Continued from page 1
Making abortion illegal will create murkiness, indecision and more deaths, without lowering
number of, much less stopping, abortions.
The argument about when life begins is a huge distraction in abortion debate. The defendants love to trap pro-choice people by getting them to either agree that life begins at conception, or get them squirming in their chairs trying to avoid question. Too many pro-choice people fall for it and they can’t win. We’ve shown that in any abortion law anti-abortion groups will need to make concessions that compromise their overriding principle that all life is sacred. The real discussion cannot be about when any of us believes life starts. It must be about circumstances that make abortion necessary.
Why not take a new, liberal view of debate? Why won’t defendants take their heads out of Bible, and face truth? Unmarried people will not stop having sex even with all finger-wagging and righteousness of defendants. Given that, why not teach proper sexuality education? Why not make available any and all contraceptive devices that would stop pregnancy from happening in first place? Why not let women be in charge of how they handle their reproductive years? Why not do all this and create a situation where abortion is less necessary? Abortion will never be eliminated. The defendants themselves say they know that in certain circumstances an abortion is only medical solution. Once again, they can practice this moral relativism, while at same time inciting abortion foes and painting liberals as “baby killers”. Their tactics suck and we need to call them on it. Rational people are going to disagree in this debate. What we should strive for is an agreement to reduce necessity for abortions. Reason versus irrationality has to prevail.
Sheldon Reiffenstein is a freelance writer and a studen tof government, with a Political Science degree. His latest book is titled "Liberal Is NOT A Four Letter Word, available at www.liberalisnotafourletterword.com/
