The commentary and rancor accompanying the passing of yet another anniversary of the ill-conceived Roe vs Wade decision by the U.S. Supreme Court brings to mind a more neglected, but possibly even more fundamental truth about the controversy:
From the pov of outside looking in, the fact is that Abortion Advocacy of the hardline type is in fact the greatest stain by far on Liberalism's (or if one prefers, the Left) supposed champion of ideals and concern for the unwanted. By hardline, I refer to such things as partial-birth abortion, and the refusal to readily grant parental notification rights, and the insistence on unlimited abortion on demand and for any reasons including psychological ones.
What is so amazing about this is at a stroke this advocacy negates and undermines the possible overall message of Liberalism, and makes a mockery of its stated goals. After all, on other so-called Left issues, like gay/lesbian rights, the Civil Rights movement in general, the correctness of offensive war in policy, the harshness of capital punishment ---- EVERY one of these issues boils down to an attempt to seek a gentler and more restrained solution to problems. Most of the causes also share in common a concern for those of lesser means, or opportunity, to defend or look out for themselves. This at least, is the stated goals of Liberalism. In my opinion, it was even true, prior to the rise of the Pro- unrestricted Abortion clique imposing their will by judicial fiat and resisting any attempts to in any way modify or lessen the harshness of their cause.
You see, there are many Conservatives, `Right-wingers' whatever the Left wishes to term them in turn, that would give more credit to the Liberal point of view if it were not so casual and naked in its hypocrisy. Advocacy to abolish capital punishment, complaints about destroying enemies in war, mistreating saboteurs and terrorists --- all these fall on deaf ears as long as the Left lets itself to appear to not only approve, but glorify abortion of definite innocents.
Consider: the very foundation and point of the Civil Rights movement, and egalitarianism in general, was to establish safeguards and protections for the less advantaged, the dependent, the downtrodden, or those with little political voice or means. Protect them particularly from the depredations of larger agendas and social attitudes. Allow such lives a fair chance. The campaigns on behalf of the handicapped are a good example of this as well. Yet into this mix drops unlimited, unconstrained Abortion. The very act of sacrificing millions of lives waiting to be, those with almost no legal option or voice just because they are dependent in much the same way that the bedridden elderly are. Sacrificing these unborn for what on any honest analysis is really the insistence on the right to have careless, unplanned, and irresponsible sex. Abortion as birth control to secure casual sex is by far the vast majority of the millions of abortions now performed, with the oft-touted `triage' of Rape/Incest/Danger to Mother being comparatively rare.
Even if one wishes to argue some cases that legislation should exist to allow an abortion option, the real issue is the unlimited and flagrant abuse of the civil rights of the unborn, and that this was imposed by judicial fiat with no room for modification. After all, medical science has shown that all the genetic components that will make the person-to-be are present from the start. The only difference inside and outside the womb is the dependency on the environment --- much like exists in nursing homes.
This is not denying that sometimes special and tragic individual circumstances that are not frivolous or a product of casual behavior lay behind some abortions. The real problem is the Left's continuing failure to call for some restraint, to aggressively explore more humane and thoughtful options to the challenge of unwanted pregnancies. In a real way, the issue with Liberalism and Abortion-on-Demand is not even about the act of abortion. It is about how this is really the single-greatest stumbling block to the Liberal, or Progressive, or whatever one prefers, paradigm and stains their credibility.
The irony is, if this is realized, if Liberalism itself turns from a near advocacy of slaying the unborn for convenience(and statements like "the sanctity of abortion" prove this tendency) , then it can likely regain the noble and inspiring role it played in our history in "raising the bar" and imagining a better nation for all. Once the abusive excesses of unlimited abortion are confronted by Liberals, consistency on matters of life and dignity will be regained, and overall habits of callousness in punishment and even policy will begin to fade. It can't happen now. This because to thoughtful Centrists and Conservatives the loudest voices and spokesmen of Liberals - and their party of choice, the Democrats - at present come across as hateful, intolerant, and glorifying of abortion and the trampling of decency. Ironically, the very things they once opposed, and claim to still do.
That is the challenge for Liberals in the coming years, and a long-overdue new crop of spokesmen for the Democratic Party.
- Anthony
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Huzzah!
You'll remember, of course, my pitiful attempts to call attention to Democrats for Life of America back in Fall of 2004. Though I am not a Democrat, I support this organization fully and wanted to post a couple of quotes from DFLA sites in support of your thesis:
"It is an anomaly that our life-affirming Democratic Party has in some quarters recently become identified with death, euthanasia, capital punishment, and abortion in contradiction to standards that apply to other actions in the American criminal justice system about the willful taking of helpless life. Killing other human beings, and rationalizing it, is not our vision for our Democratic Party." --Capital of Texas Democrats for Life [http://www.io.com/ctdfl/]
"It is consistent with the root principles of both the Democratic Party and the feminist movement to respect life and to encourage the development of everyone's full potential." --Democrats for Life of Texas [http://www.dfl-tex.org/]
"Democrats for Life of America exists to foster respect for life, from the beginning of life to natural death. This includes, but is not limited to, opposition to abortion, capital punishment, and euthanasia. Democrats for Life of America is one of over 200 member organizations of Consistent Life: an international network for peace, justice and life." --Democrats for Life of America [http://www.democratsforlife.org/]
Perhaps the real issue that makes the left's abortion advocacy appear contradictory to its other stances is the way it defines freedom. Freedom is not only ability to pursue such pseudo-psych goals as self-actualization and realization but also the ability to have no one encroach on private behaviors (or in some cases, public ones) except when those behaviors are in line with or have consequences that have historically been associated with paternalistic attitudes.
Resistance to unlimited abortion rights, therefore, smacks of an attempt to deny an individual one's right to live life as he or she chooses and make decisions in the privacy of one's own bedroom or with one's doctor. It also is perhaps an attempt to ensure that every child is born "wanted" and therefore has the tools to best "self-realize."
The left's position on abortion is therefore consistent with liberalism in this at least: a negative response to judging how others should conduct their private lives. There's also sometimes an underlying message saying that that creating additional human life on our already population-burdened planet is irresponsible.
Sandra Day O'Connor wrote in the '92 Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision: "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life." Liberalism's support for abortion, under such a definition, is justified.
clay, I'm all for increased paternal responsibility, but nevertheless see the need to remind that during pregnancy, it is the woman who experiences the physical changes, the pain of childbirth, the potential risks to her life, and she is the one who is more likely to suffer from debilitating mental health problems due to changes in hormone levels, etc.
It can be argued that a man makes his choice when he chooses to engage in intercourse with that woman, and if he fails to know her position on terminating a pregnancy that may result from that act, well, that was his responsibility.
However, I would like to see more burden (or perhaps more shame) placed on the men who are engaging in irresponsible sexual behavior that may result in abortions, and an elimination of the shame associated with offering a child for adoption - I truly believe it would be disastrous to force people to be parents to the child they "accidentally" conceived, and bound to each other, without huge societal shifts that reaffirmed the importance of family and support structure, etc.
I would like to see men have a greater say in this issue, but with full recognition that part of what drives the "it's her body" response among abortion advocates is the double standard for sexual conduct that men have been the beneficiary of since ancient times. Arguments by men have to recognize that women have shouldered a disproportionate amount of the burden of the consequences of sex, and aim to achieve greater equality on that front.
Post a Comment