A friend of mine recently helped me realize how difficult it is to discuss politically polarized issues. We have been given to believe that stances such as pro-life or pro-choice, conservative or liberal, etc. are mutually exclusive and have predetermined views. How can one see an issue for the nuanced real world set of problems and conflicting interests that it really is? We must as individuals and as a society learn to look at issues that have no easy answers.
I am by definition "pro-life" but I would not agree to the label "anti-abortion" because while I believe unborn babies are people, I do not believe that pregnant women lose their rights to their bodies. What we have is a conflict of interest, where the babies cannot defend themselves, and the mother cannot become independent of the baby before birth without the death of the baby. This is not an easy matter, and while I don't have a clear position on all of the extraneous circumstances (such as rape/incest/medical danger) I still believe we should treat these issues realistically, as difficult, and may end with a person's death.
So I'm pro-life because I think any way of preventing the unnecessary and avoidable death of an innocent person is morally obligatory. Yes, that is a qualified statement, and it means that sometimes an abortion is necessary and unavoidable. But shall we not seek primarily to reform society to make abortion always unnecessary?
Perhaps I should write posts on the paradox of suffering, justice and judgement, and faith versus certainty.
Til next time, dear reader, Bon Voyage.
+u thank you
ReplyDelete