Abortion Has Nothing to Do With Women’s Rights
Warning: This Essay Was Written by a Man!
Yes, that is a dramatic title designed to attract attention, but I don’t know if it can be considered clickbait because it is honestly the claim of my essay.
As for the subtitle, again, there for the clicks, but I also think a result of this essay will be an explanation of why it’s just fine for men to talk about abortion.
I understand that this is a controversial subject, and I know I am bound to get responses from people who disagree with me, so I just ask for those who read on and choose to respond to direct your comment towards the actual arguments I make.
I appreciate productive debates, I will not engage in bickering about strawman claims or insults. So here we go:
What is abortion? If one believes an unborn child is a living human being then that person might conclude that abortion is murder. If one believes an unborn child is just a group of cells then that person might conclude that abortion is little more than a medical procedure.
Here we encounter a dilemma in calling abortion a woman’s right: that argument only works for people who agree with the premise that an unborn child isn’t a living human being. For those who disagree with that premise, women’s rights have nothing to do with it at all.
How can an argument proceed if each side begins with a different premise? Calling abortion an argument about women’s rights would only allow you to argue with people who already agree with you.
It’s clear that society is talking about abortion wrong. We ought to be debating about the humanity of an unborn child, and yet so many are canceling that debate with a nonsensical claim that they have a right to choose.
If an unborn child is a living human being, no one has the right to choose to kill them.
Now that that’s out of the way we can get into some real issues around this topic. For starters, there is the argument that, even if we accept that an unborn child is a living human being, the mother has no responsibility to keep her body connected to that life.
This argument has a major logical flaw that is perhaps more visible through analogy:
If you kidnap someone and hook them up to life support, you, through your actions, have assumed the responsibility of keeping them alive. Disconnect the life support and you are guilty of murder just as if you stabbed them.
The act of getting pregnant, of creating a life, is a choice and an action that makes you responsible for that life. If an unborn child is a living human being, abortion is murder.
An exception to this scenario is if the pregnancy wasn’t consented to. In instances of rape, it is more justifiable for the woman to say she has no responsibility for the life of the child, that she has a right to bodily autonomy. But more and more I see this argument being used where it doesn’t apply.
The second issue I’d like to address is the drawing of a line between a group of cells and a living human being. Even if people can’t agree on where that line is, we should all be able to agree that an unborn child is a potential living human being.
What does that mean in terms of a right to life? Let’s use another analogy, one in which we even assume there is consensus about the definition of living human beings:
A person gets into an accident and goes into a coma. The doctors say in nine months they will wake up, but during that time period, they may not display characteristics of what we consider a living human being.
Is it alright to kill that person within the nine-month period before they again become a living human being? I would say no.
It is for all these reasons that I can’t fathom why people are actively celebrating abortion. There is no scenario I can imagine where it isn’t a tragedy, even in situations where it can be justified. Calling abortion good is a disgusting way to view the value of life.
It is also for all these reasons that I believe men have an equal say in the debate about abortion. Abortion isn’t a woman’s rights issue, it’s a moral issue, and no “identity,” as defined by proponents of identity politics, has a monopoly on morality.
In the future, I hope society, through productive debate, will be able to reach a consensus on when human life begins. I hope that even after that point, society will be able to see the value of potential, pre-human, life. And I hope society fulfills its duty to protect those lives.
In the meantime, we need to all, men and women, keep talking about this issue, keep challenging each others beliefs on it, and keep trying to be consistent with our moral values.
I used to be pro-choice. My current beliefs are the result of discussions with Benjamin Morawek and videos by Ben Shapiro; both, through their well thought out arguments, convinced me of the right position. Maybe this essay can be a starting point for others too.
