Latest Pajama’s Media Column: An Abortion Opinion Guaranteed To Irritate Everyone
July 7, 2009 / 3:59 pm • By Dr. Melissa ClouthierMy latest Pajama’s column discusses abortion. Here’s a snippet:
Those at the fringes of the abortion argument wish to make it simple. At the foundation of the ideological debate lies the civil rights of the unborn child versus the civil rights of the woman. Protect the life of the unborn (is it life?), or sacrifice the child’s life in hopes of a better life for the mother. The current data shows approximately 10 percent of Americans support abortion under all circumstances and approximately 10 percent of Americans oppose abortion under all circumstances.
Most Americans hold a more nuanced view, balanced by the obvious conundrums imposed by abortion. Most Americans don’t want to make a personal decision for another American, but most Americans also don’t like the idea that a helpless victim gets killed due to irresponsibility. (That is, choosing to abort a baby for convenience — or even worse, for gender — makes people uncomfortable. In the latter case, it’s nearly universally reviled — 90 percent of Americans are against aborting to select for gender.)
Is there common ground? Go read the whole thing. You tell me.
2 Responses to “Latest Pajama’s Media Column: An Abortion Opinion Guaranteed To Irritate Everyone”
July 7 2009 / 4:45 pm
Reply
Melissa,
Nearly 30% of Coloradans voted for an outright ban in 08.
I think the stats you are using are skewed.
July 8 2009 / 11:34 am
Reply
I read the Pajama’s article, and a number of the comments. The opponents of abortion all appear to be calling it murder. They are saying that all abortion, being murder, is wrong. The definition of murder, according to Webster’s Desk Dictionary, is: the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Note the word unlawful. Presently, abortion is legal, so the opponents have no grounds for objection, unless they are inclined to say that all killing (in which case the distinction of “unlawful killing” would have no meaning) is wrong, or that they are appealing to a higher law. But the appealing to a “higher law” is their own choice. Not everyone subscribes to their “higher” law, and they have no right to try to impose their beliefs on others. Would those same opponents of abortion submit themselves to the dictates of Islam if it were to become the majority religion or ideological influence in this country? I seriously doubt it, yet that’s the very position the anti-abortionists are expecting other’s to adopt.