Saturday, February 10, 2007

It's not ultimately about abortion

So I'm just clicking around the internet in the middle of the night, with a bout of insomnia, when I happen upon the comments section of a post by ottlib.

Steve V of Far and Wide made this comment:

I have no problem with social conservatives, because I respect others opinions. What does bother me, and this where "narrow" fits, is the intolerance and rigidity that too often finds its way into the thinking.

Abortion is a great example. You are against it, and have a line of reasoning to support the thesis. You make the choice not to have an abortion, as is your right in a free society. You have the right to persuade others that your belief is the correct one. You do not have the right to tell others who disagree how they should act, that mentality implies a moral superiority, as though heathens need your guiding light. Imagine if we passed a law forcing people to have abortions because I felt that people should only be allowed one child. Imagine the outrage of social conservatives. Exactly. Social conservatives seem to the group most inclined to not accept others who see a complicated world differently.

There is a failure to see the issue for what it's about: it's about fetal rights. Personally, my ultimate goal is not an abortion law, although that is desirable.

My goal is equality for unborn children.

So yes, pro-lifers do get upset about people who kill fetuses. And we do have the right to lobby the government so that all members of the human family can benefit from Charter Rights.

There is plenty of rigidity and moral superiority on the left, too. The more hardcore social leftists are people who can equally fall into a "black-and-white" mentality.

I have nothing against seeing some things in black and white. Clearly some things are. But it's simply not true that social conservatives are unable to accept those who "see a complicated world differently". Not in my experience.

Open Trackback.