Here's something I have often thought about the pro-life, anti-abortion lobby. If human life is so precious why aren't these people doing something meaningful, something active to save the lives of African children? It's okay to hold a placard or sign a petition about unborn children and foetuses but what about raising money to provide clean water? What about combating malaria, AIDS and fatal diarrhoea in childhood? Getting behind such schemes would be an authentic way of demonstrating your belief that every life matters.
But they don't do they? These anti-abortionists, often emboldened by questionable interpretations of medieval holy books, it's only unborn western foetuses that they carp about, not living black babies with distended bellies, hollow eyes and legs like sticks in faraway places like Malawi, Somalia or Chad. Perhaps those lives are not quite as precious.
Last night I watched the second part of an excellent BBC drama called "Three Families". Set in Northern Ireland and based upon three true stories, it explores the heartbreak that anti-abortion regulation has brought to very many families in that corner of these islands. Two of the women were even obliged to proceed to full term births even though they knew that the babies they were carrying were incapable of independent life outside the womb.
All my adult life I have believed in the principle of "A Woman's Right to Choose". It should not be up to religious leaders, politicians or old men in legal robes to make decisions about women's bodies. The reasons for seeking abortion are manifold and no woman takes that path without good reason to do so.
It is undoubtedly best for abortions to happen in a safe medical environment close to home. Denying women abortions will often drive them into the back streets, putting their lives at risk. Abortion is not a nice thing but it is often very necessary. - because of poverty, the mother's age, rape, physical problems with the unborn child and simple bad timing.
My late grandmother was desperate for an abortion in the 1920's and had to go to an unqualified back street abortionist. The operation was botched and involved a knitting needle. Tragically, she could never have any more babies after that.
Obviously, the question of abortion has been the subject of much moralising debate but for me it all boils down to that famous rallying cry: "A Woman's Right to Choose". The drama "Three Families" helpfully served to fortify that simple belief.
Well said.
ReplyDeleteThe philosopher Jonatan Glover writes brilliantly on this and related subjects if you're interested - his book Causing Death and Saving Lives was reading for my degree forty years ago and is still available - brilliant rapier like mind on these questions. You will like his conclusions.
ReplyDeletePS. His book Humanity is a harrowing but BRILLIANT exposition of the capacity of human beings to be 'inhumane' to each other.
here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Glover
ReplyDeleteThanks for the signpost Mr Shed.
DeleteThis is a subject which makes me insane. It is pure and simple patriarchy which tells women what they can and cannot do with their own bodies. And lives. And yes, there are plenty of women who march outside of clinics but it is the men who mainly make the laws, who have written the rules of religion, who want to control women. And plenty of women have internalized these patriarchal practices to the point where they cannot think for themselves. Forcing a woman to have a child that she does not want or can care for is beyond cruel to the woman and to the child. And the trite, "Well then, give it up for adoption," is perhaps crueler yet in my opinion. The damage done to a woman who is forced to bear a child and hand it over lasts a lifetime.
ReplyDeleteMen's contribution to so-called sacred life is over and done in minutes while the woman is left with a lifetime of responsibility and thus, men should shut the hell up about what a woman can and cannot do when that few minutes results in something that will so profoundly affect her.
I could say a lot more but I won't.
It seems it has always been about men telling women what to do.
DeleteMy son-in-law was adopted and he has certainly been damaged by it
DeleteI think what galls me the most is the notion that if I'm "pro-choice", it automatically means I'm "pro-death". There is a great deal of gray area on this topic that many in the "pro-life" refuse to address. Regardless of my personal opinion about abortion (and I can acknowledge a lot of that gray area), I believe it's something between a woman and her doctor (and her God).
ReplyDeleteThanks Kelly. An interesting comment though I do not fully understand your final point.
DeleteI sometimes have trouble expressing myself. It might be simpler to just say that although I have a strong faith in God, I'm very much pro-choice.
DeleteThank you.
ReplyDeleteThat's okay Tigger. I sense that this is a topic you have given a lot of thought to.
DeleteThe back street butchery that went on was barbaric. I feel ill just thinking about it.
ReplyDeleteSadly, it is still not buried in the past.
DeleteI too watched that programme and could not believe that Ireland was so behind the times that it was only in the last year or so that abortion was passed as legal. To be made to go full-term and give birth to babies that were not viable from the start beggars belief. I can remember back in the 1970s helping two German women get abortion help in England as it was illegal there for a while - again Catholic communities did not allow them to do it in Germany.
ReplyDeleteYour translation skills brought unexpected benefits to those two German women.
DeleteI agree with you 100% on choice. We're taking drastic steps backward in the U.S. on that issue.
ReplyDeleteIt is never something to be taken lightly but in the end it should be up to the woman concerned.
DeleteI could not agree more. To me it's crystal clear that it's up to the mother to decide whether she is in a position to have a baby. I don't understand why it's even a question. (Unswayed as I am by ancient holy books.)
ReplyDeleteThere is undoubtedly a racial element to anti-abortion crusading. When you see anti-abortion posters and billboards they always, ALWAYS feature cute, white, blond babies. To be fair, I think some religious, anti-abortion campaigners DO care about babies of other races and nationalities and often support overseas mission work and that kind of thing, which they believe will improve the lives of those children -- but I think it's debatable whether that's ultimately true.
Typically thoughtful response. Thanks Steve.
DeleteYou are so right "it is only the unborn western foetuses they seem to care about". Well said!
ReplyDeleteOf course there will be some exceptions to that rule.
