Love this chart from Vox showing how divided Americans are about abortion, and how many people (39%) are trying to find some middle ground between pro-choice and pro-life.
It's almost as if the reason for an abortion is important, and having a blanket stance which fails to factor in motivation is unrealistic, eh?
I'm certain there are many "pro-life" individuals who would, in certain circumstances, make exceptions to their stance - such as for rape victims, or for children that will be born with crippling defects, or for pregnancies that are almost certain to miscarry and endanger the life of the mother, et cetera. Supply a good enough reason, and all but the most stubborn of individuals will at least consider the possibility of an exception.
The trouble with the larger conflict, however, is that "pro-choice" already allows for those exceptions. It advocates the ability to choose your fate, rather than being forced to go through with a dangerous or damaging pregnancy. Why, then, do more individuals not simply idenfity as pro-choice?
Obviously I can't say with any certainty, but it would seem to me that a large factor in play is a moralistic one regarding not only the sanctity of life, but also regarding sexuality. And while you can argue in circles for days about the sanctity of human life without getting anywhere, sexuality is a completely different beast.
There seems to be at least some portion of the nation which is legitimately afraid that making abortion easily available will magically turn women into floozies who sleep around more than a stereotypical gay man in 1980s New York City, and that they'll just get abortions left and right as a means of living their amoral hedonistic lifestyles without consequences. Hence we have those who support a zero tolerance policy for abortion - they're unwilling to make any exceptions whatsoever, presumably because they believe people could then use those exceptions as excuses for frivolous abortions so they carry on with their bacchanals.
Of course, the simple fact of the matter is that this imagined debauchery just hasn't materialized, and isn't going to. And even just considering the possibility that we could be enabling those few individuals who might already actually lead such cartoonish lifestyles, there's still the fact that people are going to seek abortions whether they're legal or not - the only difference is that illegal abortions are unregulated and unsafe, and we'll thus be paying a toll in human lives by driving women to put their safety in the hands of the black market, or even take direct measures themselves.
It's almost as if the reason for an abortion is important, and having a blanket stance which fails to factor in motivation is unrealistic, eh?
ReplyDeleteI'm certain there are many "pro-life" individuals who would, in certain circumstances, make exceptions to their stance - such as for rape victims, or for children that will be born with crippling defects, or for pregnancies that are almost certain to miscarry and endanger the life of the mother, et cetera. Supply a good enough reason, and all but the most stubborn of individuals will at least consider the possibility of an exception.
The trouble with the larger conflict, however, is that "pro-choice" already allows for those exceptions. It advocates the ability to choose your fate, rather than being forced to go through with a dangerous or damaging pregnancy. Why, then, do more individuals not simply idenfity as pro-choice?
Obviously I can't say with any certainty, but it would seem to me that a large factor in play is a moralistic one regarding not only the sanctity of life, but also regarding sexuality. And while you can argue in circles for days about the sanctity of human life without getting anywhere, sexuality is a completely different beast.
There seems to be at least some portion of the nation which is legitimately afraid that making abortion easily available will magically turn women into floozies who sleep around more than a stereotypical gay man in 1980s New York City, and that they'll just get abortions left and right as a means of living their amoral hedonistic lifestyles without consequences. Hence we have those who support a zero tolerance policy for abortion - they're unwilling to make any exceptions whatsoever, presumably because they believe people could then use those exceptions as excuses for frivolous abortions so they carry on with their bacchanals.
Of course, the simple fact of the matter is that this imagined debauchery just hasn't materialized, and isn't going to. And even just considering the possibility that we could be enabling those few individuals who might already actually lead such cartoonish lifestyles, there's still the fact that people are going to seek abortions whether they're legal or not - the only difference is that illegal abortions are unregulated and unsafe, and we'll thus be paying a toll in human lives by driving women to put their safety in the hands of the black market, or even take direct measures themselves.