The Abortion Debate Folly
While going about my daily routine and listening to the radio, some commentary by Rush Limbaugh caused my interest in addressing a subject I usually avoid. I often disagree with Rush Limbaugh, but in this case I agree with him selfishly since I already shared the point he made with others. The part of his commentary I agree with is the debate on abortion has little chance of either side altering their respective positions to resolve the issue.
Which brings me to the part I usually avoid. I rarely offer my opinion on this topic for it seems pointless given the almost impossible task of resolving the issue. There seem to be few, if any, reasons given for an abortion with which those opposed to abortion would be tolerant. On the flip side, there seem to be few, if any, reasons with which those in favor of abortion would be opposed. An atmosphere of discussion limiting the options to all or nothing with either no abortion is acceptable or all abortions are acceptable is doomed to never be resolved.
Some people who oppose abortion have indicated a willingness to agree with the exceptions to banning abortion for
life-threatening risks to the mother or victims of rape. Many in favor of abortion seem disinterested in any restrictions to its use. Allowing abortion to be used as contraception for dummies or deciding for the public at large what constitutes a fair use exception seem to be unwavering positions that will never lead to resolution or practical alternatives.
Another point of contention is when does life begin? This is where the abortion debate enters the ethical debate on stem cell research. It is fair to be concerned, in the present climate, that turning abortion clinics into embryonic stem cell farms is not outside the realm of possibilities with respect to possible abuse. But at the other end of the debate, where one places the magic line for determining what is life, a case can be made that other choices not commonly considered could violate that distinction. Would any action altering human reproductive potential at some point be considered the ending of unborn life? Nothing is outside the realm of possibility in this debate.
For example, in the past the Catholic Church maintained contraception was against the rules. At one time, zero population growth was proposed to avoid the problems of overpopulation. The status of those propositions are of little importance. The fact that they were proposed and largely ignored contradicts the notion that any fine lines have been established and accepted as a common belief. If you advocate no contraception and zero population growth at the same time, complying requires abstinence. And we all know how well that works.
The reason for failure in resolving the abortion debate is the same as it is for many other public issues. Unless people are willing to be disciplined and responsible and adhere to principles that foster good judgment, no law or other attempt to regulate behavior will succeed. The success comes from viewing proper behavior and choices as a personal benefit that is chosen, preferred and passed on from generation to generation as routinely as we take a breath.
As a final note, still listening to Rush Limbaugh, he asked ‘ what happened to standards of behavior’? A rare day when I have little to complain about with Rush Limbaugh.
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com
Trackposted to Perri Nelson’s Website, Adam’s Blog, Maggie’s Notebook, basil’s blog, Helium, MONICA, Stuck On Stupid, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Pet Haven, Conservative Cat, Pursuing Holiness, Conservative Thoughts, Pet’s Garden Blog, Rightlinx, Faultline USA, third world county, stikNstein… has no mercy, Pirate’s Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, Planck’s Constant, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, CORSARI D’ITALIA, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
April 19th, 2007 at 1:03 am
I heard Rush t’day as well…complex issue..enlightening read!