The Abortion Debate

Hah! Got your attention, didn't I? Your mind snaps back from traffic and to-do lists, and you suddenly remember you're listening to the radio. Are you hoping I will offer some new insights, perhaps change your mind about the issue? Nah. You realized years ago—despite some emotional difficulty with the decision—which side was right, and I have about as much chance of changing your mind about abortion as I have of converting you to a new religion.

So you're not really listening to learn something. You're listening primarily—let's be honest—to find out what side I'm on. Am I, like you, one of the hard-fighting minority who is desperately trying to save the country? Or am I one of those other people who seem to have somehow dominated the debate with their expensive marketing and emotional propaganda? Now, you may not realize it, but the woman in the next car over is asking the exact same question—except she's on the other side. She feels just as impassioned, and as embattled, as you do.

So, since you can't talk to each other about it, let me save you the trouble. The debate goes something like this.

Mr. Pro-Life: <Stuffy Sam-the-Eagle voice> "Abortion is murder. It is morally and religiously wrong."

Ms. Pro-Choice: <Huffy female voice> "If that's what you think, don't have one. But this is my body, so don't try to impose your morals on me."

Mr. Pro-Life: <Growing more frantic and preachy> "If you only knew the suffering you are causing to a poor baby, just because it happens to be unborn!"

Ms. Pro-Choice: <Screaching> "If you only knew the suffering you are causing to a young girl who has no other choices, and she can't afford the baby, so she winds up going into a back alley with a coat hangar!"

...and so on. Neither one of them is listening to a word the other one is saying. For some reason, when people argue about NAFTA, they bring up facts and debate intelligent points. But when people argue about abortion, they are reduced to screaming children.

Not sure what I mean? Then let me play that discussion a little differently, starting in the middle. This is the sort of conversation I would like to hear more often.

<During the following dialogue, the different voices are used to indicate who is talking, so I don't have to keep saying "Pro-Life" and "Pro-Choice.">

"But this is my body, so don't try to impose your morals on me."

"If a woman tries to murder her children, we all agree that society should stop her, right? We shouldn't just say 'it's up to her'; we should impose our collective belief that child-murder is wrong on her, even though she disagrees, right?"

"Of course."

"So, why is it different just because the child is still in the womb?"

"Hmmm...Good point." <Aside, my voice> When was the last time you heard anyone say that in an abortion discussion? <Back to female voice> "But when you talk about a two-week-old fetus, you're not talking about a person, it's just a collection of cells at that point."

"It feels pain just like a human."

"What if it's two days old? Or what if we put the mother and baby to sleep and then did it painlessly? Come on, you know this isn't really about pain."

"You're right. What this is really about is preventing a potential human from coming to life."

"Doesn't a couple prevent a potential human from coming to life every time they choose celibacy?"

"Hmmm…Good point."

You see how different this is? These are two people who are listening to each other, responding to each other's points, and actually having a discussion. It's a discussion you have probably never heard, certainly not in any public forum.

And why not? Because if we continue this discussion, the issues get sticky. Now we have to agree on exactly when a bunch of cells (which are undoubtedly alive, but not really human) becomes a human being. We have to dissect the wonderful-sounding phrase "the sacredness of life" and figure out exactly what we mean. And both sides are going to have to concede, at some point, that they just aren't sure. And where would that leave them? Today at least they have the thrill of desperately fighting for justice, doing the right thing against all odds. It's much more exciting than thinking through sticky issues.

I am getting very soft these days, probably because I am breaking down the wall I built around me so that no one could get in, but then I was shocked to find that I couldn't get out either. I lived that way for nearly 50 years.

 Send comments or questions to the author