"The difference between the Republican and the Democratic parties . . . [in] this contest," he declared, "is, that the former consider ABORTION a moral, social and political wrong, while the latter do not consider it either a moral, social or political wrong. . . . The Republican party . . . hold that this government was instituted to secure the blessings of freedom, and that ABORTION is an unqualified evil to the UNBORN, to the BORN, to the soil, and to the State. Regarding it an evil, they will not molest it in the States where it exists . . . ; but they will use every constitutional method to prevent the evil from becoming larger. . . They will, if possible, place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate peaceable extinction, in Gods own good time."
I find the parallels between American slavery and American abortion quite piercing, especially in the character of the abolitionists, both then and now. It is no mere coincidence that we forget today, as the abolitionists did 170 years ago, that the question is not one of the morals of "the other side." The question is not whether those in favor of the institution are moral men--their hearts and minds are as good as ours; their institution is legal, and no long-standing institution can be simply removed without regard for the means or the consequences of doing so, no matter how much we may desire instant and universal moral purity.
The question was then, and is now, whether the victim is a human being. If the slave is a man, with all the natural rights of man, then slavery is an evil. If the unborn child, too, is equal in his rights with you and I, then abortion is an evil.
But we forget all this. The new abolitionism makes all the same tactical mistakes as the old, with all the same uncharitable moral indignation. We denounce, we impugn, we forget that whatever else it may be, the institution is legal. But we have the example of the past to teach us.
Our fathers condemned slavery, but when they saw that they were then unable to abolish it, they put it on the road to ultimate extinction. I am for doing the same with abortion. I do not blame the pro-choice for their beliefs. If I did not believe life began at conception--had I been raised differently--who is to say I would not hold the same position? It is not a thing we can undo overnight, and it is legal. We must be prudent.
The path to the ultimate extinction of abortion seems to me one of convincing the hearts and minds of the people. Mores change with religion and with education.
Statesmanship is education, but I believe what matters here is to have many children and raise them well, particularly in their first decade of life. It will not do to make abortion a national issue, as if a single presidential election or judicial appointment will reverse Roe v. Wade and by that somehow put the issue to rest.
I find the parallels between American slavery and American abortion quite piercing, especially in the character of the abolitionists, both then and now. It is no mere coincidence that we forget today, as the abolitionists did 170 years ago, that the question is not one of the morals of "the other side." The question is not whether those in favor of the institution are moral men--their hearts and minds are as good as ours; their institution is legal, and no long-standing institution can be simply removed without regard for the means or the consequences of doing so, no matter how much we may desire instant and universal moral purity.
The question was then, and is now, whether the victim is a human being. If the slave is a man, with all the natural rights of man, then slavery is an evil. If the unborn child, too, is equal in his rights with you and I, then abortion is an evil.
But we forget all this. The new abolitionism makes all the same tactical mistakes as the old, with all the same uncharitable moral indignation. We denounce, we impugn, we forget that whatever else it may be, the institution is legal. But we have the example of the past to teach us.
Our fathers condemned slavery, but when they saw that they were then unable to abolish it, they put it on the road to ultimate extinction. I am for doing the same with abortion. I do not blame the pro-choice for their beliefs. If I did not believe life began at conception--had I been raised differently--who is to say I would not hold the same position? It is not a thing we can undo overnight, and it is legal. We must be prudent.
The path to the ultimate extinction of abortion seems to me one of convincing the hearts and minds of the people. Mores change with religion and with education.
Statesmanship is education, but I believe what matters here is to have many children and raise them well, particularly in their first decade of life. It will not do to make abortion a national issue, as if a single presidential election or judicial appointment will reverse Roe v. Wade and by that somehow put the issue to rest.
I understand it may be somewhat intolerable to read the words of a man lacking much conviction, but I'd like to share my thoughts on the matter regardless.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, one's morality does not read like a static script. It is very naive, I believe, to think one can always opt to, "If X occurs, Y should always follow." I'm not saying you don't agree with this, Jody; I'm simply reiterating.
