February 10, 2003
Let's look beyond the biasness of polls and look at the real dynamic at work on the abortion issue. Is fetus human or not human? This is the deciding factor here; not what the polls say which seem to be concocted to support either side of this issue. The Choice side basically believes that it is up to the individual to decide that for themselves. Presumably one would only procure a miscarriage if they believed they weren’t killing a human being. Lifers, of course believe the fetus is definitely human and that is that. Given these two hypotheses, I have stumbled upon a startling parallel.
This part of the world, or more particularly the U.S., was divided over the slavery issue a 150 years ago: North versus South. Now it seems the heavily Democratic States vs the Republican states on the abortion issue upon which a demographic map could almost be drawn geographically as well.
The commonality is this notion of choice. Should a pregnant person believe the fetus is burdensome on her financial future and possibly on society too, then by choosing to believe the fetus is not human, one can make life a lot more comfortable and prosperous for all. This same thinking process seems to have been the case with slave owners. choosing to believe slaves were not human would justify the entitlement of people to a more comfortable and prosperous existence.
The parallel goes further when you look at party lines. It was the same Democratic party 150 years ago who fought tooth and nail for what was essentially the right to choose slavery as an option to the point that the new Republican party had to be formed to challenge it. People seem to have forgotten this. Of course a war ensued with passions not dissimilar to those passions of today over abortion.
The division over the slavery issue yesteryear must have looked exactly like today’s split on Capital Hill over abortion. Quite literally, this parallel was witnessed at Bush’s State of the Union address when he asked the Congress to end partial birth abortions. The Republican side gave him a standing ovation while the Democrats sat motionless in their seats on the other side, Hillary being the most obvious.
I can just imagine the stone silence on the side of the Democrats when slavery was denounced. Given this point of view, Al Sharpton might want to reconsider his shifting the Democratic Party back to its roots in his bid for leader of the Democrats.
No conscientious law abiding citizen would kill or own a human being for the purpose of making life easy and more financially rewarding. However, if people are convinced by society or by their own accord that they are not dealing with real human beings in these matters, then it takes on a whole different meaning and is not so wrong to do so.