On Abortion
Jun. 26th, 2014 01:05 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
skysailorOkay, I don't normally ask this, but. This is a sensitive issue and, while I value posting this over emotional self-protection, I still would like to ask that yelling at me/hurtful comments/etc. about this post be left unsaid or expressed via the "unfollow"/"unfriend" button. That said, I am not going to be trying to offend anyone here, so hopefully such a response will not be necessary.
Pardon me, going to step on an emotional landmine here... yes, yes, step back a couple feet, out of the blast zone... there.
So. Abortion.
Let's get stances out of the way - former pro-lifer; turned pro-choice after examining the science on fetal brain development (sorry, it's been a few years and I don't have the appropriate links anymore). I've been on both sides, so i can tell you this bizarre and seemingly impossible truth: They're both right.
No unfollowing yet; hear me out. Past all the politics, religion and hidden agendas, what we're arguing about is personhood and what that means. Is a fetus a person? How do we define "person"? And once we've defined person, how are we going to balance the rights of that person/nonperson/personqueer being with its definitely-a-person host, especially if that host is involuntary?
Yes, there are people using this question and answers to it for other agendas - oppressing and empowering women, salvaging past mistakes, furthering political aims, and even finding excuses to shame and denigrate people. These other agendas have massive effects on the debate and where it's focused and can't be ignored. But muffled beneath that noisy mass are all the rest of us, who have considered this issue based on more than what it can win us and whom it can let us condemn.
This is what I mean by "they're both right" - however you define the "other side", the other side isn't evil. They're other people who are thinking about this differently than you, and their conclusion is right under their assumptions and definitions in a really confusing and fraught issue. "They hate women" and "They think life is disposable" are a propagandist's way to frame this debate, even if there are examples to fit each bill.
I doubt we can bridge this divide. But we can remember that the other side has a line of thought beyond "arg blarg evil brainwashing, oppress, kill." We can call out those using our views to enhance their own power at our expense. We can fight misinformation, examining the claims the loud people make and making sure our causes aren't fighting themselves. And we can try to find middle grounds, like access to contraception, that promote what both sides really want out of all this - freedom to live.
Pardon me, going to step on an emotional landmine here... yes, yes, step back a couple feet, out of the blast zone... there.
So. Abortion.
Let's get stances out of the way - former pro-lifer; turned pro-choice after examining the science on fetal brain development (sorry, it's been a few years and I don't have the appropriate links anymore). I've been on both sides, so i can tell you this bizarre and seemingly impossible truth: They're both right.
No unfollowing yet; hear me out. Past all the politics, religion and hidden agendas, what we're arguing about is personhood and what that means. Is a fetus a person? How do we define "person"? And once we've defined person, how are we going to balance the rights of that person/nonperson/personqueer being with its definitely-a-person host, especially if that host is involuntary?
Yes, there are people using this question and answers to it for other agendas - oppressing and empowering women, salvaging past mistakes, furthering political aims, and even finding excuses to shame and denigrate people. These other agendas have massive effects on the debate and where it's focused and can't be ignored. But muffled beneath that noisy mass are all the rest of us, who have considered this issue based on more than what it can win us and whom it can let us condemn.
This is what I mean by "they're both right" - however you define the "other side", the other side isn't evil. They're other people who are thinking about this differently than you, and their conclusion is right under their assumptions and definitions in a really confusing and fraught issue. "They hate women" and "They think life is disposable" are a propagandist's way to frame this debate, even if there are examples to fit each bill.
I doubt we can bridge this divide. But we can remember that the other side has a line of thought beyond "arg blarg evil brainwashing, oppress, kill." We can call out those using our views to enhance their own power at our expense. We can fight misinformation, examining the claims the loud people make and making sure our causes aren't fighting themselves. And we can try to find middle grounds, like access to contraception, that promote what both sides really want out of all this - freedom to live.
