Does abortion really fit in the liberal platform?
There was a time when I was strongly pro choice. I felt, as a man, that it was hardly my place to tell a woman what to do with her body. I believed that a Roe V. Wade left open the option to women to make a decision. If they were pro-life, they would simply not have abortions. I also took the pro-choice stand because too many young girls were having illegal and dangerous abortions that were causing serious damage to their bodies, and too frequently lead to their death.
At the same time, being a progressive liberal thinker, I am very firmly against the death penalty. It clearly is not effective in stopping the crimes it is intended for. It is a system that is flawed, with potentially innocent people being killed. It goes against rational thinking, against the evolution of humanity. The death penalty is the result of the human need to seek retribution for one's loss, even if that retribution will not bring back that which was lost. When the death penalty is further imposed on children, the mentally impaired, it just further magnifies the inhumanity of the act. I won't even get into the racial bias of this system of injustice.
My personal feeling about the death penalty is that it does not allow for an opportunity for redemption. For me it is not a cost issue, though that argument can certainly be made. It is about giving a person a chance to change, and even more, knowing what lead this person to commit this act so that steps can be taken to prevent such actions in the future.
Getting back to abortion, people argue that it should be allowed because in the first 3 months, the fetus is not viable without the mother's support. One might argue that any child is not viable until its 18th birthday... or longer! Does that give one the right to take that life? Children of any age are dependent upon the love and support of their parents, that is one of the many joys of creating a new life.
Now, if we, as progressive liberals, argue against the death penalty, how can we possibly argue in favor of abortion? In both situations we are talking about taking a life; a life that could very well significantly contribute to the betterment of society. I think of Mumia Abu-Jamaal as one example. In both we are denying the possibility of that life to be transformative, to grow, to learn, to have an impact, or to simply be.
So I ask, does this seem like a contradiction to you?
Peace
TRANSFERRED FROM TAO OF APU... ORIGINALLY POSTED FEBRUARY 22, 2005
There was a time when I was strongly pro choice. I felt, as a man, that it was hardly my place to tell a woman what to do with her body. I believed that a Roe V. Wade left open the option to women to make a decision. If they were pro-life, they would simply not have abortions. I also took the pro-choice stand because too many young girls were having illegal and dangerous abortions that were causing serious damage to their bodies, and too frequently lead to their death.
At the same time, being a progressive liberal thinker, I am very firmly against the death penalty. It clearly is not effective in stopping the crimes it is intended for. It is a system that is flawed, with potentially innocent people being killed. It goes against rational thinking, against the evolution of humanity. The death penalty is the result of the human need to seek retribution for one's loss, even if that retribution will not bring back that which was lost. When the death penalty is further imposed on children, the mentally impaired, it just further magnifies the inhumanity of the act. I won't even get into the racial bias of this system of injustice.
My personal feeling about the death penalty is that it does not allow for an opportunity for redemption. For me it is not a cost issue, though that argument can certainly be made. It is about giving a person a chance to change, and even more, knowing what lead this person to commit this act so that steps can be taken to prevent such actions in the future.
Getting back to abortion, people argue that it should be allowed because in the first 3 months, the fetus is not viable without the mother's support. One might argue that any child is not viable until its 18th birthday... or longer! Does that give one the right to take that life? Children of any age are dependent upon the love and support of their parents, that is one of the many joys of creating a new life.
Now, if we, as progressive liberals, argue against the death penalty, how can we possibly argue in favor of abortion? In both situations we are talking about taking a life; a life that could very well significantly contribute to the betterment of society. I think of Mumia Abu-Jamaal as one example. In both we are denying the possibility of that life to be transformative, to grow, to learn, to have an impact, or to simply be.
So I ask, does this seem like a contradiction to you?
Peace
TRANSFERRED FROM TAO OF APU... ORIGINALLY POSTED FEBRUARY 22, 2005
posted by Apuuli at 9:38 AM
0 comments
