KLRU
It's Magic
RECEIVED Fri., Jan. 19, 2018
Dear Editor,
On reading the well-written Jan. 5 letter "It's True, Google It," I was struck by the similarities of the pro-life arguments and a magician's trick. The magician offers lots of movement, which you watch carefully to see how something disappears, but actually it all happened before you started to pay attention.
The writer asserts that the law is designed to protect innocent human life, no matter what stage of development. No it isn't. The law is designed for two purposes – to get society to function effectively and to benefit the powerful. That is true everywhere. Despotic regimes focus primarily on the second objective. Those catering to the first disagree on how best to protect society. For example, should we be all-in on freedom of speech or should hate speech be restricted?
The issue is not whether abortion is good or bad, but whether outlawing it furthers the objectives of society. I don't doubt that the majority think abortion is bad and generally speaking, those who get abortions do it only because they view the alternative as worse. However, in this country, unlike in a theocracy, the default position is that you do not outlaw something just because it is wrong. I am entitled to sin if my sins do not hurt you.
We can argue about whether to call it a fetus or an unborn child, but there is little doubt about what it is not. It is not a member of society.
So there are just two defensible pro-life arguments. One is that abortion opponents are powerful and should get what they want because serving the powerful is one of the law's objectives. The other is that it helps maintain the moral fabric of our country, not unreasonable but very much at odds with freedom of religion.
On reading the well-written Jan. 5 letter "It's True, Google It," I was struck by the similarities of the pro-life arguments and a magician's trick. The magician offers lots of movement, which you watch carefully to see how something disappears, but actually it all happened before you started to pay attention.
The writer asserts that the law is designed to protect innocent human life, no matter what stage of development. No it isn't. The law is designed for two purposes – to get society to function effectively and to benefit the powerful. That is true everywhere. Despotic regimes focus primarily on the second objective. Those catering to the first disagree on how best to protect society. For example, should we be all-in on freedom of speech or should hate speech be restricted?
The issue is not whether abortion is good or bad, but whether outlawing it furthers the objectives of society. I don't doubt that the majority think abortion is bad and generally speaking, those who get abortions do it only because they view the alternative as worse. However, in this country, unlike in a theocracy, the default position is that you do not outlaw something just because it is wrong. I am entitled to sin if my sins do not hurt you.
We can argue about whether to call it a fetus or an unborn child, but there is little doubt about what it is not. It is not a member of society.
So there are just two defensible pro-life arguments. One is that abortion opponents are powerful and should get what they want because serving the powerful is one of the law's objectives. The other is that it helps maintain the moral fabric of our country, not unreasonable but very much at odds with freedom of religion.
Ray Heitmann
