The debate on abortion has always been presented with two sides of the argument that appears to be two interestingly different topics; Pro-life and pro-choice.
The pro-life concept argues that if a baby is a human life, there can be almost no justification for ending it, while the pro-choice concept argues that a woman's right to have choice and control over her body is so paramount that it wouldn't matter if a baby was a human life in the moral sense. A woman's body is her own, and her right to choice has primacy over any other possible concerns.
This interesting proposition about pro-choice came from modern feminist groups coming from a background where male alcoholism and wife-beating are quite common and where recent laws redefining rape to include a husband against wife were long overdue. Hence, modern feminism considers men dictating to women their duty to carry through an unwanted pregnancy a return to a woman's body being seen as the property of her husband.
Considering the notion of morality, if one believes morality to be a set of rules made up as is most convenient to regulate behavior, then one could form the view that since men have no experience of pregnancy, it should be the women who decide all moral issues relating to pregnancy.
But if one believes that morality is meant to be sought after and not created, morality can be considered as a real thing, and if one is seeking it, then an experience of morality and not of pregnancy should more importantly be considered.
The validity of the statement that a woman is free to do with her body as she pleases will then be also valid for all people.
A group of Aussie men setting out on a fishing trip can be used as a demonstration to tackle some thoughts on the nature of freedom, duty and responsibility, as they exist, and how they might apply to pregnancy.
A group of men from Darwin pool their cash yearly to rent a boat and set out for a few days fishing. While on the trip, they hear a distress call over the radio. Since they are the closest boat, they speed up towards the sinking vessel abiding to the rules of the sea only to find out that the sinking boat was not an Australian boat but rather a boat used for smuggling.
In this demonstration, do the fishermen have the right to turn around and go back to fishing, or are they bound by the rules of the sea to try to tow that boat to safety?
The rules of the sea are a code of duty. The captain of any ship is free to do what he likes with his ship. But the code of the sea is a duty of care, it extends to all people at sea and it is a duty of reciprocity. Its moral force comes from the reciprocity. If your boat is sinking, it is their duty to rescue you. If they are sinking, it is your duty to rescue them.
A pregnant woman has a very similar reciprocal duty to take care of a baby, born or unborn. Any person has the right to recall her to her duty, even if a woman's body is her own. But, whether she complies or not is up to her. The reciprocal duty is balanced during times when the inevitable happen as such cases where rape is involved.
With scenarios that involve gruesome acts such as rape, the reciprocal duty is balanced off. A mother's life in danger can also be considered because this will prevent her from safely fulfilling that duty. However, if a woman's pregnancy is inconvenient or impractical, consider first how your own birth gave convenience to your parents.
Just as your parents did their duty towards you, that baby is relying on you to do your duty if you are pregnant. Like a captain who does not respond to the distress call of a sinking boat, if there are reasons why you cannot fulfill that duty at this point, those reasons should be pretty good reasons.
The pro-life concept argues that if a baby is a human life, there can be almost no justification for ending it, while the pro-choice concept argues that a woman's right to have choice and control over her body is so paramount that it wouldn't matter if a baby was a human life in the moral sense. A woman's body is her own, and her right to choice has primacy over any other possible concerns.
This interesting proposition about pro-choice came from modern feminist groups coming from a background where male alcoholism and wife-beating are quite common and where recent laws redefining rape to include a husband against wife were long overdue. Hence, modern feminism considers men dictating to women their duty to carry through an unwanted pregnancy a return to a woman's body being seen as the property of her husband.
Considering the notion of morality, if one believes morality to be a set of rules made up as is most convenient to regulate behavior, then one could form the view that since men have no experience of pregnancy, it should be the women who decide all moral issues relating to pregnancy.
But if one believes that morality is meant to be sought after and not created, morality can be considered as a real thing, and if one is seeking it, then an experience of morality and not of pregnancy should more importantly be considered.
The validity of the statement that a woman is free to do with her body as she pleases will then be also valid for all people.
A group of Aussie men setting out on a fishing trip can be used as a demonstration to tackle some thoughts on the nature of freedom, duty and responsibility, as they exist, and how they might apply to pregnancy.
A group of men from Darwin pool their cash yearly to rent a boat and set out for a few days fishing. While on the trip, they hear a distress call over the radio. Since they are the closest boat, they speed up towards the sinking vessel abiding to the rules of the sea only to find out that the sinking boat was not an Australian boat but rather a boat used for smuggling.
In this demonstration, do the fishermen have the right to turn around and go back to fishing, or are they bound by the rules of the sea to try to tow that boat to safety?
The rules of the sea are a code of duty. The captain of any ship is free to do what he likes with his ship. But the code of the sea is a duty of care, it extends to all people at sea and it is a duty of reciprocity. Its moral force comes from the reciprocity. If your boat is sinking, it is their duty to rescue you. If they are sinking, it is your duty to rescue them.
A pregnant woman has a very similar reciprocal duty to take care of a baby, born or unborn. Any person has the right to recall her to her duty, even if a woman's body is her own. But, whether she complies or not is up to her. The reciprocal duty is balanced during times when the inevitable happen as such cases where rape is involved.
With scenarios that involve gruesome acts such as rape, the reciprocal duty is balanced off. A mother's life in danger can also be considered because this will prevent her from safely fulfilling that duty. However, if a woman's pregnancy is inconvenient or impractical, consider first how your own birth gave convenience to your parents.
Just as your parents did their duty towards you, that baby is relying on you to do your duty if you are pregnant. Like a captain who does not respond to the distress call of a sinking boat, if there are reasons why you cannot fulfill that duty at this point, those reasons should be pretty good reasons.
About the Author:
Interested in hunting and social issues? Why not try David Greentree's new book, 'Tom Grafton Vs The Environmentalists'.
No comments:
Post a Comment