Abortion Restrictions Lack Integrity
Tuesday, February 28th, 2006 in sexuality, human rights
A few days ago, Pete talked about a South Dakota law that limits access to abortion services. Obviously, as soon as something like this happens, people start talking as the bitter-girl did recently. Both of them make important points.
Pete pointed out that restrictions are logically inconsistent. Bitter-girl points out that this is all just about power. Both reasons - a lack of logical consistency and unequal treatment - are good reasons to oppose laws like this.
I have one more reason: legal restrictions on abortion lack integrity.
I believe integrity is a think-act-do cycle, in the simplest terms. To explain why abortion restrictions lack integrity, we have to connect what the pro-life view seeks: stop all abortions from happening. Restrictions on the access to abortion services don’t do this.
Economically, there is a demand for abortion services. Outlawing the supply will not make the demand go away. Outlawing the supply simply means that the supply will be more costly. And, as we’ve already seen in the United States, if the restrictions are relaxed the use of the service quickly returns.
This kind of law is also an abuse of power and government and a waste of money used to dry up the supply. All you have left, after this kind of government intervention, is a police state where abortions still happen, just under different conditions.
A solution with integrity must address the root causes of the demand to permanently reduce the demand until it reasonably equaled zero. Only then would abortion be ’solved’ because (a) people would still be free and (b) they would not choose abortion over the other choices made available to them. The real answer is not to ‘attack abortion’ but ‘remove the demand’.
Of course, this means a bunch of other things, like teaching birth control, actively trying to reduce poverty, supporting social organizations that provide a range of services to those in need, and more. An ‘anti-abortion’ law with integrity would support women who face a difficult decision with respect, honor their freedoms and would give them real alternatives.
At that point, I think there would be something for everybody to sit down and discuss in a positive manner…and I doubt the word ‘abortion’ would even be mentioned. That’s a discussion I’d love to hear and a law I’d applaud.
Amen! If we’d actually start a discussion, instead of hurling insults and attacking each other, maybe there would be no need for abortion! I couldn’t agree with you more.