To the Editor:
In his April 3, 1995, column, Kevin Walsh proclaimed that "The fight against abortion is not just righteous. Pro-lifers are more than righteous. We are right." Like many before him, Walsh has thus unknowingly lowered the level of public debate on the topic by doing the same thing he accuses pro-choicers of doing: namely, portraying the other side of the debate as amoral and somehow subhuman.
Walsh and others accept the doctrine that abortion is the moral equivalent of murder and don't allow for other points of view. While I am not willing to deny flatly that this doctrine may be true, I am not willing to deny that this belief may be false either. Pro-lifers can stand there and repeat "Abortion is murder!" over and over again, and it will accomplish nothing constructive, because their arguments are based only on their assumptions and are therefore circular.
I have problems with some of the perceptions of some of my fellow pro-choicers as well. I don't view abortion as a tool that empowers women or as symbolic of women's rights. It does bother me that there needs to be so many abortions taking place in this country. When a woman chooses to have an abortion, there can be very grave consequences -- it is true that to have an abortion is an irrevocable decision that many doubtlessly regret. It is probably true that abortion is sometimes misused as a form of contraception (often because access to contraception itself is restricted in some manner). It should by no means be a casual decision.
But I don't believe that the decision should be made by activists, politicians or clergymen. It should be left up to the woman in question. And government bans have not proven to be terribly effective in many areas; abortions would still happen, only instead of in clinics that can be regulated for safety they would be done with coat hangers in dark back alleys.
So what can those against abortion do about these problems, other than the obvious, oft-repeated call, "If you're against abortion, don't have one?" Well, currently, pro-choice groups are working with members of the Catholic Church hierarchy on drafting a proposal to make adoption an easier option in America, which would to some degree open an option that makes abortion unnecessary. Some anti-abortion Republicans in Congress voted against the GOP welfare proposal because they knew that denying Aid To Families With Dependent Children benefits to women who had additional children would only encourage more abortions. In European countries, where contraception is more widely available and sex education in schools is more widespread, teenage pregnancy (and thus abortion) rates are lower.
To summarize, it's time to find common ground on this debate and to work to reduce the number of abortions performed in this nation instead of showing "Hooray for our side!" ad nauseam.
