Abortion is a highly charged, emotional issue described bluntly as "murder" by religious conservatives and defended as "a woman's choice" by liberal feminists. It is certainly a moral issue, regardless of one's position, and it exemplifies issues that are central to the future development of American culture, national pride, and moral confidence.
There are two extreme positions in the abortion debate; one taken by those who believe that abortion is murder and unjustifiable under any circumstances, and the other by those who believe that abortion is merely a surgical technique to reverse an unwanted pregnancy. The legalization of abortion in the Supreme Court Roe v. Wade decision (1973) brought the debate into the political arena. Politicians such as vice-presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro and Utah senator Orrin Hatch have made abortion a key issue of their political agendas.
Emotional scare tactics color both sides of the argument. Liberals raise the specter of knitting-needle, back-alley abortions should the operations become illegal, while pro-life advocates show dramatic videos of an abortion in progress. Amidst this emotionalism and oversimplification of the issue, little progress can be made in solving even relatively simple problems, let alone such complex questions as when does life begin.
For example, one pro-life hand-book on abortion states that the ethical choices on abortion involve two questions: 1) "Judge it [the fetus] to be a mass of cells, a piece of meat? Then vote for abortion-on-demand." And 2) "Judge it to be a human life? Then join us in fighting for his and her right to live, with all the energy and resources at your command."
The two positions, as phrased, do not allow for the discussion of extenuating circumstances; either abortion is murder, or it is not. The handbook goes on to defend the position that it is murder, arguing form the tenet that life begins at conception, when an ovum and sperm unite. Given that the pro-life faction is made up largely or religious people, this argument is surprising. First of all, the basis for the argument is essentially material, not spiritual, in nature. Secondly, the decision is inconsistent with other positions that have been taken. For example, the fetus from a spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) is not given a religious ceremony. A miscarriage is considered to be a passing, though regrettable, moment of a woman's biological clock, and is rarely spoken of except with close confidants.
On the other hand, abortion is not merely a question of freedom or of the woman's choice. It is, at least, the destruction of a potential human being which was the result of an intimate relationship between a man and woman. A fetus is thus, theoretically, the creation of love arising from two human beings. It is, therefore, a potential representation of heart and of love; the decision to destroy that creation is serious.
These issues affect the deepest level of humanity's consciousness. Our world is dominated by our five physical senses; but these issues go deeper and call up questions concerning the purpose of life, and the role of invisible values and meaningful relationships. What cannot be seen, felt, touched, heard, or tasted is not easily comprehended and is even more easily forgotten. Yet these intangibles lift humanity to higher levels of thought and
...
Read Full Article
|
