I find most of the arguments for either side either moronic or ineffective. I reject the "this is my body I can do what I want with it" argument. Nothing in our legal system allows such wanton freedom. I reject the "I didn't consent to having my life mandated to support another life for 9 months" argument. Consent is implicit with engaging in sexual acts, in my opinion. I reject the "it's not a real person yet" argument. Personhood is indefinable. There's no question whatsoever that the process gives rise to a human life, even if there's no specific point we can identify as 'aware'. On the flip side, I obviously don't grant some metaphysical soul or something that begins at conception. I can't grant sanctity of life reasoning that's based on Imago Dei, for similar reasons. I consider both of those arguments ineffective, as their persuasive power is very limited. The people most likely to argue for abortion are the ones least likely to hold to Imago Dei or its like. I also reject the "right to life" concept because I reject the idea that 'rights' are somehow real things that are inviolate. In general, I find the "it's my right" arguments misguided at best, and it's particularly damning that they're the primary support for abortion.
However, a general sanctity of life is something I can get behind. I think it self-evident that all living things seek to preserve their life, and the few exceptions to that are rightly considered mentally ill. I think very few people truly hold that life is inviolate. The same ones arguing for pro-life are often arguing for the death penalty. Cultures throughout time have recognized certain people as heroes for giving up their lives to save others or to effect a change. Sometimes, it's necessary and/or important that people die. In spite of that, the very impact of such sacrifice is lost if it becomes a commonplace occurrence. It's a soldier's duty to die for his country, but it's the officer's duty to spend lives frugally. To make abortion a common and accepted occurrence clearly reduces the value of life in our society's eyes. That sort of precedent is downright dangerous. In that sense, yes, I am very much anti-abortion.
The complications arise when we start discussing how to prevent abortion. Most people think the right way is through legislation. Some seem to think that's the only way. I know it's not the only way, but I'm not sure how much it's the right way, either. The line here is fuzzy for me. I'm completely against having at-will abortions for any and all, and I think there are strong reasons that the government should prevent such actions. At the same time, I think our system is generally unable to make laws in the interest of its citizens. Where majority rules, long-term self-interest is not necessarily present or expected.
There is an ongoing issue with precedent, though. In the same way that acceptance of at-will abortion is a dangerous precedent, so too is a government system that dictates the answer to extremely difficult and emotional decisions. For that reason, I'm not in favor of outlawing abortion in cases of rape or when the life of the mother is at risk. This does not mean I'm in favor of abortion in these cases. It simply means I think it would be an abuse of power for the government to be involved in such decisions. If nothing else, it simply doesn't have the capacity to do so. Since legislation is not the solution, we must seek other means. These other means are essentially winning the hearts and minds. I believe we need to equip all people, including teenagers, with the information and education they need to make informed decisions. Eliminate in a sound and rational manner the misconceptions regarding pregnancy, and especially that resulting from rape or incest. Eliminate the negative attitudes toward raising children. Support reasonable means of prevention. If we can do these things, I think we will have won in the long run, and we will have done so much more effectively than an attempted ban.
However, a general sanctity of life is something I can get behind. I think it self-evident that all living things seek to preserve their life, and the few exceptions to that are rightly considered mentally ill. I think very few people truly hold that life is inviolate. The same ones arguing for pro-life are often arguing for the death penalty. Cultures throughout time have recognized certain people as heroes for giving up their lives to save others or to effect a change. Sometimes, it's necessary and/or important that people die. In spite of that, the very impact of such sacrifice is lost if it becomes a commonplace occurrence. It's a soldier's duty to die for his country, but it's the officer's duty to spend lives frugally. To make abortion a common and accepted occurrence clearly reduces the value of life in our society's eyes. That sort of precedent is downright dangerous. In that sense, yes, I am very much anti-abortion.
The complications arise when we start discussing how to prevent abortion. Most people think the right way is through legislation. Some seem to think that's the only way. I know it's not the only way, but I'm not sure how much it's the right way, either. The line here is fuzzy for me. I'm completely against having at-will abortions for any and all, and I think there are strong reasons that the government should prevent such actions. At the same time, I think our system is generally unable to make laws in the interest of its citizens. Where majority rules, long-term self-interest is not necessarily present or expected.
There is an ongoing issue with precedent, though. In the same way that acceptance of at-will abortion is a dangerous precedent, so too is a government system that dictates the answer to extremely difficult and emotional decisions. For that reason, I'm not in favor of outlawing abortion in cases of rape or when the life of the mother is at risk. This does not mean I'm in favor of abortion in these cases. It simply means I think it would be an abuse of power for the government to be involved in such decisions. If nothing else, it simply doesn't have the capacity to do so. Since legislation is not the solution, we must seek other means. These other means are essentially winning the hearts and minds. I believe we need to equip all people, including teenagers, with the information and education they need to make informed decisions. Eliminate in a sound and rational manner the misconceptions regarding pregnancy, and especially that resulting from rape or incest. Eliminate the negative attitudes toward raising children. Support reasonable means of prevention. If we can do these things, I think we will have won in the long run, and we will have done so much more effectively than an attempted ban.
Comment