Should Abortion Be Banned As A Discussion Topic?

I am very hesitant to ban topics from discussion in the forum because I like to think that adults are capable of discussing issues without going to war, but I realize that this might be naive on my part. As a secondary consideration, I'd like to believe that those who are unable to discuss a topic without getting angry would simply stay out of it and enjoy the rest of the forum, but that isn't true either.

Abortion is an important topic. It is certainly one in which people on both sides have strong feelings, and it is one that is seized upon by politicians as a point of division, particularly in election years.

However, in a discussion forum, there are a few things that I can be certain of. One of them is that no one's opinion is going to be changed as a result of a forum fight on the topic. This could possibly occur as the result of a reasonable discussion but that doesn't seem to be a possibility. People do change their minds and positions on abortion but this is rarely, if ever, the result of an argument with someone on the other side of the issue.

During abortion discussion, people on both sides of the issue are quickly forced to adopt and defend extreme positions that they aren't entirely comfortable with, and the inability to rationally defend these more extreme positions leads to frustration, and frustration leads to anger.

Another thing that I am certain of is that not one unborn baby or unwed mother is going to be saved as a result of a forum fight.

What does occur, and probably will occur, is that online friendships will be lost, and people will leave the forum from both sides of the argument, as well as those who are simply tired of the fighting.

I don't want to get in the habit of banning every topic that someone might disagree with, but I don't know that this is a topic that can be reasonably discussed here.

So, I leave this open for discussion. By that, I mean that this thread is open to the discussion of discussing abortion, not to the discussion of abortion itself.

 

I think that a part of what makes it difficult is that whatever position someone holds on abortion, there is a tendency for that to change the opinions that those who disagree with them have of them as a person and, of course, that makes it personal. That is neither fair or reasonable, but it occurs, I think.

 

The discussion is is about whether or not abortion should be banned as a topic in the forum, not a discussion of the pros and cons of abortion.

 

I understood your post, @Joe Riley.

 

To me, it's simply a matter of drawing lines. When our cultural lines were more local or regional in nature, we seldom came across people who drew their lines in a different place. Those who drew their lines in a different place than everyone else were thought to be a little weird, at best. Depending on which line they were drawing, and where, they might be thought of as dangerous or even sociopathic. Some lines may be drawn in sand, while others are carved into the concrete.

I'll try to explain what I mean. It makes perfect sense to me and, to a point, it defines who I like to think I am, but I haven't tried to put it down in writing before. Bear with me, please. I might be a long time getting there. I could start anywhere, but since the topic here is abortion, I'll begin with that issue.

One of the problems with discussing the issue of abortion in a forum is that we're locked into an extreme, black or white position, and this is rarely the position we actually hold. Another part of the problem is that we don't usually think our positions through to their logical conclusions.

I believe that abortion is wrong in all cases, just as I believe that killing human beings at any other stage of their lives is wrong. But I don't necessarily believe that that these lines are equal or absolute.

What do I mean by that? Let me try to illustrate it this way. I do believe that it is always wrong to kill another human being. You might think that, as an absolute position, that would be indefensible. Is it wrong to kill someone in defense of your own life, or in defense of your child or another loved one? I would say yes, but it's not as wrong as it would be to kill someone in order to take their stuff or because I enjoy killing. Let's look at a few hypothetical situations based on age and situation.

1. What about in time of war? Is it wrong to participate in war?
2. What if you caught that person molesting your young child? Would it be wrong to kill that person?
3. What about capital punishment? Is capital punishment wrong?
4. What about someone who is at the end of their life, in great pain, and with no reasonable hope for improvement? Is euthanasia wrong?
5. What about the young boy or girl who can see no way out of a life of abuse and torture other than to kill the parent who is responsible for it?

1. I am guessing that most of you would say that it's okay to kill in time of war, and many of you would say that it's honorable to come to the defense of your country.
2. I am guessing that most of you would say that it's understandable that a parent might become so enraged upon coming across someone molesting their child that you would be willing to excuse them for killing that person. I will guess further that some of you would say that anyone who would do that deserves to be killed.
3. I am guessing that most of you are in favor of capital punishment. Maybe not, but I'll bet you're not calling for the people responsible for carrying out these sentences to be tried for murder, and the judges tried as accomplices.
4. I am guessing that most of you are probably not really in favor of euthanasia but, as you approach old age and are accumulating your fair share of pains and troubles, you are beginning to understand it. When you watch a movie about someone who can no longer bear to watch their loved one suffer, I'll bet you can at least empathize with those who might make that decision. I am also confident that some of you are in favor of euthanasia, as long as the state isn't making the decision for you.
5. I am guessing further, that there are situations where you can understand why a child might kill their parent. You might not be able to say that it was the right thing to do but you're not calling for that child to be locked up for the rest of his or her life.

