ResurrectionSong.com

Jerry's Links

Single of the Week

resurrectionsong

July 27, 2004

Wrong or Right, Make a Choice

I don't usually talk about abortion on the site. I mean, I've mentioned my opposition, but I've never talked about abortion, if you know what I mean. And I don't intend to start now. Instead, I'm going to dance around the topic in hopes of making a point about things that have been in the news recently.

Before I go any further, let me say that this is not an attack on anyone, not an attack on anyone's beliefs, and not meant to be rude. I have to get this one out, though; it's been in my head for long enough that I know it isn't going away.

There is a difference from a man who murders one person and a man who murders a thousand; but the difference is only in degree of wrongness, not in whether the act is wrong to begin with. In certain circles, abortion seems to be a little different. One is okay, but more than one is reprehensible (the "it shouldn't be used for birth control" argument). One is okay, but selective reduction is wrong. Having an abortion is fine, but admitting to it publicly is distasteful.

See, reprehensible, wrong, and distasteful are my reactions to abortion, but not with any qualifiers. For me, it's an all-or-nothing procedure: either it is wrong or it isn't.

If aborting one fetus is okay, then selectively reducing the number being carried by two-thirds isn't a bad thing to do. It's just a more focused and narrow medical procedure.

If it's wrong to have three abortions, why isn't it wrong to have one? While murdering three people is more wrong than murdering one, that single murder is still enough to send you to jail. If it's okay to have one abortion, then it's okay to have three.

If it's okay to have an abortion--that is, not just legally acceptable, but morally acceptable--then why is it wrong to admit to the act? Would it be wrong for me to wear a t-shirt that says, "I had an appendectomy"? If having an abortion isn't a moral wrong, and if it is nothing more than the removal of tissue that doesn't yet represent "life," then there is nothing wrong about admitting as much in public.

For pro-choice voices to raise concerns over these ideas seems to me to be pretty inconsistent. A consistent view says that something is wrong or it is right. If abortion is right, then these circumstances don't change the rightness of it; if abortion is wrong, then these circumstances just make a wrong even worse.

If I were to venture a guess, I would say that the people who raise a racket over these recent stories are showing what their conscience is telling them (that abortion, in an absolute sense is a truly bad thing) but that they are unwilling to support in any absolute sense (that something that equates to a moral wrong on the level of killing should be made illegal). Of course, that conclusion comes from someone who has an axe to grind in the argument.

Still, biases aside, I truly don't understand how someone who is pro-choice could find those incidences to be wrong when a single abortion (publicly unacknowledged) is okay. An abortion affects either, in the sense that pro- and anti-choice advocates use the term, a baby or a fetus. One way is wrong, the other way is not, and there really isn't a magical point within abortion where what is right becomes wrong. Just a point where it becomes less publicly okay.

Update: So I write this, publish it, and go to check out some other sites before I start working, and I come across this. Apparently Andy has some of the same thoughts that I did.

Posted by zombyboy at July 27, 2004 07:34 PM | TrackBack
Comments

ZB,
I liken it more to DWI. Is getting behind the wheel drunk stupid and wrong? -- yeah, but that first offense, it's like, "Yeah, you were an idiot, but we all make mistakes."
But they do it time and time again and you start to say it's not an unfortunate error, it's a fatal character flaw.
That's why we have laws on the books for repeat offenders.
The T-shirt irks me because I don't feel it's good to be proud of your mistakes, and getting knocked up when you don't want to is just that -- a mistake.
Setting aside moral and religious arguments, it's a mistake from a fiscal perspective. That's money pissed away that could have better been used elsewhere and a medical procedure -- no matter how minor -- always has risks.
When the doctors started listing thing that could go wrong with a C-section for my wife, I just about fainted.
I'm pro-life, the law says it's legal now, but I still don't think it should be a badge of honor.
I was dreaming when I wrote this, so forgive me if I go astray -- God, I have got to turn this Prince CD off.

Posted by: Zygote at July 27, 2004 10:30 PM

First, don't turn it off, that's a great song. Love that song. So, it's a little outdated now, but still...

I'll try to answer the rest of your comment once I've gotten some more work done.

Posted by: zombyboy at July 27, 2004 10:36 PM

Wow! That's pretty brazen. Two of my friends had abortions and it was so painful for them that I haven't heard them talk about it in years and anytime it comes up conversationally, I always see them stiffen and find an excuse to leave the room. I can't imagine either of them choosing to wear a shirt that announced, not just the fact, but their pain and emotional suffering.

Posted by: Rae at July 27, 2004 10:51 PM

I'm staying out of this one. We aren't going to solve the abortion issue until people decide to take control of their zippers.
Hey Zombieboy! What's that I saw on Drudge about somebody putting out leaflets offering money for killing Denver PD officers? Boy, THAT'S gonna make them slow to use their guns.

Posted by: Peter at July 28, 2004 12:37 AM

Oooh, honey. I would love to live in that Black and White world you're referring to.

Allow me to say this: I had an abortion. I'm *still* dealing with the guilt, shame, and sadness attached to it. I expect I will have to deal with it for as long as I am alive. While I would not have described the situation as "I don't want to have to shop at Costco," I believed that I was making the right choice -- for me and my situation -- at the time.

