Can't we all just get along
Earlier this week, Eric Alterman chided the left for demanding ideological purity of Democratic presidential candidates, in particular noting the outcry over Hillary Clinton's recent remarks to the centrist Democratic Leadership Council. He zeroes in on abortion, and here's the money quote:
Abortion is probably necessary in a society that (purposely) does such a bad job of educating its youth about sex and does not give a s**t about poor kids once they’ve been born. But for most people it’s a personal tragedy. To celebrate it as a “right” is a big mistake, given what an unhappy experience it is for all concerned. What’s more, a lot of people think it’s murder and their religion tells them this is true. Why can’t we respectfully disagree? How does that diminish anyone? Grow up, everybody.
posted by Jonathan Potts at
6:56 PM
5 Comments:
Oh man, what a child some of us have been. I've seen the light.
I now promise never to force Eric Alterman (or anyone else) to have an abortion. Furthermore, I promise never to support a politician who would force Eric Alterman (or anyone else) to have an abortion. I hope Eric will do likewise and never deny me (or anyone else) the choice to have an abortion and never support a politician who would deny me (or anyone else) the choice to have an abortion.
There. I guess that settles that. :-)
7:39 PM
I suppose the problem with that attitude is it shows no respect for people who genuinely believe abortion is murder, or at least something to be avoided at all costs. Those of us who support abortion rights need to ask how we lost the moral high ground in this debate, and it's not just because of the ascendancy of the religious right and the GOP.
Part of the answer, of course, lies in pointing out the hippocrisy of the anti-abortion movement, as it not only seeks to eliminate abortion but also birth control. Of course, that requires abortion rights advocates to draw a bright line between abortion and birth control, not treating one like the other.
But it also lies in approaching the issue much as Alterman suggests--as a necessity for society but that something that no one would want to choose, if they had another option. In other words, acknowledging that there are some circumstances under which abortion is wrong.
8:08 PM
"I suppose the problem with that attitude is it shows no respect for people who genuinely believe abortion is murder, or at least something to be avoided at all costs."
People who genuinely believe abortion is murder will always try to end all abortions. No one will ever change their minds on that. I respect the right for people to have any opinion they want. I do not respect their "right" to end women's right to control their bodies.
"Those of us who support abortion rights need to ask how we lost the moral high ground in this debate, and it's not just because of the ascendancy of the religious right and the GOP."
Actually, it mostly is ascendancy of the religious right and the GOP. Or did evolutionists do something "wrong" too to lose the position they staked out?
"Part of the answer, of course, lies in pointing out the hippocrisy of the anti-abortion movement, as it not only seeks to eliminate abortion but also birth control. Of course, that requires abortion rights advocates to draw a bright line between abortion and birth control, not treating one like the other."
Sorry, but this is where you just don't "get it." It is not hypocrisy on their part. If you believe that you are a full human at conception, then most forms of birth control (female forms anyway) are abortifacients. The pill, the morning after pill, the IUD, etc., all risk "killing a baby." While they do try to prevent conception, they also can prevent a blastocyst from adhering to the uterine wall.
But it also lies in approaching the issue much as Alterman suggests--as a necessity for society but that something that no one would want to choose, if they had another option. In other words, acknowledging that there are some circumstances under which abortion is wrong."
What options do you have once you are pregnant: carry it to term or don't. Did I miss one? Under exactly what circumstances are abortions "wrong"? Please define them. And, by "wrong" do you mean should be illegal?
8:47 PM
We could have a nice chicken-and-the-egg argument over how the religious right has gained so much influence, or why they even become so engaged in politics to begin with. Abortion is a key reason, largely because of Roe v. Wade. The case could have been decided more narrowly, which may very well have had the same result in the long run, though a result that would have been achieved through the political process.
You raise a good point regarding birth control. But this isn't just a battle between two diametrically opposed interest groups. There are plenty of people in the middle who need to be persuaded, and a lot of them believe that birth control is OK but abortion may not be.
And I don't think something has to be illegal, or even should be illegal, for it to be wrong in some cases.
8:21 AM
To clarify my second point, I think the Democratic Party should adopt the goal of making abortions rare--where have I heard that before?--by giving women access to birth control (including morning-after pills) and because we have social policies that support poor and single mothers. Of course that is not going to win over religious conservatives. But if all the Republicans had on their side was religious conservatives, we'd be enjoying Al Gore's second term right now.
8:28 AM
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home