I firmly stand by the pro-choice arguement. I'm not going to just leave it at that, there is a basis for this desire to hold to such an arguement, and normally, I could say that this basis was simple. It is really, but as this is a philosophy discussion board, I'm sure I'll need just a tad bit more rationalization than average.
My entire problem with the pro-life standpoint is the simple belief that the goverment has the right to legislate a belief system. When it all comes down to it, that's the real issue at stake when politicians debate reproductive rights, it has nothing to do with science, it has nothing to do with protecting individuals, it's a matter of religion. Certainly I agree that, in this case, we enter a moral grey area. Without knowing for a fact when life begins, whether or not there is a human soul, or when consciousness is first attained, we really can't say that we are killing a child by aborting it. Unfortunately, we also don't have the grounds to say that we are NOT killing a child.
What we do have, however, are a few simple facts:
1. The Pro-Life movement is almost entirely based on standard Judeo-Christian dogma, and as such, is asserting the government legislate individual morality to conform to its standards.
2. The Pro-Choice camp does not advocate abortion, it advocates leaving it as an option for the individual to decide (don't like abortion? don't have one).
3. As of yet, science has not determined the existance of a human soul, when consciousness begins, or provided any rational basis for believing anything other than the idea that life begins at birth.
4. Based upon the above three facts, we can infer the following: Advocating a ban on abortion is based upon a belief structure not based on science or fact, but rather the moral authority of an external entity which, as of yet, resists all attempts at direct contact.
5. Banning abortion sets a legal precedent for legislating codes of moral conduct using theology as a basis. This is non-conducive to the basic right of Freedom of Religion.
Thus, I am firmly pro-choice.
Additionally, not that this provides me any moral high ground, I was an adopted child. My mother was, in fact, going to abort me when a friend of hers informed her of the fact that my mother was barren. As a result, she chose instead to give birth to me and pass me on to my mother. In this case, I'm glad she didn't choose to have an abortion, but I'm certainly glad she'd had the option. What if my mother hadn't been there, and I had been raised without a father and with a resentful mother who hadn't the time or the money to take care of me?
|