Awhile back, a long while back actually, I went on a date. The girl was nice and we got along well enough, but near as I can figure we didn’t have a thing in common. She was an art history major at one of the liberal arts colleges in St. Paul; I was, and am, a computer engineering student. Paula Abdul notwithstanding, opposites do not always attract.
Fortunately, as my previous girlfriends can attest, I’m a genius when it comes to dating. At some point, and for the life of me I can’t figure out how, we hit upon the topic of abortion. Now, were we on the same side of the metaphorical fence, my faux pas would have proved benevolent. But of course we weren’t, and the awkwardness level climbed even higher, as I set a new personal record which is no small feat.
After assuring her that I was pro-life, she brought up the fact that, according to Freakonomics, abortion has led to a decrease in crime. I replied that while this may be true, this is hardly a good reason to allow for abortion. She expressed an interest in changing the subject, so we did; but she staunchly recommended that I read the book.
Well, I have finally read the book—which I in turn staunchly recommend. I quote from chapter 4, Where Have All the Criminals Gone?:
There are even more correlations, positive and negative, that shore up the abortion-crime link. In states with high abortion rates, the entire decline in crime was among the post-Roe cohort as opposed to older criminals. Also, studies in Australia and Canada have since established a similar link between abortion and legalized crime…
The crime drop was, in the language of economists, an “unintended benefit” of legalized abortion. But one not need oppose abortion on moral or religious grounds to feel shaken by the notion of a private sadness being converted into a public good.
But is there really a need for a pro-choicer to be shaken by this notion? I don’t think so. There are three stances one could take on the abortion issue, two of which are consistent.
First, one could be pro-life. Pro-lifers believe that life begins at conception and that no human life is worth more than another is. A fetus is, morally speaking, worthy of the same respect as a president or the Pope.
Second, one could be pro-choice. Pro-choicers believe that the choice of the mother always trumps the existence of the fetus. Personhood is not recognized until birth, and one million fetuses are worth less than the life of one potential mother. Abortion should be legal irrespective of any tangible economic benefit, but the fact that abortion has produced unintended benefits has been insufficiently lauded by pro-choicers. Abortion was legalized, in part, to ensure that every child is a wanted child. So much the better that unwanted children are not murdering those of us lucky enough to have been wanted.
Third, one could inhabit the mushy middle of moral cowardice. Either the fetus is a human life worthy of respect and honor, or it is not worth its weight in plastic. If one is agnostic on the matter, prudence demands that what may be human not be casually discarded.
This last group can be ignored, but the second group needs to defend their position more readily. Since abortion has been “one of the greatest crime-lowering factors in American history” pro-choicers should enact federal legislation to encourage parents of potential criminals to abort. The slightest hint of doubt dare not enter the pro-choicers mind. Fetuses are only globs of tissue, and eliminating some of them renders a real benefit to the republic. If enough good pro-choicers write their congresspersons, we can ensure that crime rates continue to fall. Go get ‘em Nancy Pelosi!
5 comments:
World estimations of the number of terminations carried out each year is somewhere between 20 and 88 million.(likely 55 to 60)
Over 3,500 per day / Over 1.3 million per year in America alone.
50% of that 1.3 million claimed failed birth control was to blame.
A further 48% had failed to use any birth control at all.
And 2% had medical reasons.
That means a staggering 98% of unwanted pregnancies may have been avoided had an effective birth control been used.
I am a 98% pro-lifer, 2% Pro-choicer, who has no religious convictions at all . I didn't need the fear of god or anything else to come to my decision, just a good sense of what is right and wrong.
You see we were all once a fetus. Is it beyond the realm of possibilities that when your mother first learned she was carrying you, she may have considered her options? What if she had decided to terminate? Would that have been OK?
You would not exist, if you have children they would not exist, and your (husband or wife) would be married to someone else. You would have been deprived of all your experiences and memories. In this day and age with terminations being so readily available and so many being carried out, if you make it to full term you can consider yourself lucky.
Lucky you had a mother that made the choice of life for you.
Don't you think they all deserve the same basic human right, LIFE?
At the point of conception is when life began for you. This was the start of your existence. Your own personal big bang. Three weeks after conception heart started to beat. First brain waves recorded at six weeks after conception. Seen sucking thumb at seven weeks after conception.
Though it pains me to say it , there may always be a need for the 2% medical reasons and such, but that's all.
So how do we get the other 98% to be responsible...................
How do we get them to be honest with themselves, about when life begins.
egg+sperm = human being
Sadly many prefer an occasional abortion, over using birth control, they have all kinds of reasons, each of them selfish.
Then there's the christian impossition,and their men in high places.(all a bit talibanish, church and state should never entwine) their stance against birth control has only added to the numbers.
People should be able to choose to use birth control, to avoid having to make another choice.
I'd like to see effective birth control made available to all who can't afford it.
Sanity must provale, abortions should remain available and safe to the 2% and such, and the rest need to have a good look at themselves and get their act together.
I'd also like to see a 4D ultrasound in every clinic to provide a more informed choice,
before going through with something they may regret.
If you think the point of conception is NOT when life begins, and all you have is a clump of cells and not a living human being.
Then at least concider this -
Soon after you were conceived you were no more than a clump of cells.
This clump of cells was you at your earliest stage, you had plenty of growing to do but this clump of cells was you none the less.
Think about it.
Aren't you glad you were left unhindered.... to develope further.
Safe inside your mother's womb until you were born.
Want to know how to find humanity-?
True humanity can only be achieved, by concidering others/ caring about others, as much as, if not more than yourself.
Until we do we are no more than an uncivilisation,
with all the uncivilised things that we do...
I mostly agree with ausbloggers detailed position, but feel there is a distinction between "life" as a group of cells carried unwillingly by a woman and "personhood" as defined by the Roe decision where the womans rights end .It is an imperfect but necessary balancing of interests.
The problem with exceptions (usually for rape and incest) is that the nature of the fetus isn't dependent upon the means of impregnation.
It will invariably be insisted that women who were raped didn't ask to become pregnant. But neither does the fetus wish to die.
If the fetus is a living human being, abortion is murder. It's pretty simple really.
I have found some evidence that proves that a fetus is a person.......
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act is a United States law which defines violent assault committed against pregnant women as being a crime against two persons: the woman and the fetus she carries.
This law was passed in 2004 after the murder of the then pregnant Laci Peterson and her fetus, Connor Peterson.
If it is right for a man (or woman) to be charged for homicide and sentenced to prison ( or worse) for killing the unborn (and rightfully so) then the unborn should have equil consideration in relation to abortion..
Is a fetus earmarked for abortion of any less value to a fetus killed by violence.
Is not abortion a violent attack on an inocent life just the same.
It's just not ethical to protect one without the other.....they're one and the same........
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act is a United States law which defines violent assault committed against pregnant women as being a crime against two persons: the woman and the fetus she carries.
You presuppose that pro-choicers are intellectually honest. Sure, some of them are, but we're dealing with people who flaunt scientific evidence in the name of "choice". Not exactly your archetype for intellectual honesty.
Post a Comment