To be clear, I am pro choice so I disagree with their conclusion. But I don't think life is special.
Most things we eat were once alive. Salt is a rock and was never alive. A lot of fruit can be eaten without killing the plant it came from. But every time you eat a carrot, a plant was killed for you. Following the form of the anti abortionists' argument, that carrot plant was murdered for you.
Every time you take antibiotics for an infection or use vinegar on a cutting board you kill things that had been alive.
I don't mourn when I bleed, even though blood cells that share my DNA die. Nor do I morn when I give a blood sample to get my cholesterol checked.
So arguing that abortion is murder because life begins at conception is hypocritical even for anti abortionists who are vegetarian and don't kill spiders.
2 comments:
Dear Wren:
As a vegetarian who doesn't kill spiders (ahem!), I found your post on the hypocrisy of anti-abortionists interesting. Through my adult life, I have self-identified as a pro-choice supporter. I have attended the rallies, donated to the cause, signed the petitions, etc. Fundamentally, I do not like the idea of the government dictating this very personal decision, at least not in early pregnancy.
On the other hand, as I age, I find myself more protective of life in all its forms. I value life, be it the life of a soldier, a spider, a cow, or a baby.
Do I consider life sacred? I do not. We all die. Sometimes soldiers are sacrificed for the greater good. Sometimes animals are sacrificed for progress and sometimes they are sacrificed for our tables. And sometimes fetuses are sacrificed, often after long days of searching one's heart for a "right" answer. Such sacrifices, while often difficult, are sometimes simply necessary.
The part that has changed for me has to do with how much thought or respect we give to these decisions. Yes, the red-blood cells die when extracted, and yes it happens with great regularity. Of course my cutting boards' inhabitants' lives will be cut short by necessity. But is simple acknowledgment of that life lost so much to ask?
Your point about food is well taken. As I prepare my food, I do my best to avoid a sense of mindlessness and lack of respect. The vegetables I will enjoy for dinner tonight, and the grapes that will be represented in my glass -- I will enjoy these and be grateful for their lives, fully acknowledging my life necessitates a loss of life.
The areas I start to feel less comfortable in, though, have less to do with the necessity associated with sacrifice and more to do with the convenience and pleasure associated with sacrifice. To eat enough broccoli to survive is respectful of the life of the vegetable and the natural resources used to get it to my table. To overindulge in broccoli, or to let the broccoli rot in my crisper drawer, it respectful of neither the life nor the natural resources, and should be avoided.
"Okay," you say, "Whatever. It's broccoli, and you have lost your damned mind." Maybe. Except: I apply that same principle to the cow and the soldier, too. I am a vegetarian because I want to induce the least amount of suffering necessary for my own survival. I am against the Iraq war because I don't think our security was compromised by Iraq, and the war has brought about more suffering than we ever imagined when it started.
My point: I believe it is important to carefully consider if and when it is necessary to end a life. Your premise is that life is not inherently special and therefore unworthy of respect. My premise is that it is, and to not regard it as such dehumanizes us.
We agree the bundle of replicating cells we call a fetus is alive. Sometimes our lives necessitate the sacrifice of other lives. Abortions for the sake of convenience in this age of almost full-proof contraception, though, smack of self indulgence and lack of discipline. When I read the CDC report that indicates 839,226 abortions were performed in 2004, I am left to wonder how mindful we are being when it comes to the prevention of pregnancy.*
So, as pro-choice supporters, you and I begin and end in very similar places. We diverge on the inherent value of life and how to approach the decision to take a life. I would conclude with this observation: Since the introduction of antibiotics, unknown numbers of lives have been saved thanks to a technology that efficiently targets and eliminates organisms incompatible with us. On the other hand, the mindless over application of antibiotics has created another potentially serious issue: bacterial resistance. I submit we must be mindful, respectful, and cautious when it comes to ending of even the smallest forms of life, lest our flippancy compromises us in ways we do not anticipate.
Respectfully submitted,
- msn -
AKA: The Vegetarian Who Does Not Kill Spiders
* http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5609a1.htm
MSN - Thank you for your long and thoughtful comment. You've given me food for thought. :-)
Post a Comment