|P.S. I find your reference to abortion as a form of birth control--rather than an emergency life-saving procedure--quite worrisome. Are you saying that it's a good thing that so many people consider abortion a comforting fallback? |
[I'll respond to other posters later; I'm laid up sick, but I still have some errands to run today- this gal 'll get back to y'all later. But I wanted to respond to this quickly and clearly.]
Yes, and I make no apologies. I am a scrupulous defender of the use of rationally-planned, consistent, birth control, which will make the costly and sometimes dangerous procedure of an abortion rare (I note in passing that childbirth is more dangerous than abortion). But when birth control fails, I utterly and without reservation defend the rational self interest of a human being who values her own life, happiness, and sexuality enough to refuse to bear an unwanted child. I see something inhuman in condoning abortion in the case of threats to a woman's life [i.e, "an emergency life-saving procedure"] but not in terms of her interests, passions, or values, including that of not having her body permanently altered and the drawn-out, rape-like experience of having a living being growing inside her against her will. This heavily suggests that a woman's happiness cannot justify defense of her own body, but her life can, which means that her life is made valuable by a higher power over and above her life, which means she does not morally own her life.
The reason the abortion rights movement is slowly failing and has been for decades is because, frightened by the claims of the religious right to a moral high ground, they refuse to take the moral high ground they deserve which is the only way the battle can be fought: that women do not have a duty to bear children; that sexuality without fear is value, a crucial value, for which no woman should retreat an inch of shame for refusal to compromise that value for potential life, and that not only abstract right but that abstract right embodied in human happiness is what should send the religious right, the vacillating moderates, and a few feminist and libertarian collaborators who should be strung up in the square fleeing back to the rat-holes of their altruist God's churches.
Rand once spoke of the spectacle of a righteous, self-confident evil and a craven,. apologetic, self-effacing and self-betraying good. I can think of no better example today's pro-choice movement, or indeed the entire hesitant cultural opposition to the cultural right which speaks hesitantly about rights and choice but refuses to talk of individual happiness or pleasure. No one thought Europe's welfare state could happen here, and today no one thinks a neo-Puritanism resurrected from our own history and which has before, in fact, crushed sexual rebellion and feminist independence in other times, with appeals to the same Pauline God-family-tradition ethos is does with equal exponential success now, can happen here.
(sigh) I walk ~away~ again...
But there is one thing, that will make me take a ~stand~...
Here, I shall not spice words with allusions and artistry. On this battle I lay in no retreat from the world.
I feel no different, on this issue, towards the liberals, and libertarians, and even occasional Objectivists than Rand did towards the wavering Willkies of her today. The culture war is my war, and it is a battle which libertarians should share, but often not, caring more for chasing paleo and conservative votes than the young yearning to breathe free at their feet. It is a war which Objectivists should share, but often not, with their Platonic romanticisms that consistently and predictably align more with the homophobes, the confessed patriarchs, the thundering demons in church-robes demanding marriage in chains. I think it is a pretty sight indeed to see Objectivists- I admit, with the blessed exception of most on this site, but most outside it, having the gall to claim to see spirituality in a dollar sign down to the least purchase of an ice cream cone, while consigning all sexuality short of or alternative to their sacred and might I add poorly proxied marriage to the outer limbo of the technicality, politically tolerated but otherwise condemned as 'mindless promiscuity' that can be safely thrown as meat to conservative dogs.
The picture of abortion presented here, where failed contraception inevitably leads to childbirth, is either one where it is not abortion but sexuality which is rare, or it is one in which females live paralyzed between irresponsibility and terror, and males between coslavery and callousness, or it is one in which the bearing and raising of children remains always at least a shadow of a female destiny. There can be no other options, not is fact, not in logic... unless you wish to see females learn to explore their sexuality exclusively with other women. Do not be surprised, good gentlemen, if when you present the reality of those pictures you provoke some of us to take up the silver sword.
Yes, I defend the right to abortion as a failsafe contraception- for that reason explicitly and primarily with considerations of medical interventions as side issues, because I demand the primacy of human happiness, the exploration of sexuality as with wealth in all its forms, and I do not regard as serious defenders of egoism, at least egoism in females, those who demand a woman justify her decision for an abortion on any other grounds, including self-preservation. Communists are always willing to make that exception for their condemnations of economic self-interest, as they need living slaves.
Don't try it. I keep my oaths and will be fighting this battle long after you have lost it.
(thought to self: not a bad hour's work- almost as fun as sex... too bad you can't get paid for it.)