The cries of the so-called Right-to-lifers (and anti-abortionists generally) that abortion is unethical reek so strongly of brutish self-righteousness and an unwilligness to even properly consider the issue that it is clear their opinion is not worth the cardboard it's written on. It's painful to even write an argument against them; the arguments are so obvious that one shouldn't have to enumerate them. How is that these people can be so bald-faced while strutting their supposedly higher principles - doesn't any claim of a higher moral ground deserve at least a basic initial analysis of the issue in question? Any such analysis could never come to the conclusion that abortion is morally wrong.
Tony Abbot asks why we are so much more concerned with preventing car accidents and drug overdoses than abortions. The answer is clear; car accidents and overdoses result in the death of people and are a clear detriment to society, whereas abortions do not and are not. The insane "right to life" notion, that an unborn baby has an unalienable right to be born - is just that: insane. Though it is generally agreed that it is wrong to kill a person, the notion that an embryo is a person is stupid; there are no grounds for it.
The image of a tiny, even partially unformed child brings out a protective instinct in many of us. That's not a bad thing in itself, and in terms of the survival of the species to this point it's probably been essential. But we are humans, we have intelligence, and we know that instinct is not always right. By all means, feel sad for the loss of an unborn child - to do so is natural and human - but we must not let our emotions make all our choices for us. Intelligence is a gift that should not be idly cast aside.
Are we "playing God" by performing abortions? Are we as mere mortal humans entering ground which we have no right to tread? Even if one believes in God, the argument fails because it doesn't specify why abortion qualifies as playing God whereas open heart surgery, for instance, does not. In either case it is life and death that we are dealing with; if God exists, then surely God gave us the power to do this. Few would claim that heart surgery constitutes taking on the role of a deity (those few, even if patently insane, are at least consistent - which is more than can be said for many anti-abortionists).
If after having dispensed with ethical issues we analyse abortion in terms of cost versus benefit, there can be no doubt that abortion is a plus for society in general. Unwanted pregnancies, and the trauma and harship that they cause, can be avoided - and it's about as simple as that. Claims that abortion will be or are being used as a form of birth control are alarming, but only because there are much safer (and cheaper) alternatives; an abused service may still be a worthwhile service. Is abortion dangerous for the woman involved? There may be a slight danger, but there is danger in childbirth also, and there is certainly less danger than there would be in the underground clinics that exist where abortion is illegal. Is it wrong that taxpayers fund abortion? Consider instead the amount of welfare money saved - for example, a single mother and her unwanted child surely cost society more than a slew of abortions.
The issue is so clear cut, and yet still there are those who take up the cause against it. Proudly do they brandish their ignorance, hypocrisy, and their totally unfounded sense of self righteousness. And so we have people who rally outside the clinics on one day and send their daughter in to have the operation performed on the next, only to be back rallying again the day after that. And we have Tony Abbott standing up making stupid claims about the damage that RU486 would cause, with arguments supposedly on medical grounds but which in reality are so clearly aimed at furthering the ridiculous regressive notions which he fancies that his religion justifies. And we have Bush doing his part in the U.S., encouraging the Right-to-lifers to continue their good fight.
How is it that these nuts have come into positions of such power? And that they can even be allowed to spout off views supported only by their religious beliefs - beliefs which a large proportion of the population do not share? And how many more lives must be destroyed - in the name of saving lives - before these people with their little, narrow minds can wake up and face a startling truth - that abortion is clearly good and necessary in a progressive society.
- D.M.