DeleteI believe that the government has absolutely no business involving themselves in such a personal matter. I am pro-choice.
ReplyDeleteGlad to hear that Debby.
DeleteWithout stating what I believe, a post like yours is known in my country as “virtue signaling”.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that other American commenters upon this blogpost would agree with you on that Bob.
DeleteI agree with you, Yorkie but that doesn't mean the post is devoid of virtue signalling :)
DeleteI am a virtuous fellow. Why would I need to signal that anyway?
DeleteI am now long past child bearing years so it is rather academic but for me personally I could never have an abortion but I am a passion believer in 'Women's right to choose'. What is right for me is not necessarily right for another woman and nobody should have a say in what women choose. I have absolutely no time for the pro lifers and I think it is a moral and ethical outrage that people are dying due to a lack of basic human rights and certain quarters think it is fine for babies to continue to be born into circumstances that mean they haven't got even clean drinking water never mind food, homes, jobs etc
ReplyDeleteOf course I applaud this well-considered comment MAC.
DeleteThe late, great George Carlin said it best: "In this country, if you're PREBORN, you're fine. If you're PRESCHOOL, you're f*cked." These anti-abortion people don't give a shit about the lives of actual living children, they just want to control women.
ReplyDeleteHave a you heard about the controversy here where there's debate about Joe Biden (a devoted, lifelong Catholic) receiving communion? Simply because he believes in the separation of church and state and allowing women to make their own choices about their bodies. Several bishops want him to be refused communion on the basis of that, meanwhile they had NO problems with Trump, the most morally bankrupt politician we've ever had. It's disgusting.
No. I had not heard of all that Jennifer. I am shaking my head with my mouth slightly open in disgust.
DeleteThis is a topic that doesn't have a middle ground for some. I guess if they frame it that way it's easier for them to push their ideas,. as you suggest many of these people are completely oblivious to other causes . Yes looking after the living would make much more sense.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your thoughtful reflection Red.
DeleteI once read a very comprehensive article which stated all the ways the "pro-life" folks could care about life and the systems which would need fixing in order to properly support the families who may consider a termination. I have never been able to find it again which I am annoyed about but suffice to say, there are many, many things we need to improve before we could consider taking that option from people.
ReplyDeleteThere's something in the language of "a woman's right to choose" that I really hate. There's a vague implication that it's like choosing whether to have tea or coffee. It should be something less pithy like "It is up to the parents to agonise over the best way to honour their potential child"
I am pro choice as well. If someone doesn't want an abortion, that's their choice, not mine and the reverse is true as well. Pro life seems to stop at birth and then they don't seem to care much what happens aferwards. Women are the ones who do the heavy lifting when it comes to carrying and caring for children. It has the most impact on their lives. It's their choice.
ReplyDeleteIt does seem strange that they can bang on about unborn children but not impoverished, disabled, starving or neglected children.
DeleteThank you YP for speaking out about this.
ReplyDeleteIt's horrifying to realise that even now, in the 21st century, and in a time of so-called enlightenment, that this subject should need to be raised.
Of course it's a woman's right to choose if she has an abortion or a baby - it's her body and it doesn't belong to anyone else. It's tragic that so many "righteous" people see the need to interfere. No doubt they wouldn't offer to help sick children in countries like Chad, Malawi or Somalia - that wouldn't bring them into the media spotlight - and it wouldn't be exercising a form of control.
There is something deeply disturbing about any man wanting to control women's lives, and I'm disgusted that any woman should try to prevent one of her own sex from making decisions about her life. How many of these protesters give any thought to the actual women involved?
Ideally we'd all hope that the choice need never arise, but this isn't a perfect world.
The psychology of the pro-life protesters is a complete mystery to me. Thank you for your interesting reflections CG.
DeleteI have written several responses to this post over the last couple days but have yet to publish one. For me, there is a lot I don't understand about this topic and people are so politically sensitive that when I bring up points to clarify, I am automatically shunned. But I thought now that the blog has moved on, I will try once more.
ReplyDeleteLike someone above, I have a hard time swallowing the term "pro choice" when killing a living entity is involved. Yes it is a woman's body and she should have a say in what happens, but to give carte blanche to kill another human simply because it is your body and your choice seems a bit unmoral. I've heard both my daughter's heartbeats as very young fetuses and was told my oldest would be born with her spine outside her body and unable to live. I was unable at the time to take her life and couldn't see myself every choosing different. But that is a decision between my god and myself and I was fortunate that the doctors were wrong and my daughter is now running at a track meet as I write this.
I don't know the answers to these questions but I know labeling myself pro-choice doesn't sit well with me and neither does anti-abortionist. As someone who grew up on a farm, I am all to familiar with humane killings. I haven't had to choose between raising the offspring of rape. I don't know if I could overcome my morals to kill a fetus that might be better off dead than brought into a world uncared for and unloved. I do know I don't think this is a government decision but a moral one and thus only between you and your God. I guess for me, I fall in the gray area of this topic where most only see black or white.
This is an extremely well-considered response Ed and I thank you for sharing it. I am glad that this blogpost sparked such deep reflection.
DeleteDear Yorkshire, but how do you know that anti-abortion people aren't actually digging into their own pockets in order to provide African children with clean water, decent food and such? Do you have a drone that flies around Bible-belt communities, peeping in windows, hoping to catch sight of a bank statement lying on someone's kitchen table? The thing about for-real Christians is - they help out (even when $ is tight) but don't go around blabbing about it. But anyway, nice try with the (wet) blanket statement :)
ReplyDelete