If my assumptions were even close, I have identified that our positions on taking the life of another human being are not absolute, they are not carved into concrete, and we do not all feel the same way. Some people who kill in time of war are monsters, others are heroes, while others are merely trying to get through it alive.

1. As a Mennonite, I believe that it is wrong to participate in war or to accept a job, such as that of a police officer, where I might be put into a position to have to make that decision. But at the same time, we don't always have the luxury of doing the right thing. I am glad that everyone wasn't a Mennonite in the 1930s and 1940s, and that there were people who were willing and able to stop Hitler. I do not, in any way, believe that those who serve in the military are horrible people because they were willing to take a life, and I do believe that many of them were heroes, to whom we all owe a debt of gratitude.
2. I raised a young boy, and I was raising him at the time and in the place where the Freeway Killer was operating, who later turned out to be more than one serial killer, so this is an issue that I thought of. If it were necessary for me to kill someone in order to stop or to prevent them from molesting my son, I would do so, but I don't think I would be willing to take his life as a punishment.
3. I do believe that capital punishment is wrong, and I believe that it is often wrongly applied but, at the same time, there are people for whom you wouldn't find me standing outside the prison walls holding a sign.
4. I believe that euthanasia is wrong, but I can understand why someone would be driven to that. I wouldn't want to punish someone who took the life of their loved one out of compassion, but I would want to punish the one who took another's life because their life was no longer convenient, and I worry that legalized euthanasia will inevitably lead to that being the only option that our insurance plans will cover.
5. Children view life from a different perspective than most of us do as adults, so I can understand that a child might feel utterly hopeless and see no solution other than to strike out against a parent who is abusing him. Yet some children kill their parents because they are little sociopaths without conscience, so this would depend on the conditions surrounding it.

In each case, I believe that killing is wrong, but it is not equally wrong, and there are times when not killing someone might be even more wrong. This doesn't make the killing right, but it does make it justifiable and sometimes even heroic.

Is that contradictory? Perhaps, but life is full of contradictions.

That's the way that I view these issues, but this does not in any way mean that I consider anyone who looks at it differently to be any less ethical or moral than myself. You might draw some of the lines in a different place than I do, but that doesn't speak poorly of either of us. I hope that this makes some sense to you and, if it does, why can't we apply the same thinking to abortion?

You may believe otherwise, but I believe that abortion is wrong, always. But I can understand that there are situations when there might not seem to be another choice, and I don't believe that every abortion is equally wrong. The woman who aborts her baby because she really wanted to have a boy instead of a girl is far more wrong than the sixteen year-old girl who is faced with the choice of giving up whatever her dreams for life might have been in order to spend the next eighteen years of her life raising a baby or deciding on an abortion. Both are wrong, but they are not equally wrong.

Let's contrast abortion with euthanasia. My view is that when we legalize euthanasia the result will be that, in time, everyone will have the right to end their life at any time they wish, and for whatever reason, or for no reason at all. Some of you might agree with that, but the inevitable result will be that, at some point, Medicare and our insurance policies will no longer cover the treatments necessary in order to sustain our life, in effect taking that choice away from us. At some point, the only treatment that will be covered will be that which is intended to end our life. It is not unreasonable to consider that this may be applied to disabled people as well.

Because we agreed, or at least the Supreme Court decided, that a woman should have the right to abortion, we have reached the extreme where even healthy babies, who could readily survive outside of the womb, can be aborted in a brutal manner rather than being allowed to be delivered. Yes, I know that there are people who believe that this is perfectly okay, but I can't help but believe that most people who identify as pro-choice are not entirely comfortable with partial birth abortion.

More than once now, bills have been proposed in congress that would allow post-birth abortions up to a certain period of age, which is simply a matter of moving the line further. In fact, this was a policy in many hospitals until it was made publicly known, where unwanted but living babies were placed naked on a cold table until they died, and the cause of death was recorded as failure to thrive. No baby placed naked and alone on a cold table would survive, so this was in effect a post-birth abortion. This may still occur, although I'm sure they are taking steps to prevent it from being made public.

Not everyone agrees on where the line should be drawn, and the nature of our legal system is to keep moving the line past the point where it is reasonably defensible. I'll talk more about lines in my next post.