A few thoughts on “pro-choice-ism”, and two analogies

Last updated on: March 26, 2016 at 4:13 pm by Jane the Actuary

A few thoughts on “pro-choice-ism”, and two analogies 2016-03-26T16:13:39-06:00 Jane the Actuary

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Let’s start with this:

The pro-abortion attitudes I cited back on Friday, and the demands that abortion be treated as a routine medical treatment, seem to be increasingly prevalent. It’s highly disturbing to read these sorts of statements, the ones that say “I had an abortion because it’s my right to have sex without ever experiencing a pregnancy, and I don’t believe I or anyone else needs any reason other than simply wanting to.” And these voices so drown out others that attempt to be more reasonable, that it’s hard to hear these other voices.

So here are my two analogies. One describes the attitude of these “uncompromising” pro-abortionists — who probably wouldn’t really even try to weasel their way into rejecting the “pro-abortion” label, given their rhetoric that abortion is a positive action.

This is the “wart” analogy: an unwanted fetus is like a wart. Just get rid of it. Don’t hesitate. It’s an unwanted growth of no moral value or significance whatsoever, a parasite of sorts, invading one’s body uninvited.

But there’s a second analogy: let’s call it the “animal shelter pet” analogy, because the way this group feels about abortion is the way most of us feel about putting down stray cats and dogs.

There’s nothing morally wrong with euthanizing the abandoned dogs and cats at an animal shelter. They have no homes, they are in some cases unadoptable, their lives at the shelter would be inhumane otherwise, and there aren’t enough funds to care for all the animals brought in to Animal Control indefinitely anyway. Hence, reluctantly, those which have been there for too long are put down, and it’s morally acceptable to do so.

But at the same time, it is nonetheless a tragic thing that it’s necessary, and it would be far better to reduce these numbers: better to get cats and dogs spayed and neutered, to encourage people not to buy pets if they won’t be able to take care of them, and to adopt from an animal shelter rather than buying from a breeder, and to help those families who are unable to take care of their pets because they’ve fallen on hard times, by providing vet care, “pet food pantries,” etc.

And, though their voices seem to be more silent than they once were, it is wrong to deny the existence of this second point of view.

Now, to us who are pro-life, it’s hard to really understand how you can inhabit this middle ground. After all, if abortion is wrong, it’s because it’s the ending of a human life, and we generally criminalize the taking of a human life. It’s not like adultery, for instance, where we can shrug it off as “it’s wrong, but not the government’s business.” And if it’s not the ending of a human life, but just something vaguer like a “potential life,” then why bother even being squeamish about it; why not just welcome it the way the “fetus = wart” folks do?

But the problem is that this bright line between life and death doesn’t really seem to exist any longer.

Back in March, I wrote a post I called ““Worse than death”?” in which I discussed a post and a comments thread discussion about whether men or women were worse off in wartime. I pushed back against claims that women suffered such traumas as gang rape by pointing out that men were far more likely to die (e.g., a full 1/3 of Soviet men anywhere near fighting age), and received the reply that what women suffered was “worse than death.” And it struck me at the time that this notion, that there are a great many things that can indeed be “worse than death,” is becoming increasingly common. The increasing acceptance of assisted suicide is part of this — and back when Brittany Maynard was in the news, it wasn’t that hard to stumble into comments defending the right of anyone to kill themselves, regardless of whether society approves of their reason. Indeed, when Robin Williams killed himself, and when it was later determined that he had Lewy Body dementia, there were voices suggesting that he had a “good reason” for killing himself.

And abortion fits into this as well. If death just isn’t that big a deal, if killing can be rationalized as not intrinsically wrong but only if it tangibly harms someone who wanted to life (and who is able to think sophisticated enough thoughts to understand what it means to want to live), then the number of “good reasons” for killing expand. And, likewise, if there isn’t a moral difference between killing a pet and killing a human, but it all depends on the situation and the context, then the rejection of legal restrictions can be paired perfectly well with a desire to reduce abortions. And a “pro-choice but personally opposed” mindset can make sense, just as much as a pet-owner might personally believe a pet owner has a moral obligation to care for a pet but a legal right to abandon it.

Now, what’s interesting to me is that this particular post of mine, which I wrote shortly after I moved my blog to Patheos, didn’t really get much attention at the time. But every now and again, Google Analytics will tell me that someone has stumbled upon it, presumably as the result of some google search or another, and as of today, there have been 712 shares, which is pretty good for me.

But how do you change the mind of someone with this sort of attitude? How do you make the argument that all killing of humans is wrong, if they say, “no, some killing is OK”? Or do we accept that getting as much agreement as possible on, say, late term abortions, is the best we can do in terms of the law?

And in any case, can we work together with the “personal-opposers”? The challenge is that their solutions — at their extreme, Brave New World-style routinization of LARC-type contraception (and casual sex) even for teens, and generous State benefits for even middle-class and wealthy mothers — become hard to swallow. But more on that later.

(Image: puppies at an animal shelter, from a flicker album: https://www.flickr.com/photos/goldstardeputy/4503173277 by goldstardeputy)

Uncategorized

abortion

Previous Post

January 23, 2016

"Papers, please"? A few words on state gun background check laws

Next Post

January 26, 2016 The NEETs are not so neat: new statistics on black youth in Chicago (updated)

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Actuarial/Retirement Issues Politics Uncategorized

Select a Month September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 December 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 August 2021 June 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

In Revelation, how many elders sit on thrones around God's throne?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Twelve Twenty-four Seventy Seven