Anyway, the point is that life presents endless possibilities and situations that may persuade us to stretch or change what we've always held as concrete. As with the topic of abortion, this is no different. I actually have a friend, named Matt, who's mother is a devout Catholic and "right-winger". Even so, she still supports the legality of abortion because of a personal experience that I will now share to the best of my knowledge.
Many years ago, her married sister had become pregnant with her first child. Late into the pregnancy (I'm not exactly sure when), it was discovered that the child had developed with exposed nerve endings; a rare but documented malformation. With this knowledge, there remained two options: Birth the child, which would live for only a few days in absolute agony before dying, or abort it. Ultimately, she chose to not subject her baby to such suffering and followed through with the abortion.
Other situations to consider are pregnancies brought about through rape. Should a woman be forced to allow the seed of her attacker to quicken within her? Should she be forced to bear the burden of an already immoral act? While I understand such circumstances are few and far between, I believe this is what pro-choice presents us: the ability to have options in a world that never seems as black and white as our politicians or religious leaders would have us believe.
Now, this does not take away the fact that I am absolutely appalled by those who utilize abortion as a contraceptive. This is such a monstrously selfish act which I cannot even begin to convey my disgust for. As loath as i am to use the word, I must say it is truly evil.
Jody, I've grown tired and haven't even touched on your abortion/slavery comparison. For this I apologize, but there is always another night. I must say you bring forth very compelling arguments, but you already knew that.
Interesting connection. Another thought, the question of what next? Once the goal of making abortion illegal is reached, what next? Are those found guilty of aborting and assisting in abortion subject to capital punishment? Will this be classified as different from first degree murder? All important questions that I don't hear a lot of discussion about. Seems similar to my understanding of the abolitionist movement. Not too much thought was put into what to do once slavery was made illegal. Random thoughts while doing laundry.
ReplyDeleteWell put, whichever Wiley was writing. This is the classic problem of any kind of abolitionist movement--it is much easier to crusade for moral purity than it is to find a way to live well in an impure world. Unfortunately, the larger our political community, the more likely we are to see general ideas and abstractions rather than prudence. That is simply the nature of our social state.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I am not in favor of banning abortion, not without a clear vision of how it could be done peacefully, legally and to the good of the nation.
I would rather see the evil of abortion than the horrors of civil war, disunion, or of a legal system rampant with ex post facto capital offenses.
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/thabitianyabwile/2010/11/04/yes-how-dare-you-compare-abortion-to-slavery/
ReplyDeleteHannah,
ReplyDeleteThanks for that article. It's a similar point to the one I'm trying to make.
The issue isn't a comparison of abortion and slavery, but of the people who oppose them. And the abolitionists of 1850 and 2011 seem to me equally shortsighted, self-righteous and opportunistic in their arguments (as the article you shared so well points out).
Jody,
ReplyDeleteI think that you underestimate the pro-life movement. There are certainly those in it (perhaps a majority) who insist on instant moral purity and refuse to accept anything other than making abortion a federal offense.
However, there are those in it such as the Life Issues Institute (http://www.lifeissues.org/) who seem to realize exactly what you are saying and approach it accordingly. They have television shows about real people who face the decisions involved in abortion and other methods of education all of which are geared toward the changing of the mores you talked about - not through changes in religious beliefs, but through rectification of ignorance.
There are also many who find out exactly what laws they are allowed to pass through their legislatures to limit abortion, such as the Heartbeat Bill in Ohio which says you can't kill a baby after his heartbeat is detectable.
I think that these actions and the people behind them rightly understand the problem and are doing what needs to be done.
As for what will be done after it is illegal, I doubt that more than a few have given it any thought. You do well to draw attention to the fact that often pro-lifers do little but chant about how Roe v. Wade should be overturned, like so many occupiers of Wall Street. I do think that there are a significant minority of others who do see the problem and are addressing it well.