Recently, I’ve become more and more aware that folks on both sides of the left-right divide have this terrible habit of assuming the worst of their political opponents (I do it too). While I mostly see this from conservatives (not necessarily because they engage in it more often, but simply because it’s easier to see when it’s directed at yourself and others like you), Kevin Drum fell into that trap today on the subject of abortion:
I’m aware that other groups use these arguments for less savory purposes, and I’m also aware that I’m skipping a bunch of details - including my firm belief that most anti-abortion rhetoric is a demagogic reaction against sexual (and economic) freedom for women, not something based on a genuine desire to save human life. Some other time, perhaps.
This is the flipside of the argument that I frequently hear from radical pro-lifeistas who claim that liberals only really want abortion around because of their gleeful desire to kill babies, their inherent racism in wanting primarily babies of color killed, or any number of other ridiculous assertions that they trot out in their arguments.
Drum is generally quite moderate in his liberalism, but in this case he has bought into the radical pro-choiceista line: that pro-lifers aren’t really interested in stopping abortions, but rather in keeping the woman down.
Which, if you think about it for about five seconds, it patently absurd on its face.
I’m sure it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the Catholic church and large numbers of protestant churches believe that life begins, if not at conception, a long time before birth. And the fact that there are a LOT of people in this country which belong in one of those two groups.
As a pro-life liberal, I’m in the unique position of being able to see both sides of this issue. And I am also in the unique position of being able to understand the motivations of both the pro-life and pro-choice camp (especially since I used to be pro-choice).
So a quick note to those on both sides of this divide:
Pro-lifers really DO believe that embryos and fetuses are human beings, and therefore should be protected from an early end to their lives.
Pro-choicers really DO want to protect the welfare of both mothers and children, and really DO want to ensure that neither has to grow up impoverished.
Pro-lifers are NOT trying to take people’s rights away. Rather, they simply don’t believe that we should choose the rights of one person (the mother) over the rights of another (the child).
Pro-choicers are also NOT trying to take the baby’s rights away. They simply feel that the border between life and non-life is further forward than their pro-life counterparts, and that the government has no business telling people when they may receive a medical procedure when there isn’t another life involved.
Haven’t we had enough of the hate spewing from both sides? Haven’t we had enough of this “think the worst” mentality? We’re long overdue for some real solutions to the crisis of abortion thoughout the world. Solutions which help prevent overpopulation. Solutions which support mothers who are too young to take care of their children. Solutions which ensure that all unwanted children find loving homes. And solutions which dramatically reduce the number of abortions.
You don’t have to be pro-life or pro-choice to want these things. And you certainly don’t have to think the worst of people who don’t agree with your position.
May 26th, 2005 at 6:13 pm
Kevin would have to clarify for himself as to whether he was saying misogyny was a part of all opposition to abortion (a rather absurd claim) or just a strong factor that seems to come up too often.
Nobody consciously puts this opinion forward. But, there are some who seem to view childbirth as a price to pay (the “they’ve had their fun and now they have to pay for it” crowd).
Perhaps the most typical opinion of this form is the “I’m against abortion, except in cases of rape or incest” opinion. Which is rather common. If one truly is concerned about the life of an unborn child, the circumstances of its conception should not factor into one’s desire to protect it. But, if one wants to keep sluts in their place, well….
May 27th, 2005 at 4:37 am
A tangent regarding keeping “sluts in their place.”
It’s the “good” girls who get pregnant. “Sluts” (or women who are savvy about sex) know how to use birth control.
May 28th, 2005 at 5:47 am
I am a pro-life Republican and would like to my add my three cents (It used to be two cents but that was before inflation.)
1. I would quibble a little bit with your characterization of pro-lifers. The reason that we oppose abortion is because we believe it is murder. A doctor goes into the womb, stabs the baby until it dies, and then sucks it out with a vacuum cleaner. Can we really be considered extreme simply because we want to stop that practice.
2. You hope to be able to stop the partisan rhetoric on both sides but how is that going to happen. There simply isn’t any middle ground. A woman either has the right to abort her baby or she doesn’t. There’s no way to half way abort. So how do we really come to a compromise on an issue that has no middle ground?
3. By the way, I’m against abortion in cases of rape and incest too. Why are we putting the baby death and leaving the rapist alive to walk around? Where is the justice in that?
May 30th, 2005 at 9:18 pm
Sam,
I believe you’ve proven the point of my post.
June 3rd, 2005 at 2:11 pm
Pro-lifers are NOT trying to take people’s rights away. Rather, they simply don’t believe that we should choose the rights of one person (the mother) over the rights of another (the child).
Pro-choicers are also NOT trying to take the baby’s rights away. They simply feel that the border between life and non-life is further forward than their pro-life counterparts, and that the government has no business telling people when they may receive a medical procedure when there isn’t another life involved.
Unfortunately, there are advocates on either side of the divide for whom these statements are not true.
There are SOME pro-choicers who proudly disagree with the “rare” part of the “safe, legal, and rare” mantra (link). They feel that setting any goal to reduce the number of abortions implies that there is something wrong with abortion. And there are SOME pro-choicers who feel that even if the fetus IS a person, it’s right to life still shouldn’t be respected (link).
And on the other side, there are SOME pro-lifers who don’t give a flip about women’s rights. Some think that a woman should be forbidden to terminate her pregnancy even if it would cost her her life (link). And check out, on that same page, the part about not letting pregnant women leave the country and requiring any woman who wants to leave the country to take a pregnancy test first.
As long as these kind of extremists do exist on each side, the other side will be able to point to them as the reason why it’s dangerous to seek common ground with “those people.”
Also, pointing out the very scariest of the enemy is an effective way to rally the troops and fundraise.
June 13th, 2005 at 1:06 am
It’s the “good” girls who get pregnant. “Sluts” (or women who are savvy about sex) know how to use birth control.
What a crazy comment! Sorry but this sounds more than stupid.
June 28th, 2005 at 2:01 pm
I believe if you do the research you will find that the life begins at conception…it is living and growing from conception….and if the mom doesnt want it from fear of being “poor” then put it up for adoption…it isnt that difficult to find wanting, willing and able parents that cant have children on their on….no one is saying that the mom must care fo the child….any one of us could lose everything tomorrow and be poor as you like to say…If people would due the research of recent studies you would find that science is more and more supporting biblical and christian beliefs, however you want to say it, than disproving them….including dating the dating process…anyway…2 cents, there you go.