Trigger warning folks; might want to grab something to hold on to while you read.
Victor calls me a Liberal. We had an argument regarding wiki-leaks and whether we support what they're doing or not, I do, he doesn't, so he wryly pointed out that when I vote, he feels I should vote Liberal. I suppose it's true, I am so Liberal, I'm kind of a Liberal joke. Free speech above all else, more green policies, and to be frank, I don't use shampoo. But this is precisely why I dislike that the highest form of government we can aspire to these days is Democracy.
As a result of the system, we are forced to choose; to put ourselves in one camp, pigeonhole ourselves. "I don't support this policy." "Oh, so you're a Tory?" Well, no. I can't choose to compromise some of my principles so I can have others. They are all equally precious to me and I refuse to rank free speech against other things, weighing them as if I could do without one or another. It is reprehensible to me that I should be forced to act like there are things I do not support to gain the ones I do.
For example, Victor may have identified me as Liberal, but I support the military. I believe it should be a priority in our budget, and this is not really a classical Liberal view. But I also support gay marriage. Which is not a typically conservative view. But the biggest divergence I find is that while I support free speech and complete openness and accountability in our government, I cannot support abortion.
Feels pretty good to go on and get that out there. Before any heated discussion begins I should point out two things: one I am necessarily not talking about medical problems. If there is a forty percent or greater chance that your pregnancy will harm you, it should entirely be your choice to risk it or not, and the hospital should assist you. Two, I am discounting the morning-after pill which, although it is classified as an abortifacent, I consider it valid, but I also believe it should be readily available. These exceptions considered, I'm putting my foot down.
But why? Don't you support a woman's right to choose?
What conservatives and Pro-lifers feared would happen is coming to pass. Just today I was listening to the radio (Tuned to a heavily conservative station; one of the hazards of living with a Tory I suppose) while they discussed twin reductions. No, that's not where you stop sleeping in a queen bed and start sleeping in a couple of twin beds instead, that's where a pregnant woman discovers that she is carrying twins and elects to "reduce" it to a single baby (fetus, whatever).This is apparently pretty common in cases of IV fertilization because to ensure at least one pregnancy takes, they will implant two zygotes, which people are warned about prior to, and elect to take the risk of twins.
How can we support this? Even hardened pro-choice people squirm at this. It is selfishly terminating a life. Pro-life people everywhere feared that we would become too flippant about abortion, that we would take it for granted and you would see people getting needless abortions, and now, here we are. I cannot say what should be done about this; I personally can't see where we could draw a line. Any stand we take would be arbitrarily placed. 6 months? 3 months? Only 1 to 0, not 2 to 1? Only if there's a risk of medical issues? All I know is that it is too loose now. We are experiencing what we experience with divorces. A fifty percent divorce rate because they are too easy now, too accessible, and we take that for granted. But we cannot stand by and let people take abortions for granted. As much as I try to dissociate myself from it, and take a dispassionate view, it is ending a life. I'm not going to hold up disgusting pictures on the sidewalk to convince others to see things my way, because that just disrespects what has been done, and I cannot support that, but neither can I support its continuation in this fashion.
4 comments:
Took me a bit to a) get over the shock of hearing this from you and b) come up with a response that didn't sound like "nuh uh!"
While I can understand how you can say "all or nothing", I hope you can also understand why that really doesn't work. It's the entire reason we have courts. If all theft was dealt the same punishment, then things would be faster, however, you risk charging the desperate bread thief as harshly as the high jacker. It's right back to the Hammurabi Code. That's where courts come in. They deal with things on a case to case basis. They look at the little details that change murder to self defence. It makes things complicated, but what in life isn't?
I think abortion should also be a case to case basis. A doctor and a psychologist should analyze the "evidence" and once the choice is made, deal with it. Sure, someone will go off to Mexico to get it done, like they do with gender reassignment, but that's them dealing with it, no?
It all comes down to choice--ours as a community. I think if there is no legal abortion, things will just go back to the good old coat hanger and herbal remedy days. Hear that? That's postpartum mothers drowning their offspring in the bathtub. You can't take away someone's choice, just how much support and help you give them.
