November 10, 2003
-
Saturday night, I read a very well written blog speaking out against the legislation that proposes to end partial birth abortions in the United States. It took me 12 hours to decide how I wanted to respond to that blog.
I am a Roman Catholic and am philosophically and morally opposed to abortion at any stage. I believe, however, that abortion is a religious and moral issue and therefore should be addressed in churches and families, not in the law.
Many of the early settlers of what is now the United States came here to escape religious persecution. They founded a country based on separation of church and state to guarantee religious freedom for themselves and their descendants. Now it seems that there is a very strong movement in this country to take away that right and allow certain groups of people to tell our citizens how they must think and what they must believe. I find this to be frightening, even dangerous.
I do not believe that the issue here is really abortion. Rather, the issue is power. Promoting issues that raise strong emotions and bring about division among the citizenry is just a means to achieving that power. The abortion issue is an excellent battering ram for the power seekers because it divides on the basis of religion and also on the basis of sex. It is emotionally charged. All parties believe that they are right, but no group can be proven to be right because the issue involves matters of faith; belief in the soul and ideas about when the soul enters a fetus. Those concepts are not subject to objective proof. Use of such issues is very effective. Similar emotionally charged issues include taking the words “under God” out of the Pledge of Allegiance and the controversy over whether prayer should be allowed in the schools and at public meetings.
The issue in all the above cases is respect. The question is, in the United States, do we have the right to believe as we choose and to base our actions on that belief, do we accept and respect each person’s right to do that, or do we allow laws to be made which tell us how we must believe? That question is far more encompassing than any single issue.
The groups leading this movement are not a majority. That is why they have to use issues that divide. The more division they can cause, the more easily they can be elected to positions of power.
Unfortunately, many people are not very deep thinkers, so when someone throws them an emotionally charged issue, they react from the gut and not from the head. I think it is very important that we who are parents try to equip our children with the best possible thinking skills. It is also important to discuss moral values in our homes and equip our offspring with the tools they need to make their own choices. They need to learn to respect the rights of others to make choices also. That is the only way issues such as this one can ever be resolved. It cannot be done with laws.
I can remember being in college before 1970 and hearing a presentation on the need for legal abortion. At that time, I was horrified because I was at a Catholic Women’s college and to me it seemed that the school was hosting an attack on my religion, the very religion they were supposed to support! I had a hard time dealing with that. I have come to realize that that was not the case, however. No one has to have an abortion just because it is legal. Respecting differences in religious philosophy does not weaken religion. Instead, it strengthens it. I used to tell my kids that being moral is nothing to be proud of if you have no other choice. If you believe differently than I do, it does not diminish me or threaten me. It is when you do not respect me that that happens.
So, do we in the United States respect each other and the right of each person to choose for himself/herself, not about one issue, but about all religious and moral issues? That’s the issue and the question.
Comments (9)
I heartily agree with your main point here that the issue isn’t abortion itself but the legitimacy of a government attempting to legislate morality. Nobody has a moratorium on ethics.
Secondarily to this, I wanted to say thank you because the thing that annoys me most is when people assume that because I am pro-choice I am therefore pro-abortion. That couldn’t be further from the truth. I heartily doubt I could ever go through with one myself, for that matter. I am, however, one of the lucky ones, who has genuine options and a supporting, loving family I could count on should I ever find myself in that situation.
One thing, though ~ “‘partial birth’ abortion” is a Republican-created phrase specifically designed to raise emotions and create a gut reaction to the issue. It doesn’t exist in medical terminology. The procedure Bush is trying to ban (pending federal court appeals against its dubious constitutionality) is actually an Intact Dilation and Extraction, and its use is so rare that this can hardly be seen as anything but a stepping stone to the downfall of the provisions of Roe v Wade.
(I am really glad you took the time to think and write about this, too. I do appreciate it. One of the reasons I blog on sociopolitical matters so much is because in attempting to define my own opinion, and encouraging healthy debate amongst my friends here on Xanga, I actually learn so much. I find that a great thing, from a personal and a law-student perspective. Thanks again
)
For me, it’s not even a matter of pro choice because I do not see this as a one topic issue. It’s a matter of respecting differences and recognizing others’ right to their beliefs.
Some of the people leading the religious right claim that my religion is a cult. If they are allowed to gain the power they seek, it will not be just other people’s rights that will be taken away.
I think we’re at cross purposes, because isn’t that a choice? The choice of what beliefs you will follow? The right to make that decision?
Scary, isn’t it?
You articulated your thoughts very well. Observing human nature, the desire for power and control fuels most of our troubles in the world. It makes me skeptical of all politicians, no matter which side they’re on. They all behave badly when they have the power. Sad. I used to think we had a democracy, but now I think its just a bunch of people trying to get their own agendas into law, not representing their constituencies, and definitely not working for the good of all of us. I think the new law, if the procedure is rare, is just a bone to throw to the radical right.
I saw about this on TV I did not realise that the USA allow such things to go on so late in the pregancey . Here the limit is at 22 weeks .If you remember a while ago I did a blog about abortion that even though I am a catholic I realise that there will always be abortions and we have to do things ie better sex education to help prevent them .
A good thoughtful blog about how certain people have their own agenda on such matters
Superbly written, Nance.
I’m optimistic that the law will be overturned. Probably unreasonably optimistic
But …I AM consoled by the thought that the madness in Washington is temporary, that the pendulum will swing the other way soon enough, that our republic is strong enough to withstand such attacks against our freedoms.
It’s that marvelous Constitution of ours. The pages get singed and tattered every few decades, as now, but the binding is firm. Sanity in our laws will return. Someday.
A well written blog! I have to say that my thinking diverges from yours at one particular point, which takes us on very different paths. I believe that the abortion issue is NOT a religious and moral issue. It is an issue of destroying someones right to live, the most fundamental right that we have in this world. Furthermore, I believe that it is irrelevant when the soul enters the fetus or the body, the fact remains that this fetus, group of cells, whatever, will become life if not interfered with. Since I believe that, which is only truth, I think that the law, for lack of anything better, needs to protect that life, much that way we protect the lives of those walking around in this world. I think that, whether or not you believe in God, “Thou shalt not kill” is a pretty good dictum to live by! And yes, I oppose capital punishment for these same reasons.
These are not feelings I have always had. I struggled with this issue (still do to a certain extent) until I had a miscarriage in 1995. For some reason that loss made me think about the person who was going to be, and wasn’t. What rights (and I mean human rights, not Constitutional) should that life (or potential life) have?
Anyway, thanks for giving me the chance to air by views. Since I am behind and this an old blog probably not too many people will get to read it.
My thoughts exactly.
Amen