H 23°, L 4° | Tomorrow: 
H 21°, L 6°I’m a moderate. A centrist. I voted for a Libertarian the first time I had a chance to vote in a presidential election and for a Big Government liberal in Barack Obama the second time. I’d like to think I’m usually for finding a middle ground. But there is one issue with no middle grounds. The issue of abortion seems only to posses poles. Either you believe it should be legal or you do not.
Madison became the frontline for the issue on Saturday. About 800 people from around Wisconsin showed up in Madison to protest abortion in light of the possibility of UW/Meriter clinic offering abortions through the 22nd week of pregnancy. The requisite counter-protest of abortion rights marchers was organized by the International Socialist Organization. Stay Classy, ISO. Hoisting signs like “Abortion is a Human Right” seems like an oxymoron to me, but my views are often in the minority.
I’ve written a column on abortion already. In case you missed it, I think it’s wrong; I don’t think you need to believe in any god to see why ending a life is wrong; and the argument that it only affects one person is specious. So, you know where I stand on the issue. But from my spectators’ seat in the middle, I can’t help but point out a few glaring and distracting issues that obstruct the discussion on abortion. Let’s lay a few ground rules for Madison’s debate on abortion.
The anti-abortion claim that if one is able to figure out sex, one is suddenly qualified to have a child is unfounded. You’ve heard this argument before — it’s the “Well, if you had sex, you have to accept the consequences” argument. Those “consequences” being a human being which requires a lifetime’s worth of varying levels and forms of parenting. Many people will tell you sex is terribly difficult to perfect, but not too hard to do. A 14-year-old child who has managed to figure out the mechanics of sexual intercourse is not suddenly qualified to father or mother a child. This truism, by the way, holds for all ages. This talking point needs to go.
In acknowledging this, anti-abortionists such as myself must acknowledge the role education must play in preventing abortions. A 14-year-old may not need to be educated on how to have sex, but he or she will need to be made aware of the consequences. Abstinence campaigns and curriculum are failing young people. Those of us who have insisted upon them should be ashamed. Prevention, too, must become part of our vocabulary, as well as the C-word: contraceptives.
One of the more popular refrains from the abortion rights crowds is the government has no right to have a say in what a woman does with her body. That’s not true, and it already does. There exists a framework of laws that govern what we can and can do with our bodies, were it only to affect our own bodies — as in the case of certain types of drug use — or another’s — as in the case of theft, murder or rape.
Such logic is a disavowal of government’s role to protect its citizens from the inevitable irrationality of their own decisions. Laws related to the use of certain drugs exemplify this point. Further, government has a responsibility to protect its citizens from one another, exemplified by the plethora of laws that criminalize theft, murder, rape and a host of other crimes.
Anti-abortionists must also realize that the use of the aborted baby photo must end, as does the spirit of condemnation that seems to perch atop the shoulder of anti-abortion demonstrators. It is just as revolting, off-putting and offensive to those who agree with you as to those who don’t. It is as effective as the aforementioned abstinence programs. A far more effective way of making a difference in Madison, a far more compassionate city than you give us credit for, would be to have pictures of a child’s development throughout a pregnancy. Or a placard that proclaims, “You have choices.” You will find your cause wanting in support if you come to judge this city.
Finally, to the ISOs and other organizations who would think of organizing further demonstrations, rallies or throngs in support of abortion. Even for those who support abortion, it’s not a cause to proclaim a human right or to rally around in the streets. It does not seem to be something a woman does with her head held high, fist raised in victory, joyous at her ability to exercise her right to an abortion. It’s a somber, even mournful moment for woman. Isn’t that what its proponents often tell us? Put down the bull horns, the placards and infuse your support — which, as a reminder, I decry — with the sort of compassionate consideration those you claim to support deserve.
Though, I suppose that’s the message both sides need to observe.
Gerald Cox ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in economics.
IP hash: f57c9169
“I�m a moderate. A centrist.” Just because you say it doesn’t make it true.
IP hash: b43eab93
The other side of the coin is the mom who’s baby crazy and has 14 children through in vitro. We are a country of messed up morals, but we shouldn’t be a country that interferes with private lives beyond reason.
IP hash: 3d6b9578
Gerald, I think this is one of my favorite articles from you. However, you forgot to discount the pro-baby-killers’ argument that an unborn fetus is not a living human that deserves the same rights as we do, and therefore the mother should choose. In the case of these late term abortions that are done through the 22nd week, this is entirely untrue. Some of these babies live once there are taken out and are just left to die. Last week, I also had the pleasure of meeting a delightful young boy who had been born at the beginning of his 23rd week of gestation. These boy is an absolute joy! He runs, he plays, he laughs, and most importantly, he is living proof that we are pushing the age of viability back earlier and earlier through advances in healthcare and technology. It would not be far-fetched to think that in the near future we will be saving babies born at 22, even 21 weeks! So to say that these fetuses are not life is absurd and any person who believes that should spend an afternoon with a child that has survived, there are plenty of them out there.
