Due to the likelihood of Alito getting confirmed for SCOTUS, I've been thinking alot lately about Roe v. Wade and the whole abortion issue. Why is it so important for both sides, liberal and conservative? I just don't get it. The arguments on either side don't fit neatly into the whole Right/Left spectrum. And with all of the other problems facing us every day, why is this the one that has both sides in such a fit? Anyone have any comments on this?
I'm a liberal, will be a liberal until the day I die. I have very close friends who are very prominent in the Pro-choice movement. And I have very close friends and family members who are very much against abortion. But I just don't see why it's so friggin' important to either side. Either you get one or you don't (which I guess is the pro-choice argument). And I know that many pro-choice activist say it isn't about abortion per se, but about privacy rights and a woman's control over her own body. Fine. And I get why people who believe that life begins at conception get so upset. But why can't we just agree that we disagree? Why is it the end all/be all of political fights?
I think alot of conservative politicians are privately a bit scared of the thought of abortion being outlawed if Alito gets on the bench. What will get their base out to vote? Oh yeah, gay marriage. Let's get power through fear, folks! Sorry for my rambling - it's been a long, long week.
4 comments:
It's not simple at all. If it were, there'd be no raging debate about. Our society regularly kills people, we call it the death penalty. And we send troops overseas to fight wars. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but we do, as a society, kill people. I really admired Pope John Paul II's stance, he was against abortion, the death penalty and war. For him, it was simple. But for everyday people, the world isn't black and white. It's different shades of grey.
Yeah, everyone in jail is guilty. Forget what DNA evidence says after the fact. Reasonable doubt and absolute certainty are 2 completely different things. And folks killed by stray bombs, well, that's just too bad. They shouldn't have been in the way. Pretty f***ing gray to me. And the Bible doesn't say "thou shalt not kill INNOCENT people". What about Orignial Sin? I'm being the Devil's Advocate here (pun intended). I'm assuming you're a Christian, forgive me if I'm mistaken. One of the central tenents of Christianity is Original Sin, that we, as descendants of Adam, are born in a state of sin. So how are newborns innoncent, theologically? If they are innoncent, then why baptize them? Not that I believe in this, just to show you that it's not at all black and white - there's no consensus on this, just as there's no consensus on when life begins.
I think this dialogue we're having proves my point that the issue is grey, people don't agree on it. If you think abortion is wrong, fine, don't get one. But when a government is in charge of an individual's reproduction, we're on a very slippery slope. If the government can tell you you must have the baby, it can just as easily say you can't have the baby. Look at China.
You're obviously anti-abortion, and that's your right. But I'm pro-choice, and that's my right. Neither one of us is going to convince the other. My reality is that the issue is grey, therefore, to me, it is grey. To you it isn't. Great. But don't force me to take your view. That's the point of being pro-choice. I'm not for abortion - I don't think anyone is "for" abortion, but I'm damn sure not going to force my opinion on someone else. And again, you ignore what I was saying. I'm not speaking "legal vs. illegal". If it's wrong to kill, it's wrong to kill. Period. And no, I don't consider a fetus "pre-born" or whatever you you call it. If that's the case, then shouldn't masturbation be illegal? After all, that sperm was going to become a person.
There are so many more important issues to deal with in the world - poverty, crime, education, health-care, war. Which was the point of my original post.
Interesting column in today's (2/14) Washington Post about this issue - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/13/AR2006021301570.html
If I didn't know better, I'd say he was reading my comments section.
Post a Comment