As for the idea of one twin over another, nature does this all the time. Having multiple babies is very dangerous. The more babies, the more premature, the more sick, the more risk to the mother and child. Choosing to have a child is like choosing to go rock climbing in the Grand canyon. Being told you are carrying multiples adds rabid mountain goats to that scenario. Sure, there are plenty of healthy twins out in the world, but not everyone is prepared for rabid mountain goats. Sharp horns and hooves, you know? Small boned ladies are just not made for that kind of assault. Before your body has recovered from the trauma of one child, you are right back delivering another.
Who are we to stick our noses into things, making judgements on their choices without knowing the facts? Did it work for Darth Vader? The answer is: no, too many resentful folk. Bad mojo.
If you want to be afraid for the future of babies, how about the designer babies? I'm not talking about the "look, he matches my purse" kind of baby. I am talking "super human" genetically flawless will never die of heart disease baby. Next they will make "emotionally stable" females. Now THAT is terrifying. Imagine the economic ramifications of such a diminished chocolate market. Of course, CHina would be able to choose boy embryos and decrease their girl orphanages. Give the concept a few decades, and forget black or white, we'll be polka dots or stripes.
What? It's far more likely than abortion weekend spa parties.
Took me a bit to a) get over the shock of hearing this from you and b) come up with a response that didn't sound like "nuh uh!"
While I can understand how you can say "all or nothing", I hope you can also understand why that really doesn't work. It's the entire reason we have courts. If all theft was dealt the same punishment, then things would be faster, however, you risk charging the desperate bread thief as harshly as the high jacker. It's right back to the Hammurabi Code. That's where courts come in. They deal with things on a case to case basis. They look at the little details that change murder to self defence. It makes things complicated, but what in life isn't?
I think abortion should also be a case to case basis. A doctor and a psychologist should analyze the "evidence" and once the choice is made, deal with it. Sure, someone will go off to Mexico to get it done, like they do with gender reassignment, but that's them dealing with it, no?
It all comes down to choice--ours as a community. I think if there is no legal abortion, things will just go back to the good old coat hanger and herbal remedy days. Hear that? That's postpartum mothers drowning their offspring in the bathtub. You can't take away someone's choice, just how much support and help you give them.
As for the idea of one twin over another, nature does this all the time. Having multiple babies is very dangerous. The more babies, the more premature, the more sick, the more risk to the mother and child. Choosing to have a child is like choosing to go rock climbing in the Grand canyon. Being told you are carrying multiples adds rabid mountain goats to that scenario. Sure, there are plenty of healthy twins out in the world, but not everyone is prepared for rabid mountain goats. Sharp horns and hooves, you know? Small boned ladies are just not made for that kind of assault. Before your body has recovered from the trauma of one child, you are right back delivering another.
Who are we to stick our noses into things, making judgements on their choices without knowing the facts? Did it work for Darth Vader? The answer is: no, too many resentful folk. Bad mojo.
Google multiplied my comment. Must be showing approval.
Or maybe it's showing it's age? Nothing ont he internet was made to last.
Either way, my apologies!
Believe me, Andy, I'm just as surprised to discover it as you were. I never thought I'd be posting that, but well, I just can't support the issue anymore.
The problem with treating the issue on a case to case basis, besides the rampant inconsistency, is that the justice system has the luxury of time on their hands, whereas the pregnancy issue has a definite clock that must not be violated.
I don't think there should be NO abortion, I just don't think it should be considered an option by the woman. I think it should be like chemo. I don't say to a doctor that I want chemo, they tell me I need it. We can give help and support at all stages, and woman still do horrible things under the heel of PP, even though abortion is available now.
Let nature do what nature will then, if it decides it cannot carry two babies, fine. We also have doctors to determine if it is too risky, but it is being abused now. A 10% chance of complications therefore end one of the fetuses? Why will we accept a 10% risk in some places but now that we can have abortions so readily, that risk is too much?
Unfortunately, the nature of society dictates that we must make judgments. We don't have to do it without knowing their reasons, but since I'm not speaking of specifics, I'm just laying some ideas for what I think would constitute valid reasons.
I am terrified of the notion of designer babies, and also the notion of deliberately stunting the growth of developmentally-disabled adults to make them easier to handle. But I feel that is a product of our "drop-down select-a-option" culture, and is a topic for another post.
Although they haven't been linked to spa parties, I still think we've become too cavalier about abortions and unless we do something, we'll become even more jaded about them.
Post a Comment