After that they should spend the next few minutes leading up to 45:mins to swim around and be with their father and mother swimming back and forth between them or get some exercise. Babies are actually reasonable swimmers surprisingly, it might be a learned skill but it's also a natural skill to swim. Probably relating back to the instinctual genetic principles as to how the sperm cell swam to the ovum.

Sheer fact is only after 45:mins minimum should the doctor inspect the child breathing by using a stethoscope examination on the heartbeat and lungs upper/mid/low THEN have the umbilical cord cut maybe even give it a ceremonious cut to the father or the mother or both. And then afterwards spend the following while in the care unit testing the child for any disease or anything and then returned to the parents until the eventual hospital release.

People literally believe cutting the umbilical right away is a good thing. It probably makes the child have traumas trying to catch their breath they should allow natural breathing to begin by the child breathing without the umbilical cord cut. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if the umbilical cord still feeds oxygen even to the already breathing baby signifying it's ready to be cut as the baby naturally learned to breath rather than be forced to breath even with oxygen mask it still not a good thing.

Generating a child on a specific Natal chart

Is it fair to state this lost science is something the Gods have perfected and should be in council with people who wish to have this?

I assume the Gods focusing on people willing to listen and willing to do stuff. Will have a far greater capacity to express the chart and produce a child. I assume the Gods after a certain point only have children on specific astrological properties to maximize positive development.

I wouldn't be surprised if only the animal people who only live for material properties are the ones having children on poor astrological dates. The spiritual people who want to have children will decide to pick a date. I wouldn't be surprised if they posses specific reproduction calendars whereby mother's and father's can pick a date to impregnate and the birthing of the child comes out at a specific time period producing superior astrological chart.

Correct? I assume they do their best to make sure the child is born at the most appropriate time.

AskSatanOperator wrote:

I assume, from what other members have written, that your natal chart is determined by the exact moment you are "born", I.e. first breath outside of womb (or some other unarbitrary event). Meaning artificially planned births like C section etc, effect natal chart. This is opposed to say natal chart being determined at conception of sperm and egg. Is it okay to make the soul of a newborn have specific chart? Say planning the conception or the labour delivery etc.

Also is there such thing as a "bad" natal chart? Or are they all balanced in some way? We can have different qualities on chart, some good, some bad, but one cannot possibly be all bad right? If I am wrong, then do we not have obligation to stop any such births from happening? Why should babies be born at a time that will make their life fucked up you know

In many places in the world people plan the baby's birthday.As long as it doesnt hurt the baby I dont see why would that be a problem
Parents try to give their children the best things possible in everything))