Current issue

[ironphoenix]

I've been reluctant to post on this subject for a while, because my position isn't a popular one, I fear. Recent events, however, have made it harder to stay silent, so here goes. If you don't stop reading here, I ask that you go all the way to the end.

I believe abortion is wrong. I believe it is a killing of a helpless human being, with all that entails. In cases where if the child doesn't die then the mother will, I can support it, but not otherwise.

That said, I believe a lot of other things, too.

I believe that safe, effective contraception and thorough, realistic sexual education should be universally available. I believe that sexuality, and current reality being what it is, women's sexuality in particular, should not be stigmatized. I believe that child care should be available and affordable. I believe that staying at home to look after children should not be a "CLM." I believe that victims of rape should be supported and treated with dignity and respect, not further victimized. I believe that in law and in practice, women should have free access to safe abortions. I believe that women who choose to have abortions should not be stigmatized either, and should have access to support and counselling services. I believe that we as a society need these things. I believe that the consequences of not having these things are contributing or would contribute to a lot of suffering and oppression. I hope that we, as societies, can overcome the systemic and structural factors which lead women to consider having their children aborted. I believe that the best ways to do this are by providing the support I described, not by imposing restrictions on vulnerable women at the time of their need.

That beling my fundamental position, let me now write a few things about the recent murder of Dr. Tiller, a doctor who specialized in late-term abortions, apparently motivated by his practice.

I believe that killing this person was wrong and unjustified. I believe it was an intrinsically wrong act of itself, and more. I understand the position that could be taken, that killing someone who would themselves kill many others is the lesser of two evils, and I reject it. I believe that it's a false saving, and one which merely contributes to the violence and oppression that encourage women to seek out abortions. I believe that "preemptive" acts or punitive vigilanteism undermine the social relationships of trust and mutuality that build lasting solutions to systemic problems. Let me say this again clearly and unequivocally: I repudiate this killing.

In closing, I ask that you not quote me out of context. I've written short sentences here, but they're part of a whole. It would be easy to misrepresent me by taking bits of this and leaving the rest behind; please don't.

Comments

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

I don't think that your position is an unpopular one.

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

It isn't one I've often seen presented in this rather polarized discussion; I guess I'm afraid of being seen by each "side" as part of "the enemy."

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

I think the American debate is very polarized. I think, in Canada, your position may be within a reasonable range of the majority opinion -- the debate doesn't seem nearly as polarized here, except as contaminated by the fall out from the debate in the USA.

I would guess that most of the pro-choice people have similarly nuanced opinions -- that abortion is unfortunate (at best), not something they want to have happen, but that the choice of forbidding it is far worse. While, the other side, the "pro-life" people, seem to have less nuanced opinions, being more absolutist about it. But, when arguing against an absolutist position, it is hard to take a nuanced stance, and least in public debate.

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

But I identify as pro-life, to the extent that I pick a side.

Perhaps it's that the most vocal pro-life folks are the absolutist ones, and the circles you move in tend more towards the pro-choice, so you know the moderates on that side of the table?

[zenten.livejournal.com]

I suspect that the moderates on both sides actually agree with each other.

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

I hear that you identify as pro-life.

"I believe abortion is wrong." ... "I believe that in law and in practice, women should have free access to safe abortions."

I think of that combination as the classic pro-choice statement.

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

I see it as a moderate statement: the radical pro-choice statement is that "abortion is morally neutral." This was perhaps most clearly expressed by Mary Anne Warren in "On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion" (Monist 57, 1973, sec. 1): "abortion is not a morally serious ... act, comparable to killing in self-defense ..., but rather closer to a morally neutral act, like cutting one's hair."

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

Ah, ok. That is pretty radical.

It leads me to wonder, though, how you feel about hormonal birth control that allows fertilization to happen, but prevents implantation. Or the "morning after" pill.

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

Both fall into the "do not want" category, for me.

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

Also, I'm not sure there are non-moderates, extremists, on the pro-choice side the way there are on the pro-life side. I don't think there are any people on the pro-choice side calling for the murder of Drs, or actually performing such murders/assassinations. I don't think there are people on the pro-choice burning down buildings.

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

I made the mistake of reading some of the comments on the articles about the "suspect." Some of those comments are pretty virulent stuff, including threats of violence towards him and his family. As far as I can tell, you're correct that there are no proven cases of arson traceable to this motive, although there is a remarkable amount of church vandalism and arson. There have been some pretty serious crimes against protesters, though, including some causing permanent injury or death. Both sides, of course, argue that the other started the violence.

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

I know there has been violence around abortion clinics. I have no idea which side would have started the violence -- likely, in many cases, there was some amount of mutual escalation.

I try to avoid reading the really inflamatory stuff, anywhere. It lets me feel better about humans as a whole.

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

Probably a good idea.

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

On further thought, I realize that pro-life people see advocating abortion as advocating murder.

It is a very unclear and fraught choice, either way.

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

I don't know how unclear I would find the choice, were I ever in a non-hypothetical situation to have to make it in a specific instance.

The general case, though, is much harder, because I think there are very real limits on how much morality should be legislated.

[zenten.livejournal.com]

Your point of view seems pretty much in line with most people I know who identify as "pro choice".

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

And yet, I identify as pro-life.

[zenten.livejournal.com]

It's all really just words.

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

The labels on people and "sides" certainly are.