Often the abortion debate is dominated by extremes: the godless liberals vs. the religious fanatics. Well realistically, most Americans don’t fit either stereotype; in fact, it may surprise some that a majority of Americans consider themselves to be “pro-life.”
I found this op-ed piece to be of particular interest, therefore. David Harsanyi, a self-proclaimed atheist, explains why he is now, “pro-life,” but not completely in favor of banning abortion:
As an atheist and a secular kinda guy, I practice moral relativism regularly. Still, I’ve always struggled mightily with the ethics and politics of abortion. Apparently, I’m not alone.
A new Gallup poll claims that for the first time since 1995, when the question was first asked by the organization, most Americans consider themselves to be “pro-life” rather than “pro-choice.”
The straightforward question asked of participants was this: “With respect to the abortion issue, would you consider yourself to be pro-choice or pro-life?” Fifty-one percent responded that they were pro-life and 42 percent said they were pro-choice. These percentages are the reverse found in the same poll in 2006.
What happened? Is it possible that the nation has undergone a gigantic attitudinal shift on the fundamental issue of abortion in only three years’ time? Logically, it seems that the entire framing of the debate has become antiquated and far too simplistic for the questions we face. Anecdotally, I would say it’s possible.
I know I’ve changed my views.
After a life of being pro-choice, I began to seriously ponder the question. I oppose the death penalty because there is a slim chance that an innocent person might be executed and I don’t believe the state should have the authority to take a citizen’s life. So don’t I owe an nascent human life at least the same deference? Just in case?
You may not consider a fetus a “human life” in early pregnancy, though it has its own DNA and medical science continues to find ways to keep the fetus viable outside the womb earlier and earlier.
But it’s difficult to understand how those who harp about the importance of “science” in public policy can draw an arbitrary timeline in the pregnancy, defining when human life is worth saving and when it can be terminated.
The more I thought about it, the creepier the issue got.
Newsweek, for instance, recently reported that 90 percent of women whose fetuses test positive for Down syndrome choose an abortion. Another survey showed only a small percentage of mothers even used the test. So what happens when 90 percent of parents test their fetuses? Does it mean the end of the disease or are we stepping perilously close to eugenics?
What about future DNA tests that can detect any “defects” in a fetus? What happens when we can use abortion to weed out the blind, mentally ill, the ugly, or any other any “undesirable” human being?
Recently, Sweden’s National Board of Health and Welfare ruled that women are permitted to abort their children based on the sex of the fetus. In the United States, a woman can have an abortion for nearly any reason she chooses. In fact, a health exemption for the mother allows abortions to be performed virtually on demand.
If you oppose selective abortions, but not abortion overall, I wonder why? How is terminating the fetus because it’s the wrong sex any worse than terminating the fetus for convenience’s sake? The fate of the fetus does not change, only the reasoning for its extinction does.
Now, I happen to believe (as the civil libertarian and pro-life activist Nat Hentoff once noted) that the right to life and liberty is the foundation of a moral society. Then again, I also believe a government ban on abortion would only criminalize the procedure and do little to mitigate the amount of abortions.
Obviously, these are a few of the complex and uncomfortable issues to ponder. So maybe this poll tells us that the dynamics of the abortion debate are about to change, that Americans are getting past the politics and into the morality of the issue.
Then again, it’s entirely possible that I’m just projecting.
- Marc
Everyone is pro-life, the label is complete propaganda. The difference is that Republicans are only pro-life before birth. After that anything goes.
That’s always been an odd and troublesome conundrum for the self-righteous Republican “Pro-Life”-ers.
Way to keep politics and divisiveness out of the conversation. Did you two morons even read the op-ed?
What I find interesting about this post is the complete lack of response. Where are the repeated calls from liberals that the author David Harsanyi is truly a closet Bible thumping Fundie (the new bigoted term to describe Christians) only masquerading as an atheist? Where are the posts from liberal bloggers shouting that Mr. Harsanyi is just out to “spew his religious man-hood?” After all, isn’t it the claim from pro-abortionists that the only “real” reason someone would appose abortion is because of religion?
I made this EXACT same argument many months back and explained that while I am not able to turn off my faith like a light switch, it was not at all necessary to use faith or religion to make an argument against abortion. Not only did I make the exact same argument regarding the death penalty but went further to compare the issue to the global warming debate where advocates have held that even if global warming is un-provable we should all take action now just incase. Can’t we apply the same argument to abortion? Ask any abortionist when life begins and they we tell you what science tells us, we don’t know. So wouldn’t it be prudent to side with caution, just in case? At the very least this should be true in the case of a baby in the womb 2 weeks from full term, right?
For those liberals out there that have long followed the mantra that everyone hates abortion and that we must reduce the number of abortions but still stand behind almost no restrictions against abortion as long as the woman can claim a bit of depression as the law allows now, you might want to ask yourself a simple question; if a child in the womb is not a life then why is abortion bad at all? Why should we be concerned with reducing something that is no different than having your tonsils removed our having your nails trimmed at a nail salon? What makes terminating a pregnancy such a “difficult choice” if it’s not a life?
That sounds a bit like it was written by my own atheist friend who is very firmly and vocally against abortion, based on just what it is.