Offensive Thoughts of a Pro-lifer
So often in the abortion debate we hear things like "Don't tell me what to do with my own body", and "Men shouldn't have a say as this is strictly a woman's reproductive choice issue".

It occured to me the other day that in many moral discussions in society, religious people are automatically dismissed because they are 'not objective' and 'not rational'. We see this quite strongly in the abortion debate. Yet if being 'not objective' or 'not rational' is the criteria for automatic exclusion from the discussion, why are pro-abortion women allowed in the debate at all? Surely they are the least objective in deciding this moral issue as they have the most emotional investment in whether they have to allow an unborn child come to term if they are pregnant. Some pro-abortionists are even coming out now saying how abortion is all about letting them have sex without fear of becoming pregnant. So maybe when someone tries the "men shouldn't have a say " line we should respond with the "you aren't objective in this issue" line?

Why is their objectiveness in this moral debate never questioned? As a quick answer, I will say because moral debates aren't about rationality or objectivity, they are about people trying allow themselves to do whatever they want to do. It's about letting them give into temptation. It certainly isn't about rationality.

If it was all about rationality, then why are abortion clinics not held to the same standards of care as other operative facilities? Why has the contraceptive pill never really been through a proper trial (of course, now we know it is a carcenogenic). Why do people continue to promote "sex-education" when it clearly has failed to prevent teenage pregnancy and STD's. Because it isn't about rationality, but freedom to sin.
- posted by Alan Grey @ Wednesday, March 08, 2006