Thursday, March 30, 2006

Another twist in the Abortion issue

I have been meaning to post about this in the last few days, but have not had the chance yet, because I wanted to give this some thought.
But simply I can understand the anger and frustration that such people have when they attack abortion clinics but it goes without saying that they are doing no help to the pro-life cause at all, and for those who claim that what they are doing is out of their Christian faith ought to probably have a re-read of the Bible.
As some of you know, I am a pro-lifer myself (I just couldn't be anything else for the simple reason that I regard a foetus as a growing and living potential for human life!Although in some exceptional cases I would agree to abortions), but I am also keenly aware of the difficulties and distress many women suffer (to the point of their mental health, of not physical being affected) that leads them to taking these decisions. What I think many pro-life and pro-choice people can agree on (those who take a moderate tone that is) is that they need as much love and consideration and support as possible. Accusing teachers of child abuse simply for promoting sex education (when many fourteen and fifteen year olds have rampaging hormones and need a lot of help and support), and send hate mail to doctors is not helpful in the least and not something (for those who claim to be motivated by faith) that I imagine Jesus would do! The most violent thing he ever did in the gospels was to drive out the money lenders in the Temple and there was a specific reason for that!
So yeah, this is a difficult time to be a pro-lifer, and I would strongly urge anyone who shares my views to not only consider the unborn child and his/her rights and the vulnerable state he/she is in, but also the considerations of the unborn mother and what she is going through. Believe it or not, not all women want an abortion because they see being pregnant as inconvenient. In fact I suspect those women are in a minority.

8 comments:

politicschimpette said...

I completely agree, although I speak from a pro-choice background. I wouldn't have an abortion myself, but would support anyone who was in the position of wanting one. Contrary to what some people believe (and some newspapers peddle) deciding to undergo such a procedure is a HUGE thing, and not at all entered into lightly. People who protest and take un-called for action against Doctors and the like are deeply un-Christian. Well, that's what I think, anyway!

Paul Burgin said...

I agree, although whilst I wouldn't 'support' someone having an abortion, I hope I would be there for them and accept them whatever decision they made, without making pithy or grandiose judgements

SUZANNE said...

I find it curious that you think an unborn child has rights, but sometimes you would allow abortions. Isn't the unborn child an equal with a right to life equal to the mother's? Why should a baby die because of the mother's circumstances?

If you want to know what works, look at the people who are successful. In the US, bombing abortion clinics has not worked, but pressuring people does. I wouldn't recommend sending hate mail, but protesting, lobbying and speaking up has definitively helped to begin to create a pro-life climate.

Paul Burgin said...

Hi Suzanne

I am talking about exceptional circumstances, such as the baby not being properly developed (which would include having no brain, and/or no skull and I know of one such case) and in this situation threatening the mothers' life. There is also the Catch 22 situation where there is the strong likelihood of either the mother or baby dying, or they both die and I am not saying 'Oh well, you must abort there!' I am simply saying that that situation needs careful thought and consideration, and yes, prayer.

torytorytory said...

As a non-conformist Christian, I tend to be a pro-lifer. However, from a political libertarian viewpoint, I believe that abortions should never be banned outright, but be discouraged by governments.

Paul Burgin said...

But then it goes into the debate as to at what stage of pregnancy abortions should cease.
In any case, for the sake of argument, I see your point but to take it to another level, you might as well say that slavery should not have been banned but discouraged. I would not ban abortion outright, but I would want to see some changes in the law.

torytorytory said...

"I see your point but to take it to another level, you might as well say that slavery should not have been banned but discouraged"

The 'slippery slope' argument doesn't really count here. Slavery is taking away someone's basic human right and liberty whereas abortion is more invisible 'self-hurt' (look I don't want to defend abortion seeing as I believe a foetus is a potential life that should have a right to live, but the state has a legal duty to stop visible slavery whereas the rights of a foetus is a uncertain polemic issue in different people's eyes - not that I'm into relativistic morality).

The problem I have with banning every objectionable (such as smoking, drinking or fox-hunting) or immoral act is that I distrust the state to play the moral judge and master. History and present cases (such as theocratic states in the Middle East) has shown that such states lean toward terrible persecution and polarisation.

Paul Burgin said...

"The 'slippery slope' argument doesn't really count here. Slavery is taking away someone's basic human right and liberty whereas abortion is more invisible 'self-hurt' (look I don't want to defend abortion seeing as I believe a foetus is a potential life that should have a right to live, but the state has a legal duty to stop visible slavery whereas the rights of a foetus is a uncertain polemic issue in different people's eyes - not that I'm into relativistic morality)."
----------------
Being legalistic about abortion because you cannot see it is somewhat of a slippery argument, although I take your point about relativistic morality.
----------------
"The problem I have with banning every objectionable (such as smoking, drinking or fox-hunting) or immoral act is that I distrust the state to play the moral judge and master. History and present cases (such as theocratic states in the Middle East) has shown that such states lean toward terrible persecution and polarisation"
------------------
Well the reason I am a Social Democrat is that I have such a pessimistic view of human nature I think that too much of a free market society or too much of a natonalised state is dangerous because people cannot be trusted in both major enviroments. I also think that if something is so unpopular with the majority of people and patently harmful, then there is a strong case for making it illegal, otherwise you might just as well legalise hard drugs.