In discussing abortion, some Buddhists — especially in the West — identify as “anti-abortion but pro-choice.” They uphold the ethical seriousness of abortion while opposing its legal prohibition. This position reflects a Buddhist view that morality cannot be meaningfully imposed by law in all cases.
Figures like Roshi Jiyu Kennett and Sunyata articulate this stance with clarity. Kennett states she would never have an abortion herself, but also would never support laws banning it. She warns that such laws would endanger women, pushing them toward suicide or unsafe procedures. Sunyata affirms that ethics must involve choice, and making abortion illegal would only lead to more suffering — violating the central Buddhist goal of minimizing harm .
This position emerges from an understanding that law and morality do not always align. In Buddhist countries, not all unethical acts — such as selling alcohol or lying — are illegal. Likewise, not all illegal acts are seen as immoral. For instance, peaceful civil disobedience against injustice may be morally admirable, though technically unlawful .
Historically, Buddhist texts support the idea that governments should encourage morality, but not enforce it rigidly. The Aggañña Sutta describes how early rulers arose to prevent disorder, while the Cakkavatti-sīhanāda Sutta outlines the ideal ruler as one who reveres Dhamma — acting as a moral guide more than a strict enforcer. Emperor Asoka exemplified this model, promoting non-violence and moral reflection through education and personal example rather than coercive law .
However, Peter Harvey warns that this modern “anti-abortion but pro-choice” position does not fully align with classical Buddhist views on law. Traditional texts suggest that governments should actively discourage immoral acts, even if they do not outlaw all of them. From this perspective, the widespread legal toleration of abortion in Buddhist countries is regrettable — a symptom of moral decline rather than ethical progress .
Nonetheless, in practical terms, Buddhism often permits a compassionate pragmatism. Especially when abortion is viewed as a “necessary evil,” the moral focus shifts from condemnation to education, remorse, and healing. Buddhist ethics values the intention behind actions, and often sees legal punishment as less important than karmic accountability .
In conclusion, Buddhism affirms that abortion is a serious ethical issue. But it also acknowledges that compelled morality lacks spiritual value, and that legal systems should foster peace, not enforce every moral norm. While Buddhist principles emphasize the sanctity of life, they also call for understanding, compassion, and space for individual conscience.