Things are never -- NEVER -- as cut-and-dried as keep the baby/don't keep the baby. There are several factors and motivations in either direction. When I wrote that I thought going back to the days before Roe v. Wade would be barbaric I truly believe that. In those days, a woman who sought an abortion literally took her life in her hands. Back-alley doctors who were on the fringes of society were part of the very few choices available. I do not believe we should revert back to those days.

I honestly think that abortion is a last resort and, for most (I believe) an agonizing choice to have to make. In other words, I believe that outlawing abortions would not stop them from happening, it would simply heap more shame and guilt upon a woman who has to choose.

I tend to agree with Zygote (irony is so ironic). I will suffer the pain of knowing what I did for the rest of my life. I hope no one has to go through that which I did -- but I am heartily greatful that I had a safe, clean, caring doctor and staff to help me in a very difficult and painful time. I hope God can forgive me for what I've done. What I also did/do not need is someone berating me for what -- at the time -- was the only solution in a horrible situation for me.

Like I said; nothing is black and white.

Posted by: Emma at July 28, 2004 01:17 AM

And I would never, ever buy a shirt like that. I'm not now, not then, nor will I EVER be PROUD of that decision. I did what I had to do. I live with that decision.

Posted by: Emma at July 28, 2004 01:21 AM

As I said at Nathan's, I support the ugly loopholes simply because I support the right to choose, and that can't really come with a disclaimer or amendments.

Emma, I am sorry for what you had to go through. I think it was very brave to say what you did.

Posted by: Jo at July 28, 2004 08:44 AM

{{{Hugs}}} and Love, Emma.

Posted by: Rae at July 28, 2004 11:19 AM

My position is that I'm convinced that abortion is morally wrong, but I don't pretend I can prove it, I can only persuade. And my conviction is based very strongly on religion (although not all my moral positions are...some are on non-religious moral points, but I digress).
Thus, my advocacy has, for some time, been to try and keep keep it as much of a personal decision as possible: earlier and personally executed with RU-486.
Because I think the DUI analogy is apt: carelessness doesn't ruin you for life. Forgiveness from repentence is always available. Immaturity is a mitigating factor. I'm willing to admit that I don't know all the answers, just that I must act on my feelings and understandings: that the whole situation is absolutely messed up, in which people fight for the right for women to avoid responsibility but see no hypocrisy in simultaneously fighting to deny men the same right.
It's ridiculous that groups that get funding for abortion encourage women to go ahead and have sex because they can always have an abortion if an accident occurs. Make no mistake: if you aren't old enough to know the natural result of sexual activity, you aren't old enough to have sex.
I identify myself as pro-life...but am unwilling to fight for the complete abolition of abortion. Where does that put me? Reluctantly pro-choice? Hypocrite?
The only way to ensure that you don't have repeat DUI is to execute anyone who does it, or re-enact prohibition...but I can be against DUIs and condemn multiple convictions without being tempted to advocating the steps to ensure a complete absence of DUIs.
I think abortion is a wide, gray area, wide enough to encompass many views that might seem self-contradictory to others....

Posted by: Nathan at July 28, 2004 06:53 PM

Oh, man. This is where my ultra-conservativity shows. I am a fence rider, for the most part, but this is the issue that stokes my fire. I don't think that I will go into it, in depth, as I don't want to alienate anyone. All that I will say is, if you didn't mess with it; what would happen?
This is a difficult conversation to have with anyone and mistakes may be mistakes, but that is not what the argument should be. As far as our country goes, this should be a lawful debate, and the answer should be decided per the law. (or as they would say in "Young Guns": "We do things 'law way'") This is an argument over the beginning of life, and when life begins. When does a baby turn from a mass of cells to a fetus that is alive?
You are right, Z. There is a certain amount of contradiction with the liberal debate of this point. It's too serious and there are too many variables that contribute to the one big question which I ask in the previous paragraph. This argument cannot be compared to an appentdectomy, and this point cannot be heralded as something that anybody "has" to do (with exception of the extreme, and even then, it's still questionable). I have been involved in such a situation, though it's something that I never, ever, talk about and though it was done against my will, and against all persuasion, I still feel guilty for my involvment. My involvement in this situation also helped formulate my opinions on it, and the topic is of a very personal nature to me.
It seems to me, with all of the debate, and limitations put on it at the federal level, this topic would be destined for a vote. But, the court seems to be the sole charge for this topic, therefore, it will never be remedied.
I try to empathize with those who have undergone an abortion, and they definitely have my sympathy, but, we have to recognize this for what it is, and turn away from doing it, as individuals, and as a society. It's called "repentance" in religious circles, I don't think that it has a name otherwise.
I don't bomb clinics and I'm not insane about my opposition to abortion, but I do think that it's wrong, no matter what mask you put on it or what perfume you try and fancy it up with. It's a choice that people are given the choice to make, and given freedom from the law, people will do just about anything to make life easier on themselves. Though former Pres. Reagan had a pretty rosey view of human nature, I do not. I do not believe that people will do the right thing given a choice unless their ethics and morals root from the same place (and even then it's questionable).
-Super

P.S. - I do believe that this is the most negative post that I have ever written here.

Posted by: Superhero at July 29, 2004 12:29 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Search This Site


Site Archives

Recent Entries Consider the Birds
Ugh... (Updated)
Moderate Conservative Manifesto
Forwarded from a Friend
ResurrectionSong: Help Wanted

Blogroll
All content ©2003 by the authors of ResurrectionSong.com except where noted.