I've had a handful of conversations about this whole repealing Roe vs Wade thing, and one thing that struck me is that each side thinks it has the obvious moral high ground. Some people are horrified that people would interfere with women's medical and reproductive freedoms. Others are horrified that people would condone and support murdering babies. Naturally, most situations are incredibly complicated, but many people simplify the entire conversation into clear, black and white morality, with their side, whichever that is, being the one that's clearly morally right. Everyone thinks that they're doing the right thing, but they can't all be right.
This is a thorny issue, and many of my moral maxims are coming into conflict with each other, and with themselves. I believe in preserving freedom, but I also believe in preserving life. My favorite maxim is "Live and Let Live," but it's terribly unclear how to apply that maxim in this case. I want the right ideas to (have?) prevail(ed?), but it isn't clear to me which ideas those are, even though it seems perfectly (conflictingly) obvious to almost everyone else.
I think I need to wash my hands of this whole situation. It seems clear to me that some abortions are clearly morally justified, and others are clearly not. But it's hard to know where to draw the line, and I'm not even sure who should be the ones to draw that line. And, since each situation is different, it's really hard for me to judge the concept of abortions in general. I'm not simply Pro-Life or Pro-Choice. I think that both life and freedom are extremely important. But when those ideals come into conflict with each other, I either need to judge which one is more important to me, or I need to reserve judgement altogether.
So, I'm staying on the fence on this one. Lots of people have chosen sides, and they all believe they have chosen the right side. But, whomever's right, I hope the right ideas win.
No comments:
Post a Comment