On Choice, or “Dear god, what am I getting myself into…”
Submitted as further evidence that I can never, ever figure out what it is that will rile people up, the abortion issue reared its ugly head on Friday/over the weekend in an unexpected way - what I felt was an interesting battle between a believed-to-be-infalliable Pope and a great example of Western treatment of religion devolved into Just Another Abortion Debate.
I don’t typically discuss abortion for a number of reasons:
a) Everything that could possibly be said about abortion has been said anyway, and I’m highly unlikely to change anyone’s mind on it based on that fact alone.
b) My position on the matter inevitably pleases no one.
c) The issue is way too important to some people, and I don’t like wading in those waters.
d) It’s so hyper-politicized that it’s not worth diving into anyway.
A lot of the discussion ended up being over my statement of being “pro-abortion.” Regardless of what Webster might have to say about it, I feel there’s a precise difference between being “pro-abortion” and “pro-choice: - the former is a statement of being for a political issue, much like people are “pro-gun” or “pro-religion” or “pro-Israel,” while the latter is a statement of the act (in this case, of “choosing” to have an abortion).
I’m not a fan of abortion or abortion rights. I recognize the necessity of them not because of some reproductive rights motive, but rather because the alternative (illegal abortion) is more dangerous. In my mind, it’s better to do everything in our abilities to discourage that choice than to simply paint ourselves into a corner where suddenly we’re forced to say that a 14 year old can get an abortion without speaking to her parents, but not take an aspirin for a headache. It creates a ridiculous rhetorical situation which then bleeds over into public policy in ways that perhaps even most abortion rights supporters might not be entirely comfortable with (and not that it’s a problem in itself - I’m in support of legalizing heroin even though it makes me very uncomfortable).
The best reason (for me, at least) to stick with “pro-abortion” is that it’s simple - I’m in favor of political abortion. I then don’t get caught up in the rhetoric about choice, as it’s not a factor, and no one can pull the opposite on me like folks do regarding people who are “pro-life” and “pro-death penalty” - i.e., they’re only for life when it’s the unborn. After all, the “pro-choice” people - where does the line of choice end for you? If anyone can do anything they want to themselves, is there a line to draw? It’s kind of a weasely political point to make, so I try to avoid it, but most “pro-choice” people have their limits to what kind of “choice” is allowable, and it’s quite easier and more exact to avoid that altogether - especially since I’m generally for any choice that doesn’t unavoidably hurt another human being.
Plus, as a male, the situation gets dicier - although we account for 50% of the creation of the unborn, we’re delegated to the sidelines for 100% of the pregnancy duration, but cannot opt out once the child is born. It’s dangerous for me to even mention this - the typical response usually ranges from “you want control over a woman’s body” to “you just want to have all the sex with none of the responsibility,” neither of which is even close to the truth. However, it falls right back into the thought of choice for me but not for thee - one can choose to abort over the wishes of a father, but a father cannot “abort” once the child is born.
Essentially, where I’m going with this? It’s a huge, huge mess. Roe v. Wade, in my mind, only makes the situation worse, being a poor ruling that ends up dividing the nation in ways that go beyond abortion rights. I tend to avoid it, and I plan on continuing to avoid it once this post heads into the darkness. But the reasons why I am what I am on the issue should be made as clear as possible, given the apparent confusion.
I had more to go on about than just this issue, but this got plenty long enough.