Thanks, Tibor, another wonderful essay.
You hit the nail squarely on the head by identifying the non-rational hypocritical positions held by both the pro-life and pro-choice advocates. The most vociferous among these groups tend to take the most extreme possible stance bordering on a choice of a total “yes” or “no”. And as you pointed out, they do so, not for any logical reason backed up with empirical evidence, but based on their respective agendas.
In my opinion, the people that fanatically dedicate their lives to advancing either of these positions are operating from one side of the same coin.
In the case of the extreme pro-lifers, the underlying agenda is about having another method for controlling the behavior of women (in this case, the sexual behavior); and as a consequence, a ban on abortion helps facilitate the subordination of women to a patriarchal value system. Call me crazy, but there’s something supremely disingenuous about a man fighting for a child’s “right to life” - by holding up a large jar of formaldehyde with a fake fetus inside. Peculiarly, but in many ways understandably, some of the most dedicated pro-life advocates are women.
In the case of the extreme pro-choicer, the agenda is twofold; firstly, it is used as a wedge issue to rouse women into an even greater adversarial relationship with men. In this respect, it is a method of expanding the political influence of organizations that can only thrive by maintaining the divisive identity politics that further balkanize our culture. And secondly, as a means to undermine the concept of morality and individual responsibility (concepts which are widely viewed as the sole province of religious moral codes); hence a blow against the agenda of the religious is considered a victory by those of the subjectivist/relativist schools of thought.
When it’s all said and done, behind all those crocodile tears for the death of the “unborn”, and behind all the shrill screeching about a woman’s “right” to her own body; behind it all, the reality is just Attila and the Witch Doctor having another go at each other. The only thing that makes this particular turf war unique, is the fact that in this case, Attila is represented by the religious-right - while the Witch Doctor is represented by ultra-liberal left.
However, Tibor, here is where you might differ with me; for it’s in my belief that the majority of the people taking positions in the pro-life/pro-choice divide are not that far from your position on the issue. One of the most fascinating polls that I recently saw asked the traditional 2 'either-or' questions on the issue, but this time a third choice was added. Along with the usual 2 choices, there was a third choice stated along the lines of, “Without exception, the right to an abortion shall be legal at any point within the 1st trimester, and with the sole exception of a mother’s life being in danger: no abortion may be done after fetal development reaches a stage where the fetus has independent viability outside of the womb”. My wording is way off, but it was something along these lines, and I think you get the general idea.
The results were a large majority in favor of the third choice. This indicates to me that, unlike the loud squeaky wheels of fundamentalists literalists and the man hating Femi-Nazis, that your typical “Easter and Christmas” Christian and the modern urban professional woman (whom more often than not, are one in the same) – do not hold extreme agenda driven positions on the issue; and given a more rational third choice, they opt for the one that appeals to their common sense. In other words, when the issue is taken out of the hands of the wackos, your average American doesn’t buy into the idea that 2 seconds after a sperm hits the egg, viola, you have a genuine “baby”! But also, he won’t buy into the monstrously inverted logic, that if a 9-month pregnant woman gave birth to healthy child at 2pm, it should have been perfectly legal for her to have had this “fetus” aborted just an hour earlier!
Having read a lot of your essays and articles in the past, Tibor, I think am somewhat familiar with your position on the issue. Just correct me if I am wrong, but if I remember correctly, your preference is for a rational standard being implemented with a cut off date between the 22nd and 26th week of fetal development; this time period being chosen due to a body of science which indicates a significantly developed cerebral cortex operating the brain on a level of higher functioning. And perhaps your idea is to have a standard based on this science to be codified into law, recognizing this as the line upon which a developing fetus is recognized as a rights’ protected - human being. Interestingly, this is not far off the mark of the desire of the average American.
George
(Edited by George W. Cordero on 2/27, 12:31pm)
|
