Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MmeBlueberry
1. It's morally right for anyone and everyone.
2. It's not morally right for me, but it's morally right for anyone who thinks it is.
3. It's not morally right for anyone.
The problem with the quote above is that it assumes people who are morally opposed to abortion fall into the second category. That isn't the case. People who fall in that category, in my experience, are generally pro-choice - they consider the main issue in the debate to be over whether a woman should have the right to choose an abortion, and they say yes, she should.
People who are pro-life, again in my experience, are generally in the third category. If I think abortion is the termination of a human life, and I don't think it's right for individuals to terminate human lives, then I'm not just opposed to personally having an abortion; I'm opposed to anyone having an abortion.
Put the child on the other side of the womb and let's suppose that infanticide were an issue (yes, I know it isn't, but work with me here). Let's suppose that some people think an infant, who's dependent on others for basically everything, isn't really a human being, so they have no problem with infanticide. Others think that dependence isn't the issue, since the baby has human DNA and is a living human person; they think infanticide is tantamount to killing. Would you tell the anti-infanticide people, "Well, just don't terminate your own babies, then. No one's forcing you to do that. But it's intolerant to keep others from terminating their babies if they don't believe they're human."? Of course not. If the issue is truly about life, then it's not just about protecting your own offspring; it's about protecting all the innocent lives. That is why pro-life people are not content simply to refrain from having abortions themselves while having no problem with the rest of the world having abortions.
|
While I understand the notion behind this (believe me, I spent a long time debating which camp I fell into before I settled on my current stance), the simple fact that half the people out there simply don't agree with those who think it is morally wrong for everyone kind of throws a wrench in that notion.
What about the teenagers? They would be hit very hard by the lack of availability. Would all teenagers be morally obligated to carry their child to term? I would argue, teenagers are simply
not equipped to deal with a child, or the decision whether to keep a child or give it up for adoption (or to have an abortion for that matter). Is a widespread teen birth rate more desirable than any abortions occuring at all? What about all those teens who wouldn't accept no for an answer, and would resort to crude methods of aborting their child? It's a horrible implication, and one I think
shouldn't be overshadowed by the idea that abortions are WRONG FOR EVERYONE.
Abortion as an issue needs to go on the wayside, while our country (and others, no doubt -- Canada's teen pregnancy rate is 50something per thousand) needs to focus on teen pregnancy. You can't attack abortion, or the birth rate goes up. You can't work on destigmatizing abortion or the abortion rate goes up.
Neither of these is a good option. One has to attack the
whole of the issue, not just the part one finds most morally wrong.
One last thing, I'd like to add that laws aren't made based on morals. Or at least, they shouldn't be. Laws are practical tools to ensure order. Murder is illegal because it disrupts people's right to live. Abortion is a much grayer issue. When does life start? We'll
never know. The minute legislation becomes about morality is the minute democracy turns into theocracy. Where does it stop? Is mandatory baptizing of all citizens moral, thus legal? It sounds crazy, but once the church's teachings turn into legal ones, will it stop with abortion? What about gay marriage -- an entire class of people are denied the right to marriage by the
government why? Because people consider gays as second class citizens? Because religion teaches homosexuality is wrong? What happens when these laws are passed. What next? There's always something. Will it end there? Somehow, I doubt it.