Both men magnanimously claim to understand that there are certain circumstances where a decision to have an abortion, while regrettable, is merited. The good abortion versus bad abortion appears pretty clear to Mr. Saletan in particular.
abortions are worse in the second trimester than in the first. Repeat abortions are worse than first-time abortions. Abortions for 20-year-olds are worse than abortions for 10-year-olds. Elective abortions are worse than abortions to protect the woman's health
Does Mr. Saletan have a similar scale for murder? Is murdering a 12-year-old child, worse than murdering an 82- year old man? Is murder less heinous if the victim is terminally ill? Is killing a priest more evil than killing a homeless person? Who determines what value we place on life?
Look at the distinctions Mr. Saletan makes. An abortion for a 20-year-old is worse than for a ten-year-old. Does Mr. Saletan assume that the child is a victim of rape or incest, and the 20-year-old is a slutty college student who had careless sex?
As often seems to be the case in these abortion arguments, the issue is usually a male choosing to judge the character of a woman. They often claim their only concern is the rights of an unborn child. In many cases, however, they are judging a woman guilty of immorality. Passing sentence, they order the woman to have this child. A living “Scarlet Letter”; which must be worn for the next eighteen years.
We all make moral judgments, in situations like these. I know I do. I agree that in some instances, I would be more likely to approve of a woman’s decision to have an abortion than in others. Where I differ with these columnists, is that I do not seek to codify my moral judgments into law. The only one with the absolute right to make a decision is the woman whose life we are talking about. Hopefully, the decision is made in consultation with her family, and ideally the father. In the end, however, it is the woman’s decision. The rest of us need to respect that, and mind our own business.
Okay, I'm going to try this again. However, I'm going to post it in sections so that I (hopefully) don't lose anything.
ReplyDeletePart 1
I think Saletan, in his column and in the quote you have taken, is summing up Douthat's and the commonly held point of you -- paraphrasing -- that the issue of abortion lies squarely in a grey area. (The exception to that commonality being pro-lifers, of course.) Douthat is saying that, "enshrining a near-absolute right" to abortion precludes any type of debate, that the issue is all or nothing, black or white. He is saying that the debate required in the creation of laws allows for the possibility of grey.
I'm not saying I agree with him, just that that's what I take from his op-ed piece.
Saletan's response (in my understanding), after largely agreeing with Douthat, is that, that type of debate, while it may examine the possibility of grey, results in legal black and white. It opens the door further to this becoming a criminal issue enforced by "police, detectives, judges and jails". In other words, moving one step closer to a police state (my term, not his.)
In both cases, it was refreshing to hear a different issue raised, and not just a rehashing of what has already been (and will continue to be) debated: Is abortion right or wrong? When is it right; when is it wrong?
Okay, posting before losing.
Part 2
ReplyDelete(Sorry. First sentence above should read "point of view" not "point of you". :))
My own position on abortion can be summed up as follows: Thank god I never had to decide.
I do believe in a woman's right to abortion, I do believe there are shades of grey, but at the same time, how can you "force" a woman to have a baby, which is essentially what you are doing if you deny her the right to abortion. Is there an equivalent denial of rights for men? Does that even matter?
Yup. More shades of grey.
I really only came close to contemplating these matters in a practical sense, rather than theoretically, once, in my first year of university. Soon after moving into residence, our proctors gathered us all in the common room and told us about many things relating to campus life. The only one I remember is being told (in 1979) that if we got pregnant and wanted an abortion, we would basically be approved for one because we were university students.
Wow. What a concept is that! You are going to contribute something to society (yeah right) so you get the "get out of jail free" ticket. I remember feeling slightly titillated (I was pretty naive) to be in this "privileged" group, but also confused by the double-standard.
A couple of weeks after that lecture, I was "late". That never happened to me, so I was worried. I had gone as far as buying a pregnancy test kit when things sorted themselves out. But I had had time to consider the "what if" scenarios.
I don't think I could have done it, even if it had jeopardized my education. I was in love with the non-baby's father and had been for two years. I don't think I could have destroyed something that had resulted -- even accidentally -- from that love.
So I guess I'm saying my own stance on the issue is somewhat head-stuck-in-the-sand. But I wouldn't deny the right of any woman to consider her options -- hopefully with care -- and to include within them the right to abortion.
I agree that there are gray areas involved in any debate about abortion. The question is who gets to decide what a woman can and can and can not do. Your example from your college days is a perfect example. The privileged always get to decide for themselves.
ReplyDeleteSaletan brings up Mississippi. That is one of the poorest and least educated states in the union, and the laws have been written in a manner that makes obtaining an abortion nearly impossible. That is what happens when you have a "democratic" debate, as Douthat suggests.
If Rowe v Wade were ever overturned, abortion would not be illegal in the US. Most rational states, would continue to have legal abortion. But large sections of the country, ruled by the Religious fundamentalists would be taking the decision away from millions of Americans who could not afford to travel to get an abortion.