IP hash: 6fabc93d
11:08 is assuming 100% of these unborn children are healthy, viable. This assumption overlooks a difficult but necessary choice that many heartbroken mothers will have to make. These patients do not need some wildly ignorant protester expressing their fairytale viewpoint.
IP hash: b84008cc
As to your last few points, you can not discount as a primary reason why women are ashamed to have an abortion being the constant attempts of anti-abortion groups to paint abortion as an awful crime. Also just because a human right isn’t joyous doesn’t make it any less of a human right and any less worthy of fighting for.
IP hash: efe63057
silly rhetoric and name calling should be dropped as well. its simple to point fingers, to create the “enemy,” to decry the other side. since there is seemingly no middle ground in this battle i suppose its a far-fetched hope to see fair play. but both sides should be well aware that any infantile rambling on their part will do no justice to the “purpose” they are trying to serve. so yes, please 11:08 call us pro-baby-killers, because that’s really the intent behind all abortions, population control … did you read anything Gerald wrote? i don’t think i’ve ever seen the decision to get an abortion applauded, i’ve only seen it tolerated. I graduated high school 3 years ago and since then 33 of my female classmates (that I am aware of) have become pregnant or have already given birth. the first step to this battle is the practice of safe sex - condoms, contraceptives. however, its completely ludacris to expect 100% of the sexually active population to engage in safe sex 100% of the time. should they be forced to deal with the consequences and raise a child as a potentially unfit parent? what of the backlash the child will face years down the road from having a mother who was too young and dumb to care about the well being of their child? everyone speaks in favor of the child, the child. But just because you guarantee the child’s birth doesn’t mean that he/she will be given a suitable childhood, whether they live with their teen mother, go to the orphanage, or get placed in the foster care system. And let us not forget that both of these social securities (orphanages and the foster care system) are in great need of an overhaul, foster care especially, and that some kids never get out, some of them turn to the streets, etc etc. And I’m not blaming this on single motherhood through and through, this happens in other situations as well.
I’m going to leave it at this.
When talking about abortion, the effects extend far beyond the birth of the child. I’ve never seen a joyous abortion, I’ve never heard anyone talk about the prospects of getting one as a light-hearted, carefree “solution.” Its the end of the line, last chance option for many women who know they would not be able to handle the situation.
Its a messy battle ground to be sure, and I suppose that’s about all there is to be said.
IP hash: e1ac6a57
@1108 calling pro-choicers “pro-baby-killers” is a little ridiculous, no? I for one prefer the term abortion enthusiast, although pissing off the Christian right is a bonus.
IP hash: c11b69ce
Excellent article, kind sir.
@11:08am: Nice straw man. Nobody’s saying that a non-viable fetus is not alive. Taking facts of biology and applying them to philosophy is a no-no. (For example, “A fetus has a 1% chance of surviving outside of the womb, therefore it should be granted Constitutional rights in utero.”)
IP hash: 4089035a
Mr. Cox, though I only occasionally agree with what you have to say, I have tremendous respect for the clear, intelligent, well-articulated arguments you make. Thank you.
IP hash: 183f76a6
Too bad you don’t need to take a pill in order to get pregnant, instead of the reverse.
IP hash: 579ec11e
Mr. Cox,
You make a good argument, just like all the other pro-lifers do. But you and the others always fail to draw attention to the fact that a late term abortion is first and foremest a medical procedure. It is a medical procedure that can save lives. There are women out there that find out late in their gestation periods about serious complications that could be potentially fatal for them. If no clinics in the area offer this procedure, the lives of many women like this could be threatened. Personally, if I had to choose between saving a potential life or saving a person who has a life, I would choose the aborter. I think anyone who makes the choice to let the mother die in order to keep the fetus in there is out of their mind, because what would they be saving? It’s going to die WITH the mother, isn’t it. I know of the miracle it can be to have an early born child survive. But I can say through personal experience, so to speak, that I fully support late term abortions due to complications or delay. I myself was supposed to be a late-term, aborted child. My parents had gotten the ill news from our doctor that the embrionic fluid sample taken from my mother’s belly had been tested, and I was supposed to be born with a rare disease. How would I look? Short legs, short arms, hairy down the neck and spine, and a pretty low IQ to boot. My parents made a very hard decision. They bought the plane tickets to the nearest clinic they could find for late term abortion at the time (Kansas). But my mom couldn’t handle it. Even after all this trouble, standing there in line at the clinic, she couldn’t do it. So they had me - disease or no disease - and I turned out fine (turns out the umbilical cord had had the weird cells). The point of my story is: I accept that I may not have been here if it were not for the life saving decision of my parents. Yet, I also know and accept that there are other parents out there, like mine were, making hard decisions, and they should have the right to make those decisions. Especially if the baby-to-be is going to cause so many problems after birth, or during it. I AM pro-life. Our life.
