|
well you can see from the way the positions are outlined in this thread the same problem that happens in 3-d between pro- and anti-choice folk: the arguments work past each other, there's no agreement about premise, no points of contact. the upshot of that is that abortion should remain legal and safe.
if you oppose it on principle don't have one.
this isn't to diminish the objections of the communities of folk who oppose the procedure, either. if anything, it acknowledges that within these communities, there are shared arguments/viewpoints that would lead folk within them to not avail themselves of it. nothing about this extends beyond the limits of these communities.
the claim that abortion is murder for example rests upon a sequence of assumptions that are particular to certain communities. there is no agreement about the validity of these assumptions in the broader context. so what that amounts to is basically that *for these folk* abortion is seen in this way--but there's nothing else to acknowledge.
at bottom, i see this as a complex and particular decision. i don't have a general position about it really because it seems meaningless to develop one--this at the level of what i would think were someone i was involved with or was close to me were to confront this choice. there are too many situational parameters that would be fundamental to my thinking. but in the end, i am of the opinion that the choice should be the woman's choice. that's it.
i don't know how i would react were a basic differend to arise over whether or not the procedure should happen--i really don't. but because i do not assume this is a cavalier decision for anyone, i don't think not knowing in advance is terribly important.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|