The "Moral Values" Vote and Abortion
Since the election, newspapers and pundits have been writing on the “moral values vote”. The “moral values vote” is basically the group people who voted for Bush based on issues such as gay marriage, stem cell research and abortion. Despite this common grouping, I do not believe this is an accurate way to lump people’s vote.
The argument against abortion does not solely claim that it is immoral and against normal family life. People use the argument that there is a clear divide between church and state, and abortion cannot be banned on such grounds.
I will not deny that some people are against abortion based just on moral values, but just because something has moral values attached to it does not put it solely in the moral value category. The difference between abortion and something like (what some "pro-choice" claim may happen) jailing for premarital sex is that abortion involves life. We, by very existence, have a right to our lives, our liberty and our property. If someone believes a fetus to be a living human being, people having abortions are denying that fetus its right to life.
One may bring up the argument at this point that a person’s belief as to when a fetus is “living” is often based on his or her religious belief. While this is true, this goes beyond the abstractness of beliefs. There is an actual point at which the fetus becomes a human being. Some believe this point is conception and some believe this to be birth. However, no proof as to when human life actually occurs has been found as of yet. Therefore, everyone’s opinion regarding abortion is based on “belief”. Based on our basic human rights and the laws of this country, wouldn’t it make sense then to err on the side of caution? Why permit something( more correctly, someone) to be destroyed when everyone is unsure as to whether or not a human life is being destroyed? Abortion is not cut and dry, and does not solely fall under the moral values umbrella. Advocates against abortion are simply fighting for our basic human rights.
The argument against abortion does not solely claim that it is immoral and against normal family life. People use the argument that there is a clear divide between church and state, and abortion cannot be banned on such grounds.
I will not deny that some people are against abortion based just on moral values, but just because something has moral values attached to it does not put it solely in the moral value category. The difference between abortion and something like (what some "pro-choice" claim may happen) jailing for premarital sex is that abortion involves life. We, by very existence, have a right to our lives, our liberty and our property. If someone believes a fetus to be a living human being, people having abortions are denying that fetus its right to life.
One may bring up the argument at this point that a person’s belief as to when a fetus is “living” is often based on his or her religious belief. While this is true, this goes beyond the abstractness of beliefs. There is an actual point at which the fetus becomes a human being. Some believe this point is conception and some believe this to be birth. However, no proof as to when human life actually occurs has been found as of yet. Therefore, everyone’s opinion regarding abortion is based on “belief”. Based on our basic human rights and the laws of this country, wouldn’t it make sense then to err on the side of caution? Why permit something( more correctly, someone) to be destroyed when everyone is unsure as to whether or not a human life is being destroyed? Abortion is not cut and dry, and does not solely fall under the moral values umbrella. Advocates against abortion are simply fighting for our basic human rights.
posted by Jeanne Marie @ 2:20 PM
1 Comments:
Great points Jeanne Marie!
It is unfair for the left to try and lump all pro-lifers under the same heading when many people oppose abortion not on religious grounds, but because it is wrong to take the life of another innocent human being.
Post a Comment
<< Home