IP hash: 579ec11e
Mr. Cox,
You make a good argument, just like all the other pro-lifers do. But you and the others always fail to draw attention to the fact that a late term abortion is first and foremest a medical procedure. It is a medical procedure that can save lives. There are women out there that find out late in their gestation periods about serious complications that could be potentially fatal for them. If no clinics in the area offer this procedure, the lives of many women like this could be threatened. Personally, if I had to choose between saving a potential life or saving a person who has a life, I would choose the aborter. I think anyone who makes the choice to let the mother die in order to keep the fetus in there is out of their mind, because what would they be saving? It’s going to die WITH the mother, isn’t it. I know of the miracle it can be to have an early born child survive. But I can say through personal experience, so to speak, that I fully support late term abortions due to complications or delay. I myself was supposed to be a late-term, aborted child. My parents had gotten the ill news from our doctor that the embrionic fluid sample taken from my mother’s belly had been tested, and I was supposed to be born with a rare disease. How would I look? Short legs, short arms, hairy down the neck and spine, and a pretty low IQ to boot. My parents made a very hard decision. They bought the plane tickets to the nearest clinic they could find for late term abortion at the time (Kansas). But my mom couldn’t handle it. Even after all this trouble, standing there in line at the clinic, she couldn’t do it. So they had me - disease or no disease - and I turned out fine (turns out the umbilical cord had had the weird cells). The point of my story is: I accept that I may not have been here if it were not for the life saving decision of my parents. Yet, I also know and accept that there are other parents out there, like mine were, making hard decisions, and they should have the right to make those decisions. Especially if the baby-to-be is going to cause so many problems after birth, or during it. I AM pro-life. Our life.
IP hash: e1fdebf7
11:08, while I’m a pro-lifer and have too met children that were extremely early that live quite well, there are plenty born at the same age that don’t live well. Many are significant burdens and have a very poor quality of life. I’m not using that as an argument for abortions, just that your argument is false. Also, 3:08’s response is also poor. While finding out your child has some disease like Tay Sach’s, or their brain is developing on the outside of its skull, etc. and the child has no possibility of experiencing any joy or quality life, only pain may be an argument for an abortion. In that case it almost sounds like euthanasia and I’m not even going to enter that arena. But there are many women out there who do or would choose to terminate because of things like Down’s Syndrome. While people with Down’s may fall in a spectrum of functionality and quality of life, there are so many that lead full, joyful, wonderful lives. In these types of cases, one cannot ignore that these mothers are simply selfish and it is unfortunate that this is allowed in our society.
IP hash: 6fabc93d
9:20 2/3- You make a strange distinction between euthanasia and abortion in utero. If the child has its brain developing on the outside of its skull, the procedure you’d seek is not called “fetus euthanasia.” Anyway, if you’d get right with your church and God with semantics, that’s cool.
Second term abortions are perhaps more medically necessary than first term ones, which are often for birth control.
IP hash: 5f8e77a3
“Abstinence campaigns and cirriculum are failing people.” I always laugh at this argument. It totally sums up western culture. Perhaps certain people are failing to abstain?
“Moral relativism will certainly end our species and damn our souls.”—C.S. Lewis
IP hash: c11b69ce
@2/4, 8:54: Wagging a finger at people doesn’t convince many to abstain. Since they want to learn about sex but you refuse to talk about it, they learn by doing instead. And while they’re doing, they’re not using condoms because they were never taught how or were told that condoms don’t actually work anyway, so why bother?
Compare to the Netherlands: any child who asks about sex can get an honest and straightforward answer without judgment or suspicion. It’s not even a part of public education because parents will actually teach their kids age-appropriate info about sex.
As a result of knowing what they’re getting into, average age of lost virginity in NL is two years later than in USA, and this is accompanied by rates of low abortion, high contraceptive use, low STI transmissions, etc., which are consistently among the best in the world.
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/PUBLICATIONS/factsheet/fsest.htm
I want to be a Dutchie.
IP hash: 1283ac60
You bring a good point to my attention. I’m curious as to whether they treat chastity as a virture or not. Also, I’m just guessing, but I would think that American teenageers are exposed to much more cultural pressure to lose their virginity.