This is the most controversial post I have ever written in ten years of blogging. I wrote it because I was very angry at a specific incident.
But if you find it meaningful and helpful and would like to contribute whatever easily affordable amount you feel it is worth, please do do. I will appreciate it. The button to the right will take you to PayPal where you can make any size donation of 25 cents or more you wish, using either your PayPal account or a credit card without a PayPal account.
Preface The abortion controversy has become one of the most divisive and irrationally contentious issues of our time, turned into a legal and political power struggle with no permanent resolution in sight. Yet it need not be. Social, and therefore media, attention has been focused almost exclusively on the differences between pro-life and pro-choice forces, rather than on the common ground they have; and that has been even further compounded by the fact that many actively involved people on both sides have been driven to extreme positions they do not really relish, simply out of fear that not seeking more than is necessary will yield less than is acceptable.
But there is more common ground among opposing sides than is realized. And there would be even more yet if the issue were discussed and portrayed in a rational way that sought mutually agreeable solutions rather than unconditional victories, particularly solutions that are consistent with those principles in many other areas of life that involve relevantly similar moral features good samaritanism, normal privacy freedoms and limitations, definitions and consequences of negligence, responsibility limitations in non-negligent accident, etc.
Many pro-life and pro-choice advocates cannot even accurately state the other sides' position; and many people cannot even state their own position in a way they would be comfortable with after even just a few questions that get them to reflect on it.
Almost no pro-choice advocate believes that abortion should be a person's chosen first-line method of birth control or method of gender determination. Almost no pro-choice Essay on both sides of abortion believes that promiscuity or sexual irresponsibility male or female is a good thing or that either ought to be encouraged.
Almost no pro-choice advocate thinks that teen-age sex or teen-age pregnancy is a good thing. Almost no pro-choice advocate believes that abortion is or ought to be considered a casual event or that it should be undertaken without reverence and respect for the life or potential life that is being ended.
Almost none but the most zealous pro-life advocates think babies should be made to be born if that means they only suffer painfully and prolongedly until they die with nothing to somehow make up for that suffering.
Almost no pro-life advocate can consistently maintain for any length of time their initial view that quantity of life is more important than quality, or, put in another way, that life under all circumstances is better than, and preferable to death under any circumstance.
They would have to disavow Patrick Henry's revered statement "Give me liberty or give me death", for example. Almost no pro-choice advocate thinks abortion is a good thing; but many simply think it is sometimes the best of a bunch of bad options; and that it would be better if women's other options were better so that abortion would not have to be chosen.
Pro-choice advocates would prefer to see fewer abortions chosen voluntarily -- not by making abortion even less desirable due to more punishment, but by making the other alternative in regard to having and rearing one's children reasonably proportionally more desirable than it currently is.
Almost no pro-life advocate argues that it is better to force women to have babies they do not want than to help them want the babies they might have. This booklet tries, first, to show what the worst and least relevant, least valid, of the abortion arguments from both sides are; second, to show what the real issues are, and how many of them relate to areas of settled law and accepted, or acceptably changing, public moral opinion; and third, it tries to offer some solutions that might be acceptable to, a much greater majority of Americans -- particularly with modifications that others might suggest -- than current law or any of the proposed laws I have seen yet.
The Use of Hypothetical Situations I first wrote this in the late 's, and included in it hypothetical medical "fertility-related" procedures I thought would become available which would have relevance to the abortion issue.
Some of the kinds of cases, based on medical science, have since become reality. Some of the cases I discuss are still in the range simply of theoretical possibility. But, even though many people do not like to consider or to try to come to terms with theoretical or hypothetical situations, I discuss such cases for three reasons: And having an impartial framework now will make it easier to do that 1before decisions will be biased by vested interests and purely emotional, subjective, personal consequences; 2 they help us see aspects of conception, birth, and parental rights and responsibilities that we might otherwise tend not to notice or to take for granted; and 3 hypothetical situations can help us see a larger "picture" -- of how different elements involved in abortion relate to each other and to similar elements in other areas of life.
Further, there is nothing about considering hypotheticals that requires policy to be based on them or wedded to them. Given the, often interesting, surprising, and worthwhile, benefits from considering hypotheticals and given that what one thinks about a hypothetical situation does not necessarily commit one to have the same views about a similar, but real, situation which may also have additional elements one had not considered when just previously "thinking", I don't really understand some people's reluctance to consider hypothetical cases in order to help them better formulate and clarify their ideas.
A Note About Terminology I have tried to use as value neutral terms as possible in the main section of this booklet in describing arguments and positions for and against abortion.
I have not used terms like pro-life", "anti-life", "pro-choice", or "anti-choice", terms popular in polemical treatments which try to linguistically promote one's side while linguistically castigating the other.
In cases where I use terms like "embryo", "fetus", "prospective baby", "baby", "prospective person", "individual" to refer to the subject of abortion, or "prospective parents", "parents", "prospective mother", or "mother" when I am referring to the people who conceived that subject, I am not trying to persuade or prejudice by use of language.
My arguments are intended to be spelled out, not hidden behind associated psychological connotations of words.Also, “it starts to look like me and the feminists” should be “looks like I”.
And “untitled” doesn’t really make sense. And if biology is a hard science, it’s on the extreme soft edge of hard sciences. Here's a look at abortion from both sides: 10 arguments for abortion and 10 arguments against abortion, for a total of 20 statements that represent a .
Menu Abortion access: All sides of the issue. About abortion: Abortion is a very active topic on the Internet. Google found over million hits for "pro-life" and . [an error occurred while processing this directive] excerpts from “Abortion: Is it Possible to be both “Pro-life” and “Pro-Choice”?” or.
If corporal punishment advocates are correct, then the abandonment of spanking will significantly increase violence and criminal activity among the next generation of adults.
Society will become more violent. More people will be victimized. We will have to build additional jails to hold all of the criminals. May 31, · The most widely available abortion drug in Latin America, misoprostol, is commonly used to treat ulcers. Although less effective than the combination of mifepristone and .