Question for the Pro-Life Crowd

Originally Published 2008-11-04 00:45:57

Before I begin, I'm sorry for the overtly political post. Blame it on the season.

I have a question. I intend it to be open-ended and simply spawn discussion.

Assuming you, dear reader, happen to be part of the pro-life crowd (all one of you), are there ever any exceptions? The canonical examples, of course, are rape and incest, which I suppose will do. Think about this in the context of your wife or your 15 year old daughter. Ok, maybe not the latter if we're talking incest, but you get my drift.

Think about this, please, then scroll down.

Time out for a joke... (check out the Obi-Lincoln about 3 minutes in!)

THE EMPIRE STRIKES BARACK | Funny Jokes at JibJab

Ok, you ready? Thought about my question?

So... are these legitimate consideration? If your underage daughter were raped by your worst enemy, would you insist that she keep the baby? If your wife were raped by that same worst enemy, would you raise your enemy's progeny, supporting their offspring as your own?

Yes?

Ok. While I might disagree personally, I cannot in good conscience argue with you. Everything that follows debates your belief system, not your logic. I find your philosophical stance consistent and rational.

But if you didn't... if you made an exception for these extreme cases, then you absolutely must consider the pro-choice alternative. Because an exception -- any exception -- indicates that you believe there are bad things that occur out there in the big crazy world and that there are hard decisions that must be made in their aftermath.

Sometimes those hard decisions have moral consequences.

Nevertheless, if there is room for that exception, I assert that this is more of a pro-choice stance than anyone realizes. That there are exceptions -- that the world is morally gray -- means that hard decisions, nay choices are to be made.

Put another way, if abortion is acceptable given the extremes that we all wish did not exist, then you must admit that there is a time and a place for choice. And if you believe this, then this becomes a non-partisan issue. It becomes an issue of where you divide your grays... where you make the morality call.

Why would we presume to let the state draw that line?